Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yuantang (language game) (2nd nomination)

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 keep‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:33, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yuantang (language game)

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject fails GNG. The prior AfD was withdrawn as clearly no sources were added and I don't care what zh-wiki says. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:21, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Games, and China. Shellwood (talk) 23:09, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – here are three scholarly sources:
- 兴宁“鸳塘话”研究——兼论兴宁苑塘罗氏家族的兴衰史 by 陈靖云
- Exploring Xingning's Yuantang subdialect, a secret variety of the Hakka dialect / 從興寧“鴛塘話”探析客家話的秘密語 by Sheng-yu Teng / 鄧盛有
- 射字游戏及其应用 by 刘本才 and 李春

Over at zh:苑塘话 there's another source listed, but I haven't found a link to it:

罗建平. 举世无双的神秘罗氏族语:苑塘话. 客家风情, 2003.

This should be enough to demonstrate notability. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 03:34, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep if I'm allowed to vote – I had withdrawn the original nomination after being convinced by the viability of the sources provided, but since then I haven't gotten around to improving the article, and didn't want to add the sources to it if they weren't being used yet. Remsense留 06:20, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep "I don't care what zh-wiki says" is such a flippant attitude to take when it cites scholarly sources and is an affront to WP:BEFORE _dk (talk) 06:44, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
keep: The first source given by Mx. Granger is from a journal started by a Chinese national museum which IMO is reliable. Based on the abstract, it should be considered as a secondary source as it provides an analysis/synthesis based on local chronicles and ethnographic materials. I don't have access to the full text, but based on the title and abstract, they should clearly have significant coverage. --94rain ^Talk 06:34, 22 December 2023 (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.