Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eson xorgol


 * 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion.  Sandstein  14:39, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Eson xorgol

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I prodded this with "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline nor the more detailed Notability (companies)'s section for products requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. I did find some mention in but snippet view prevents me from confirming it is significant and I am not seeing anything else. Please also note  which could be an indication of either interesting trivia - or a partial racist hoax." It was deprodded by User:Andrew Davidson with copy-paste rationale. Let's discuss here, then. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 01:17, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  01:17, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mongolia-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  01:17, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kazakhstan-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  01:17, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * The nominator mentions Google Scholar, so I am rather surprised that it does not show him and, which at least need refutation to not be regarded as reliable sources. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:09, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , There is not much refutation needed. I can't find any mention of the game in the linked pdf, and as for the academic article, the sole mentions a footnote for the sentence "The African game of Awari"... that states "There are numerous other names for the game, including adi, congkak, mokaotan, maggaleceng, aggalacang, nogarata, owari, mancala, awele, oware, bantumi, bao, gebeta, omweso, wari, congklak, warri, round-and-round, adji-boto, abapa, gabata, nam-nam, tampoduo, omweso, marabout, mandoli, ba-awa, uri, tampoudo, ayo, ayoayo, jerin-jerin, ayo-j’duo, eson-xorgol, toguz-xorgol, pallanguli, and sungka. In addition, there are variant rules." So this source suggests a potential redirect target (plus more to create, and a bunch of articles to review). I'll note here that the researcher includes Mancala as an alternate name, but we list Mancala as the main article for the family of games of which Awari is a variant. I haven't yet had time to think if more of those articles may need merging. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:26, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * The pdf that I linked says that this is an alternative name for "Tchuka Ruma" on page 361, with a translation to "game of nine dung balls". It seems that this family of games needs to be covered in a more coordinated way than this plethora of different articles based on the accident of whether any particular variant has coverage in an English-language (or at least Roman-alphabet) source readily available online. I'm not volunteering to do the work involved. Phil Bridger (talk) 22:27, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   19:32, 24 February 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   11:30, 4 March 2021 (UTC)


 * 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.