This article serves no purpose other than as a redirect to Cherokee. Like I've pointed out several times before, we don't keep native names of nationalities or ethnic groups separate from the English terms. "(die) Deutschen" is not separate from German people and "Dansker" is not separate from Danish people. This is no different.
People have demaned that if this article be redirected, the information contained in the article has to be merged, yet the linguistic information already exists in the only relevant article I'm aware of; Cherokee language. The only difference is that it's properly formatted instead of being presented in a rather anecdotal fashion. The rest of the info (the first paragraph) has already been included in Cherokee.
Peter Isotalo 02:44, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
In a culture where the language and religious beliefs evolved together, this word has very special meanings and is worthy of a unique and distinct article. As this article has survived an Afd, and this view was already proposed and rejected by the majority voters, Karmosen is simply continuing his argument because he did not get his way. Please accept the ruling of the majority and focus somewhere else in WP. Thanks. 67.177.35.211 05:34, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
" ....People (only Karmosen) have demaned that if this article be redirected, the information contained in the article has to be merged, yet the linguistic information already exists (False, it does not already exist) in the only relevant article I'm aware of; Cherokee language (again false). The only difference is that it's properly formatted instead of being presented in a rather anecdotal fashion. The rest of the info (the first paragraph) has already been included in Cherokee. ..."
Also, this statement is totally false. In addition to being a false representation of reality, it also evidences intellectual dishonesty IMHO on the part of someone who did not get their way, and is this point in the discussion, borders on disruption. 67.177.35.211 05:37, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
- You're behavior is just downright uncivil and abusive and I'm really not interested in hearing any more of it. I'm giving up on this since you seem convinced to keep everyone who disagrees with you away from Cherokee articles.
- Peter Isotalo 22:20, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
- I don't feel this way. From my perspective, you just bulldozered over DES and everyone else who disagreed -- this is uncivil and disrespectful. From now on, use the talk page if you want to have a discussion. If the majority disagrees, accept this and move on. Don't vandalize and page blank because you got mad. You have no idea what I am writing, and I am not the one who added the linguistic stub to the article, someone else did. If you are asking to take out the stub, then this is a very different thing. Gadugi 05:44, 26 September 2005 (UTC)