Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heritage languages in Toronto

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 redirect to Demographics of Toronto#Languages. Editors must decide whether to merge any content from history. Sandstein 18:41, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Heritage languages in Toronto

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete. This is the parent article from which both Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mandarin as a Heritage Language in Toronto and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Italian Heritage Language in Toronto were originally forked. Although it isn't as terrible either in tone or in sourcing as either of those were, it's still far short of anything one would call good -- out of all the world languages that could potentially have content about them added to something like this, it picks just nine samples (presumably the ones of the most direct personal interest to the creators), sources some raw demographic stats and then mainly serves as a directory of community service organizations catering to that language community rather than an actual encyclopedia article. And, of course, the article could be bloated far beyond the point of maintainability anytime somebody wants to add similar content about a tenth, fifteenth, twentieth or hundred-fiftieth language besides the nine that are already here. And while unlike in the spinoff articles some Toronto-specific sourcing is present this time, overall this still is a little too strongly dependent on the primary source web pages of organizations mentioned in the text rather than reliable source coverage about the topic. And again, we don't have an article like this for any other city on the entire planet -- and while I live in Toronto, I fail to see that Toronto-specific topics would warrant special treatment denied heritage languages in London or New York or Berlin or San Francisco. It's just too impossibly broad in its potential scope to be maintainable as an encyclopedia article. Bearcat (talk) 02:24, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~: It can get rather unwieldy and it relies heavily on primary sources. As Bearcat said, why isn't there an article called Heritage languages in New York City? The selection of the languages also constitute original research as well. I am saying this as a native Torontonian. Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 02:31, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing, there's already Demographics of Toronto, so there's no need to have another article that has very much the same content if all the original research and statements from primary sources were removed. Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 02:19, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 02:51, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Perplexing topic with little foundation to merit an encyclopedic entry. Aust331 (talk) 10:04, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete For lack of a better statement, what? Lots of people in lots of places speak lots of different languages natively.--Savonneux (talk) 11:19, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:01, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merge some content into Demographics of Toronto#Languages, there seems to be quite a bit of well-researched, encyclopedic information that would be lost.--Prisencolin (talk) 22:44, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Changed vote to Merge into Demographics of Toronto#Languages for the proper encyclopedic content, not those from primary sources or original research. Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 02:05, 27 August 2016 (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.