Deletion of Rendille–Boni languages

Comment: Wikipedia is not the place for linguists to |work out correct taxonomies. If reliable sources (preferably secondary or tertiary sources) differ on the status of the family, that controversy needs to be noted, with |due weight to the published sources on each side. But that does not suggest that the controversial conclusions should be deleted from Wikipedia. True, the stub article currently cites only one source, but that source, ''Ethnologue'', is for better or worse often the key work for such issues
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:NOR||WP:NPOV)

Comment: where current social science consensus is mixed, |proper weight should be given to the controversies.  Here, I am ''leaning to a keep'' with the added sources, but a ''merger'' to an appropriate target would also be reasonable
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:WEIGHT)