Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pah Tum

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. j⚛e decker ^talk 16:22, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pah Tum

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

This has been tagged as a hoax for some time. An editor has noted on the talk page that it isn't mentioned in any of the many board game-related reference books he has checked. It may actually exist, [1] but even if it does it doesn't appear to be notable given the dearth of coverage in RSs. Fails WP:GNG (as well as WP:OR and WP:V). Jinkinson talk to me 15:19, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 15:22, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for lack of coverage. The game is claimed as an ancient game, one of the referenced sites indicates that a board was found in the XII Dynasty tomb of Reny-Seneb. But Llagostera, Esteban (2011). "El ocio en la antigüedad. Juegos del Mundo". Espacio Tiempo y Forma. Serie II, Historia Antigua (in Spanish). 1 (24): 305–329. makes it clear that the game found there bears no relation to "Pah tum", and that the archaeologists are completely ignorant of the rules of the Reny-Seneb game. This is confirmed in Chapter 2 of Tyldesley, Joyce A. (2007). Egyptian games and sports. Princes Risborough, UK: Shire. ISBN 978-0-7478-0661-5. where the Reny-Seneb game is referred to as "hounds and jackals". The claim of Mesopotamian and Assyrian Pah Tum boards could not be verified. It seems much more likely that the rules are of an entirely modern origin. --Bejnar (talk) 04:42, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Hoax. The ancient history has been trimmed from the article since its creation, but is particularly telling. Any board game from antiquity, especially one whose rules were known, especially one whose rules involve otherwise modern concepts like random space selection, would be a fruitful topic in scholarly analysis. But, predictably, Google Scholar is silent on the topic of "Pah Tum". Nor are there Google Books hits; even if this was a well-circulated game of more modern origin (with merely claimed ancient origins), it would appear in any of the litany of books about board games and abstract gaming, or in computer science game theory sources. But it is in none of those. Indeed, its only web presence appears to be a flurry of entries in open-submission board gaming sites (none of which constitute reliable sources), circa 2007–2008, and this 2008 entry at Wikipedia. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 15:13, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The original editor of Pah Tum, Aamma58, has contributed a vast array of essentially or completely unsourced articles on abstract board games. I am struggling to find reliable sources, even trivial ones, for nearly all of them. More eyes would be appreciated. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 15:21, 30 September 2014 (UTC) Dialing this back, somewhat. There are a TON of really poorly sourced articles here, in something of a walled garden, but at least enough of them seem to be verifiable that I don't think it's appropriate for me to pull the Official Wikipedia Fire Alarm. My opinion on this article, however, stands unless someone can provide evidence to the contrary. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 15:56, 30 September 2014 (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.