Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/10tons Entertainment

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. JForget 22:34, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

10tons Entertainment

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

I can't find significant coverage for this company in multiple searches. Joe Chill (talk) 15:58, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. No assertation of notability, and the onlt things I can find on Google and on the page itself are links to the company's own website. I can find no reliable third-party coverage anywhere. WackyWace ^{talk to me, people} 18:07, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. (Search video game sources) • Gene93k (talk) 01:35, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:36, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I had previously redirected their game Crimsonland to this article, per WP:PRODUCT due to lack of notability; therefore I am adding it to this discussion. Marasmusine (talk) 16:37, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both; Searching the web does not reveal any significant coverage of the company or their games. No other indication of notability. Marasmusine (talk) 09:44, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep (Crimsonland)~~ Delete - I found some coverage for Crimsonland from IGN which I added to the article.--Robixen (talk) 20:09, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Coverage from IGN only shows notability if it is a review or news. All that the IGN link has is a game description which is not significant coverage. Joe Chill (talk) 20:12, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I also found and added Gamespot page with release informations, does it count?--Robixen (talk) 20:22, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - No. Why do you think that a list of release dates is significant coverage? Joe Chill (talk) 20:26, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I guess you're right, but I also found 2 reviews: http://www.gametunnel.com/crimsonland-game-review.php and http://www.games-here.com/crimsonland_review.html. --Robixen (talk) 20:31, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Game Tunnel is possibly acceptable as a source [1]. As for games-here, I can't see any information on their staff or editorial, so probably not a reliable source. I'd like to see more coverage before changing to keep, but the game is at least verifiable now. Marasmusine (talk) 08:27, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - I found one more source, but I don't know if this review is written by their staff - http://www.manifestogames.com/crimsonland. --Robixen (talk) 19:01, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      - It says "player reviews". Marasmusine (talk) 08:35, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        
        I was talking about text above player reviews.--Robixen (talk) 19:49, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        
        It's probably a description, so I'm changing to delete, one article is probably not enough to establish notability--Robixen (talk) 20:07, 10 June 2010 (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.