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 qua language article (since, as Nergaal puts it, "very little is known" about this supposed language), but preserve the historical content for re-use at Pannonia or similar. Accordingly, redirected to Pannonia for now. Feel free to change the redirect target or merge the content from the history somewhere. Sandstein (talk) 21:41, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Romance Pannonian language[edit]

Uncited speculations (much is probably Original Research and some things are clearly either factually inaccurate or simply stupid "further than belonging to the Indo-European language family, probably as a Centum language"), it says almost nothing on the language itself. There should be an article about the Latin population in Pannonia, but there is nothing to say about the language itself. bogdan (talk) 16:30, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article is about Latin, pure and simple. If Latin had the time to sprout a distinct Pannonian branch (which is highly dubious), the article presents no evidence. Dahn (talk) 16:43, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Move to History of Pannonia; there seems to be valid information about the history of the district after the Roman collapse, how good it is would be something I can't say. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 18:10, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Redirect to Latin or Vulgar Latin. - Francis Tyers · 20:16, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - there is definitely some salvageable content here, and it's written by a university professor. On the other hand, it is uncited and does veer into speculation at times. I say we give the original author (whom I've notified of the AfD) a bit of time to address these issues, and then merge or delete if that proves impossible. Biruitorul (talk) 21:56, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, just speculations. There seems to be something potentially valid regarding Panonian history.--Aldux (talk) 15:16, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete --Sambure (talk) 18:22, 23 November 2007 (UTC)18:21, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MAINTAIN - The article is well referenced for a language of those centuries. The article is about a DIALECT that was sproucing in Pannonia during the barbarian invasions, as can be read here: <<In the north, a Roman population probably still lived in the former province of Pannonia at least in the 5th century and the question whether the dialect spoken there belonged to East Latin or to the Occidental dialects has been discussed without a definite conclusion.. [1] This excerpt (from a book of André du Nay) clearly states that "At least" during Justinianus times there was a "dialect" in Pannonia connected to the east or occidental dialects (from where developed successively the actual Rumanian and Ladino/Friulan). T.S.
- Comment So what we are talking about is a probable dialect which probably existed for probably more than a few decades. The factual information present in the article has no connection to the language existing or not. This should mean that this highly theoretical information is, at best, a footnote in some other article. Dahn (talk) 08:55, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Pannonia. This article is largely a post-Roman history of Pannonia. The history section of that article should be entitled "Roman Pannonia". Much of the article under discussion would usefully become a new section "Post-Roman Pannonia". If there was a language, it is likely to have lasted some time, but it is mere speculation how distinct this was from Latin, not that I really know. Peterkingiron (talk) 23:04, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletions. —Peterkingiron (talk) 23:05, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP Check List of Romance languages. This language probably existed, but verry little is known. Deleting the page would not help in any ways. Since it has been extinct for such a long time, there are veery few people interested in it. If it gets deleted, it is very unlikely that anybody would bother putting even Original Research in it. I strongly believe that keeping it and marking/labeling/tagging accordingly (or worst case scenario, chopping parts from it) would be the most productive choice. Nergaal (talk) 20:42, 20 November 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.