Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAM Development
- PAM Development (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No signs of notability, fails WP:GNG/WP:CORPDEPTH. Lordtobi (✉) 08:39, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. MT TrainTalk 10:32, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. MT TrainTalk 10:32, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. MT TrainTalk 10:32, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
- Question: Why can't it be merged/redirected to 2K Sports? Regards SoWhy 10:38, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
- The company was independent for 10 of its 13 years of lifetime, yet we have just about no information on it. The one-liner on the 2K Sports is not quite enough to justify a redirect, as the reader will find out practically nothing if they were sent there. Lordtobi (✉) 10:50, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
- Well, they will learn that the company was later part of 2K Sports. If we delete the article without a redirect, they won't even learn that. So how is the latter preferable? Regards SoWhy 11:07, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
- The company was independent for 10 of its 13 years of lifetime, yet we have just about no information on it. The one-liner on the 2K Sports is not quite enough to justify a redirect, as the reader will find out practically nothing if they were sent there. Lordtobi (✉) 10:50, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Their products were notable to have their own pages and one was licensed from a major (if poor) film and the other licensed a highly popular football player, the company will have more than enough sources out there to sustain an article.217.43.203.61 (talk) 19:00, 1 April 2018 (UTC)