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. --Core desat 02:02, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ho Yap[edit]

Non-notable neologism, 204 non-wiki ghits. Contested prod. MER-C 05:17, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Well known in Canada? Maybe regionally, but I've never heard it before. If it's real, surely its non-English language of origin could be more precise than "Native Canadian". I'd like to see better referencing than it has to change my mind. Flyguy649^talk_contribs 05:24, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- And a dicdef. Thanks, Dennis The Tiger. Flyguy649^talk_contribs 06:59, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. First, if I remember right, "native Canadian" comprises several languages - so saying "Native Canadian" is like saying "celtic language". Which one? Even if this is elaborated upon, it still fails to be anything more than a dicdef. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 06:10, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Possible hoax or thing made up in school one day. Delete unless evidence is provided. —Cel ithemis 07:32, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This seems to me to be a clear and obvious hoax. Article creator's only other contributions were to Oakwood Collegiate Institute and were vandalism. There are something like fifty aboriginal languages in Canada. What Yap in the Caroline Islands has to do with Canada has yet to be identified. --Charlene 09:50, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Definite neologism, probable hoax given the information currently available. JavaTenor 09:50, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that this should probably be a dicdef and will work towards gathering more information for the entry. It is NOT a HOAX however. And I don't see how changing the word "Gymnasia" to "Gyms" which is more commonly used in every day language is vandalism. Currently I know that this is widely used in the Toronto area mostly with Native people, along with the Rastafarian community. There does not seem to be any SPECIFIC tribe that uses it so I wouldn't be able to elaborate on that. But if some of our Native friends are out there then please DO contribute!!!

Okranian 21:45, 14 April 2007 (UTC) — Okranian (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Delete - there is not such thing as "native Canadian", and it is definitely not well-known, or used, in Canada. --Haemo
You're just being a Nazi. You are worse than Hitler. If you have proof that it is not well-known then please document it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Okranian (talk • contribs) — Okranian (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- "Proof that it is not well-known" isn't exactly the easiest thing to find in any regard. That's why the burden of proof is on anyone advocating the article be kept to demonstrate that it is well known. Additionally, Godwin's Law may apply here. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 04:38, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; as a Canadian, I'd question the "well-known" bit, as I've never heard it, and I've worked with First Nations a lot. Tony Fox (arf!) 05:08, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - is it possible to WP:SNOW this as per Godwin's Law, as pointed by BigHaz above? --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 20:05, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I wouldn't say that Godwin's Law automatically means the discussion needs to be SNOWed, although I don't think the discussion is long for this world by any means. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 22:22, 17 April 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.