Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shunga–Greek War

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Shunga–Greek War}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Shunga–Greek War}})

Clearly fails WP:GNG, Mostly based on Original Research and Non–WP:RS, None of the sources refers the event as Shungha Greek War. Mr.Hanes File:Speech bubble icon.svg Talk 16:58, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and India. Shellwood (talk) 17:39, 27 January 2025 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:35, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

• Obvious keep, since the sources cited, although meagre, do appear to indicate that such conflicts and relations are historical events involving the people and places described. There could certainly stand to be more sources to clarify where specific identifications come from, and explain where some of the material comes from. But that should be done through ordinary editing; it is not an argument for deletion. So are arguments that the article contains original research. The subject of the article is clearly not the invention of a Wikipedia editor.

:What is left here is an argument that the title of the argument is not found in the sources, and therefore constitutes original research. Having seen this argument several times in other discussions, I now feel confident that it is erroneous. When there is a commonly accepted name for something in scholarship, we can generally use that name. When there is not, any reasonably descriptive name will do. Here, the best arguments would be that we have an indefinite number of conflicts of uncertain intensity, and so perhaps it should be titled "Shunga–Greek Wars", or "Shunga–Greek conflicts", or "Greco–Shunga Wars" or something else along those lines. That is not an argument for deletion. The article should be kept, though perhaps moved to a better title—and that too is part of ordinary editing. P Aculeius (talk) 14:34, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

• Speedy keep: WP:SOURCESEXIST. Topic is notable and has independent significant coverage. In my quick WP:BEFORE, it's quite clear that sources have established notability of the event:

{{tq2|There were internecine struggles between Eucratides I and Menander I when he was at war with the Sungas.{{Citation |last=Mairs |first=Rachel |title=Bactrian or Graeco-Bactrian Kingdom |date=2016 |work=The Encyclopedia of Empire |pages=1–4 |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781118455074.wbeoe089 |access-date=2025-01-29 |publisher=John Wiley & Sons, Ltd |language=en |doi=10.1002/9781118455074.wbeoe089 |isbn=978-1-118-45507-4}}}}

Further sources:

1. {{Cite book |last=Narain |first=A. K. |url=https://books.google.co.in/books/about/The_Indo_Greeks.html?id=Ta8qAAAAYAAJ&redir_esc=y |title=The Indo-Greeks |date=1980 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-561046-8 |language=en}}
2. {{Citation |last=Ghosh |first=Suchandra |title=Shunga Kingdom |date=2016 |work=The Encyclopedia of Empire |pages=1–2 |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781118455074.wbeoe192 |access-date=2025-01-29 |publisher=John Wiley & Sons, Ltd |language=en |doi=10.1002/9781118455074.wbeoe192 |isbn=978-1-118-45507-4}}
3. {{Citation |last=Ghosh |first=Suchandra |title=Śuṅgas |date=2022 |work=The Encyclopedia of Ancient History |pages=1–4 |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781119399919.eahaa00551 |access-date=2025-01-29 |publisher=John Wiley & Sons, Ltd |language=en |doi=10.1002/9781119399919.eahaa00551 |isbn=978-1-119-39991-9}}
4. {{Cite book |last=Stoneman |first=Richard |url=https://books.google.co.in/books?id=oq1RXwAACAAJ&printsec=copyright&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false |title=The Greek Experience of India: From Alexander to the Indo-Greeks |date=2019-02-05 |publisher=Princeton University Press |isbn=978-0-691-15403-9 |language=en}} – Garuda ^Talk! 15:35, 29 January 2025 (UTC)
5. :The fact that sources exist—some already cited, plus the ones you identified, is a reason to keep the article. But WP:SOURCESEXIST is not an argument for keeping or deleting—it's a shortcut to an example of an argument not to make, namely that souces must exist, even though none have been located or identified. That argument doesn't apply here, since several sources have been located and identified. Perhaps this is a "Mandela effect" argument—one cited because it sounds like it means something, even though it actually refers to something else. But your conclusions are still right! P Aculeius (talk) 04:03, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

• Keep per above. Specifically, I checked the Stoneman source, which says on p. 392, "the conflict of the two kingdoms is historical". In the same paragraph, he says "Sungas" and "Greek rulers", so I doubt even the title needs changing. Srnec (talk) 21:13, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep if the nominator feels the name is incorrect, they are free to open a WP:RM, but the topic is clearly notable. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:34, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

{{reflist-talk}}

{{clear}}

: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.