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 delete. - Mailer Diablo 16:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

All attempts to find reliable sources to which article information can be verified have failed, term being used can be reliably sourced, but no reliable sources actually talk about the term in ways that allow an encyclopedic entry.--Cerejota 23:12, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: It strikes me as likely that it can be sourced from Spanish-language sources published in Puerto Rico, and English-language offline sources published in Puerto Rico and in the linguistics sphere. Poor Google results doesn't mean something cannot be sourced. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 23:38, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am Puerto Rican, from Puerto Rico (I currently reside in Brooklyn), my family includes language academics, and you cannot find reliable sources off-line that talk of "Goleta English" as a researched linguistic category. Not Maria Vaquero, not Marshall Morris, not other academics who in recent years have studied language use in Puerto Rico have made any research about so-called "Goleta English". This is mostly a slang term used to make fun of people's real (and perceived) mis-pronunciations of American English. Sourced material of use might belong in a wider article on Puerto Rican culture, and more specifically slang or epithets, but it is not an academic term. The contents of the page, in particular regarding pronunciation or pseudo-scientific characterizations are entirely original research, and very novel at that.--Cerejota 03:23, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Puerto Rico-related deletions. --Infrangible 03:13, 4 June 2007 (UTC) [reply]
• delete nonverifiable. Mukadderat 15:34, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:V and WP:NOR. -- Satori Son 03:49, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Also per WP:V and WP:NOR. --Evb-wiki 14:30, 8 June 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.