The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. John Reaves (talk) 03:34, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Romanica[edit]

Romanica (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Another Interlingua derivative created by a single person and with an insufficient claim to notability, other perhaps from being mentioned in other Wikimedia projects, a self-fulfilling prophecy. An earlier deletion discussion resulted in the article being turned into a redirect to Interlingua, but this was undone later. I say this article should be deleted outright to prevent this from occurring again. -- Dissident (Talk) 11:41, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Doesn't seem to be verifiable or meet WP:ATT. Wickethewok 21:16, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Restore Redirect. Outright deletion will not prevent article recreation, and actually affect Wikipedia content.--ZayZayEM 03:06, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Respect the original decision to redirect and keep the article's history. If the redirect is reversed again, this could mean there is a need for the article. Non-notability isn't a reason to delete. See this section and this one. Unverifiable and unsourced are two different things, and the second one doesn't call for deletion. Cal 01:52, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.