Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Video games

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Video games. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Video games|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Video games. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from August 2015) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Video games/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Video games-related deletions

AstralShiftPro

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

The only SIGCOV I can find about this company is an interview, so it appears to fail WP:CORPDEPTH. Redirecting to Little Goody Two Shoes (video game) is a potential WP:ATD given that it appears to be their only standalone notable product. Notability is not inherited from that game, however. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:47, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Portugal. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:47, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hect

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

Lack of independent sigcov. Most sources are for Moon Crystal instead of the company itself. Go D. Usopp (talk) 10:46, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Japan. Go D. Usopp (talk) 10:46, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I agree that this should likely be a page on Moon Crystal instead of a page on Hect. Bgrus22 (talk) 19:38, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pocket Mirror (video game)

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

The only significant coverage from a reliable source I can find about this game is a single review here. It doesn't seem to pass the bar of WP:GNG. Little Goody Two Shoes (video game) might be an WP:ATD given that the game is a prequel to this one, it would make sense to incorporate something about it. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:45, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:45, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thank you for reviewing my article and explaining everything clearly. I understand now that I should have improved it more before publishing. I really appreciate your feedback, and I’ll move it to my draft space to work on sourcing and rewriting it properly. Thanks again for your time and for helping me understand the process better. MeldyRose (talk) 11:20, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, please don't move articles when an AfD is in progress. As the banner says, do not remove this notice before the discussion is closed. You'd have to actually ask me to withdraw my nomination first.

If you had asked me though, it's unlikely I would have because I believe this is a WP:AKON situation. I don't believe this article would be notable in any incarnation so redirection or deletion are the only potential options for it in my view. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:41, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

QA & UX Manager

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

Orphan article with no real content — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 12:34, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Management. — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 12:34, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per WP:TNT, even if notable it would need to be rewritten. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:21, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, notability is a big concern here because there are no reliable, independent sources(excluding blogs and other self-published sources) that establish notability for this in particular. At most, it would maybe merit a subsection in the Quality Assurance article. monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 16:25, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. jolielover♥talk 16:39, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Go D. Usopp (talk) 00:24, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Dreamers Guild

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

Fails WP:CORPDEPTH with a lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. Many of their games are notable, but that isn't inherited by the company itself. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:43, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and California. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:43, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream (video game). Most notable product. Go D. Usopp (talk) 00:26, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wildfire Studios

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

Fails WP:CORPDEPTH; any sources appear to be only trivial mentions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:36, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Australia. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:36, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shobon no Action

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

Amazed that I had never came across this article before. Cat Mario was a short-lived trend when I was younger. The sources for this article are thin on the ground, ref 5 possibly not even existing. The gameplay section, being the longest, really does need to be sourced, and at the moment it doesn't have any. Despite my enjoyment of this game, it isn't notable enough for a standalone article. I wouldn't oppose a merge to the list of unofficial Mario media. Failing this, deletion is probably in order here. 11WB (talk) 22:10, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Technology, Computing, and Japan. 11WB (talk) 22:10, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep This is an old game, sources are more likely to be in gaming magazines than anywhere online. I found this Edge magazine article and this excerpt from a book by Ian Bogost which together with the sources currently in the article, make it pass GNG. I will note that Syobon Action appears to be WP:COMMONNAME, even if incorrect, the current title seems to be a WP:OR/WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS attempt to set the record straight and may need to be changed back. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:26, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't specifically for Cat Mario? 11WB (talk) 22:36, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Quick note on the sources you provided. The Edge magazine is a "Game of the Month" short piece. Bogost's chapter is definitely the stronger of the two sources. Both would be good additions. 11WB (talk) 22:43, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I assume that Cat Mario, Syobon Action and Shobon no Action are the same game. The triple naming is also mentioned in this book: [1] (though there is a chance it may be citogenesis). ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:56, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, that makes sense. I wasn't able to find any reliable sources on Google under a search for "Cat Mario" specifically. Will check the other names too. 11WB (talk) 23:06, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Earliest revision of the page made reference to this video from 2007 which had "Cat Mario" in the title, so no citogenesis. REAL_MOUSE_IRL talk 13:49, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. A minor article about a minor topic. Notable enough for a short article. I see that it has articles in several other languages. Maybe some of those have additional sources? --DanielRigal (talk) 00:09, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
On Russian Wikipedia, ru:Syobon Action is a good article or at least their equivalent to it. Besides some fairly bad sources (Know Your Meme, WhatCulture, Screen Rant) I could find these sources: passing mention in a book on game design, some discussion in a book there is no preview for, and a review on ferra.ru. The rest of the references are already in this English article. In Spanish, there is this somewhat detailed Zona Red article that calls it "gato bros" and a discussion about it on Univision.com. -- Recon rabbit 20:20, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Moblyng

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

The article appears to fail Wikipedia's notability guidelines for companies (WP:ORG) and the general notability guideline (WP:GNG). Coverage of Moblyng is limited to a few VentureBeat articles, both authored by the same journalist, and there is little evidence of sustained, independent, in-depth coverage from multiple reliable secondary sources. The company had limited impact and ceased operations in 2012. Deletion, merge, or redirect may be appropriate. SanneMonte (talk) 20:55, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 October 31. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:10, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and California. Shellwood (talk) 21:13, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:25, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Go D. Usopp (talk) 05:51, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Some other sources that might add to arguments to keep: WP:ORGDEPTH: Reuters, 6 articles on Techcrunch (as Moblyng and Fliptrack),
Delete: An article on a start-up which operated as Fliptrack then Moblyng. It gained the usual start-up coverage and occasional quotes from the company founder in wider context pieces, but I am not seeing the coverage of the company itself needed to demonstrate that it attained notability. The founder appears to work in a quite different area now, so an ATD redirect does not appear sustainable. AllyD (talk) 08:28, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chipper and Sons Lumber Co.

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

Disputed drafification; WP:DRAFTOBJECT applies. Fails WP:GNG, oft declined at AFC. Useless sources. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 11:02, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please help for finding reliable sources without self RealRizvan5 (talk) 12:35, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

With respect, RealRizvan5, your moving it to mainspace in the state it is in is why we are here. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 12:52, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete 3 out of 4 sources not reliable. ScrabbleTiles (talk) 12:47, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request full article RealRizvan5 (talk) 13:14, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@RealRizvan5 You appear to have a question, but we cannot ascertain what it might be. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 13:23, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:51, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Locked redirect to Scott Cawthon#1996-2014: Early work Game is non-notable by itself and this works as an ATD. Unfortunately it seems as if the creator will persist despite the many notes and warnings about how much this doesn't meet N/GNG, thus the additional lock to discourage this from staying in delete/recreate draft limbo. Nathannah • 📮 14:55, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the page it RealRizvan5 (talk) 15:25, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Scott Cawthon#1996-2014: Early work Per nom. I don't believe protection is necessary; this seems more like a CIR issue with one editor than numerous people attempting to create the article. That is to say, the actions of one editor are better off dealt with at WP:ANI if they continue to be disruptive. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:27, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - An article should speak for itself so that a reader can tell from the article why the subject is notable, and this article does not. The article is almost incomprehensible. The fact that the author asked for help with the sources is a sign that even the author knows that the sources are questionable. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:23, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Does the author have a conflict of interest? Robert McClenon (talk) 16:23, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: FWIW the creating editor seems to have retired and vanished, and requests deletion, albeit not in conventional English 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 00:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per zxcvbnm. Plausible redirect target and not much else. Go D. Usopp (talk) 00:21, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Winged Cloud

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

Fails WP:CORPDEPTH with no significant coverage. A merge to Sakura Spirit, which is notable, may be a viable WP:ATD, but notability is not inherited. There's no real indication the company is standalone notable in any capacity. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:01, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Companies. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:01, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:56, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I got pinged as the page creator, so I'm just stopping by to say I don't contest this AFD. I'm also neutral on a merge to Sakura Spirit versus outright deletion. CurlyWi (talk) 16:38, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – The article meets WP:GNG as multiple independent reliable sources have covered the developer and its games (e.g. Destructoid, MangaGamer, Gamasutra). The studio has released dozens of titles over a decade, indicating lasting significance in the English visual novel market. SanneMonte (talk) 07:53, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Without actually mentioning the sources claimed to exist here, it is just WP:LOTSOFSOURCES argument. Also, "and its games" does not apply here unless there is significant coverage of the developer themselves within that game coverage. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:52, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Sakura Spirit. Lacks independent sigcov in comparison to the proposed redirect target. Go D. Usopp (talk) 00:14, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Empty Clip Studios

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NCORP with a lack of significant coverage, and likely made as WP:PROMO. Similar standards don't appear to have been in place upon its last AfD, so this should be given another look. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:22, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and California. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:22, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Groovin Blocks or another product. Go D. Usopp (talk) 05:41, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect- to the game developers more notable games as a possible ATD, as yet to find SIGCOV specifically for them, interesting, as their games have multiple articles already existing in the wiki, one of them Symphony (video game) which has won some awards.Lorraine Crane (talk) 20:01, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ASC Games

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

Fails WP:ORGCRIT. Go D. Usopp (talk) 10:16, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Connecticut. Go D. Usopp (talk) 10:16, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not finding any sources myself. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:19, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Found [[2]] and [[3]] but I'm not convinced that the WP:ORGCRIT is met here. Let'srun (talk) 22:10, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect'- to any of their more notable games as a possible ATD, searching online has not shown SIGCOV sources that have caught my attention so far.Lorraine Crane (talk) 20:49, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per my above comment. Let'srun (talk) 03:31, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pepsiman

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

A move request on Talk:Pepsiman (video game) recently closed with a rough consensus to not move the page to this title. However, there was no consensus established for whether or not this disambiguation page was necessary, or if it should redirect to Pepsi#Pepsiman. This discussion seeks to attain a consensus as to whether or not this disambiguation should be retained, or if it should redirect to the subsection covering the mascot character on the main Pepsi article. silviaASH (inquire within) 04:06, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Video games, Advertising, Products, and Disambiguations. silviaASH (inquire within) 04:06, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It disambiguates between two identically-named topics that are equally primary. I don't see a need to remove it. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:33, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Zxcvbnm - It looks like a perfectly valid and useful disambiguation page, as Pepsiman the character and Pepsiman the game are identically named and covered in separate articles. Rorshacma (talk) 17:01, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Pepsi#Pepsiman. We do not need a disambig page for two topics, and the character is obviously the primary topic given the game is based on him. Hatnotes on both articles can easily help with navigation between the two topics. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 19:28, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1) Disambiguation pages are perfectly valid even for 2 topics, and even if one of them is a DABMENTION.

2) The character is not "obviously" the primary topic, as decided in the previous move discussion noted in the nomination. One could argue that the game is just as notable as as an old advertising mascot. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:58, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: This is a valid disambiguation page between two identically named topics, and I don't see enough evidence to establish the character as the primary topic over the game. MidnightMayhem (talk) 23:35, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per @Pokelego999. Character is a more appropriate primary topic when the video game is literally based on and starring him. Go D. Usopp (talk) 06:44, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cabela's Big Game Hunter 6

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

Non-notable video game, there are barely any sources mentioning it, and ones that do mention it normally barely do, are unreliable (often times user generated), or are just listings. [4][5] TheSilksongPikmin (talk) 16:19, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 October 30. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:45, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:55, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Cabela's Big Game Hunter - There's a review by Game World Navigator: [6] and a gameplay synopsis by AllGame: [7]. Not enough for notability. --Mika1h (talk) 16:22, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Cabela's Big Game Hunter: Not notable as an individual game; better covered at the series article. MidnightMayhem (talk) 19:19, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cabela's Big Game Hunter 5: Platinum Series

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

This game is completely non-notable. After some searching, I discovered that all the sources online are either user-generated, unreliable for other reasons, or are just listings/one off mentions of the game. [8][9] It makes sense that this article is just one line long. TheSilksongPikmin (talk) 16:05, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 October 30. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:28, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:33, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Cabela's Big Game Hunter per WP:ATD. There is at least some confirmation that it was released in article form, just not SIGCOV. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:40, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Cabela's Big Game Hunter: Does not appear to meet WP:GNG on its own and would be better covered as part of the series. MidnightMayhem (talk) 22:37, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Cabela's Big Game Hunter - Found an AllGame entry: [10] but not anything else. --Mika1h (talk) 10:21, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cabela's Big Game Hunter 4

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

Non-notable video game, there are barely any sources mentioning it, and ones that do mention it normally barely do, are unreliable (often times user generated), or are just listings. [11][12]TheSilksongPikmin (talk) 16:12, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 October 30. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:28, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:33, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Cabela's Big Game Hunter per WP:ATD. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:14, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Cabela's Big Game Hunter: Does not appear to meet WP:GNG on its own and would be better covered as part of the series. MidnightMayhem (talk) 22:36, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Found these sources [13], [14], [15]. Timur9008 (talk) 11:25, October 31, 2025 (UTC)

Those don't change my opinion, unfortunately. One is a press release (primary source), another is summarizing a press release, and there is one that is a legitimate review but not long enough to count as SIGCOV. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:12, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ChairThatSpins

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

Entirely unsourced (aside from many external links to Macinanti's social media posts) BLP, no evidence that this meets WP:NBLP. ZLEA ^TǀC 05:23, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ZLEA ^TǀC 05:23, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Little confused on what exactly you're saying isn't backed up.

First section of the article: Besides some slightly vague wording which I'll give you credit on, none of it is downright non-factual. You can check the linked channel for the first upload date, for the video and the reply from Mike Desjardins, you can check the linked video's replies as the comment is even pinned, same with the view count and release date. There's no argument against Mike Desjardins being the developer, as his Twitter account has been confirmed by themeatly, who on his account has posts dating all the way back to 2014. And the YouTube channel that replied to mikes video, has been linked by said twitter account.

So, for the next section regarding the interview:

It's linked, and you can very clearly see Adrienne Kress in it, and there's also no discussion about whether she worked on the books as she has multiple credits for the books as seen in the linked post for Bendy Books. Again, same with the amount of views. The only thing here that's really disputable is him being infamous in the community, but considering the fact he has multiple shirts (with these being posted by the @Bendy twitter account, and literally sold BY joey drew studios) it's not much of a discussion.

And as for the last one in regards to B:SOTM, the video linked there does show the chair in the update, and the chat shows it was a live stream when this was recorded if you look at the footage. There's no easy way to verify this besides video footage, unless you want to pull up the SteamDB version from around 5am on 4/14/2024 (which if you really want, I can do to prove.) but yeah.

Again, as for the shirts being listed at the end there; those link directly to @Bendy, not his own personal tweets. Which, if there's any source of information that I think matters- it's probably the developers themselves.

I do agree I think this needs to be stated better- I'll work on adjusting the page to be better informed in that regard, but I think it's not misleading and does show enough evidence, but maybe not in the best way. If you think any of this is wrong/inaccurate, please do point out specific details or anything I've listed here. Hoping this can be resolved, thanks.

OmotamiaDev OmotamiaDev (talk) 06:22, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Made a mistake: meant to say "you can check the linked video's replies as the comment is even pinned, same with the view count and release date. There's no argument against Mike Desjardins being the developer, and as his Twitter account has been confirmed by theMeatly, who on his account has posts dating all the way back to 2014. And the YouTube channel that replied to Joe's video, has been linked by said twitter account in a circle that confirms validity." OmotamiaDev (talk) 06:26, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As Shazback noted below, user-generated content such as social media posts and YouTube videos are generally unreliable. It doesn't matter if none of it is downright non-factual, as Wikipedia's content is based on verifiability, not truth. We also have notability guidelines that help us determine if a topic should have its own article. Most importantly, a topic is generally notable enough for its own article if it has received significant coverage from reliable secondary sources independent of said subject.

On a side note, I noticed that you have declared a conflict of interest with ChairThatSpins on your userpage. Users with conflicts of interest with certain topics are usually discouraged from creating or editing articles on said topics, and are instead encouraged to make edit and article requests to ensure the outcome is neutral. - ZLEA ^TǀC 07:48, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Internet, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:37, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete: possibly Draftify as a WP:ATD, but as is this page has numerous issues, chief of which is WP:N. To the article creator, I would suggest 1) reviewing H:FIRST and in particular identifying what are the WP:THREE articles from WP:INDEPENDENT sources that establish the article subject's notoriety as per Wikipedia's WP:GNG; 2) creating this article in draftspace and asking for a reviewer to help you assess if it is ready to be published. Note that social media and user-generated content (Twitter/X, Youtube, other wikis, twitch...) are generally not considered reliable to establish notoriety. Shazback (talk) 07:01, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination; links to user-created content are not references and don't establish notability. A WP:BEFORE search did not turn up any valid sources. JSFarman (talk) 21:20, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Fails the most basic standards of a BLP article to otherwise keep. Go D. Usopp (talk) 05:42, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alice no Paint Adventure

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

Fails WP:GNG. Lacks significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. Retro Gamer piece is not in-depth enough to count as significant coverage. I can't read the Google Books reference but even if it were SIGCOV, it wouldn't be enough on its own. Suggested WP:ATD targets: Epoch Co.#Licensed games or List of Super Nintendo Entertainment System games. Mika1h (talk) 17:37, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Japan. Mika1h (talk) 17:37, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Preferably to an article related to the film it's related to, but either choice are good enough. Go D. Usopp (talk) 05:44, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or merge into the above: I could not find any more significant reference through a WP:BEFORE check, so it appears to fail GNG. Somepinkdude (talk) 23:02, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect- agree with the nom s suggest for redirects based on its context, the former would be the better option as its closer in relevance to the game's developer.Lorraine Crane (talk) 00:42, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh My God! (video game)

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

Only piece of significant coverage I found is this Hardcore Gaming 101 article: [16]. It alone is not enough for notability. Redirection to List of Atlus games? Mika1h (talk) 15:18, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Japan. Mika1h (talk) 15:18, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No Japanese wiki article, so that doesn't help... I found this [17], it self-styles as the Museum of Video Games, but I suspect it's not a RS. I don't see much of anything that we can use for sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 19:51, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Atlus games - I was unable to find any coverage of this game on Archive.org, searching both by the English and the Japanese titles. Doesn't appear independently notable, but apt to have on a list of games by the company with the Hardcore Gaming 101 ref the entry is sourced to. Waxworker (talk) 15:04, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Atlus games per above. Found an All Game Guide entry [18], but that's it. Timur9008 (talk) 11:02, October 31, 2025 (UTC)

Ferrari Virtual Academy

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

Fails WP:GNG. VirtualR.net is a Wordpress blog. DSOGaming is an unreliable source per WP:VG/S. FormulaPassion.it and Road & Track refs are both fairly insubstantial news stories. Redirect to Kunos Simulazioni? Mika1h (talk) 15:08, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn by nominator - Found reviews by Level (magazine): [19], The Games Machine (Italy): [20], Giochi per il mio computer: [21]. I added them to the article. --Mika1h (talk) 10:30, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Italy. Mika1h (talk) 15:08, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Motorsport-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:46, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. BuffaloTaro (talk) 00:48, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect – It doesn't seem to have ever been the subject of much coverage or interest. There is little discussion of the game on the developer's article but at least it would serve to confirm the basic details (i.e. release year, platform, developer). 5225_C (talk • contributions) 02:27, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nom. Go D. Usopp (talk) 05:51, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Why still vote redirect? I found 3 reviews, all are significant coverage. --Mika1h (talk) 16:37, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  That by itself doesn’t mean this warrants a dedicated article. Tvx1 20:13, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  I already expanded the article with additional sourcing, I don't think it warrants a merge now, let alone just a redirect. --Mika1h (talk) 20:28, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  You can't withdraw a nomination that other people have started !voting on unless all the !votes were for keep. That's not the case here, where everyone except you (oddly enough) supports deletion or redirection. My !vote is unchanged. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 06:56, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  
  Can you explain why 3 sizable print reviews are not enough for notability? --Mika1h (talk) 08:10, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  I don't place much weight on reviews of any media when considering notability because they are typically WP:ROUTINE in nature. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 11:43, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - - - That reasoning runs afoul of WP:NGAME: "A video game is appropriate for an article if it has been the subject of significant commentary or analysis in published sources that are independent of the game developer." There exists non-significant reviews out there, though (capsule reviews), as well as unreliable ones (blogs). Geschichte (talk) 09:09, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The reception section can also be expanded from the available sources. Geschichte (talk) 08:02, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Let's! TV Play Classic

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

Fails GNG, lack of significant coverage in general and article does not have any footnotes. Go D. Usopp (talk) 12:09, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Japan. Go D. Usopp (talk) 12:09, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No significant coverage in reliable independent sources. The article fails WP:GNG and WP:VGSCOPE, consists mainly of unsourced game detail and reads like a game guide. Thilio^{R O B O T🤖 talk} 13:26, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Asymmetric Publications

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

Fails WP:CORPDEPTH; notability is not inherited from Kingdom of Loathing or its other spinoffs. I do think Zack Johnson is probably notable per WP:NARTIST, but not the studio, and therefore the page itself would likely require a total rewrite. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:09, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Arizona. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:09, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zack Johnson is the founder of the company, so it appears WP:SURMOUNTABLE. IgelRM (talk) 16:02, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep, I support the total rewrite but if that doesn't work out a redirect to Kingdom of Loathing will do. Go D. Usopp (talk) 01:21, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see what Zack Johnson being the founder has to do with it, notability is not inherited. I have no prejudice towards a separate article being made about Johnson if notability can be shown, but this is separate unless you are proposing to move and rewrite as a Zack Johnson bio page. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:20, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for more votes, so far only one (weak) !keep vote
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 18:06, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sad Socket

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

Fails WP:CORPDEPTH, notability is not inherited from the success of a video game. 9 Kings seems like an acceptable WP:ATD as it does appear to scooch slightly over the notability bar. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:00, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, Brazil, and New York. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:00, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to 9 Kings. Not much reason to not do so given that it's their only notable product. Go D. Usopp (talk) 01:18, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect- to 9 Kings- is agreeable, spot checks on the citations refer more to their game than about than the subject game studio. Additional searches reflects the same.Lorraine Crane (talk) 18:12, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In terms of WP:CORPDEPTH, I believe the studio meets the guideline, as it has several other projects of note. Its main product is Seraph’s Last Stand — not as notable as 9 Kings, but it has received global coverage and reportedly sold around 250,000 copies (per PlayTracker). The studio also developed Ending Tau, an upcoming title that has been covered by notable outlets such as IGN. Considering these, the company’s track record suggests notability that extends beyond a single title. Within the regional context of Brazil, the studio is particularly significant, which likely justified the creation of the Portuguese-language article that this one was translated from. I’m open to feedback on how best to reflect this in the English version. Regarding 9 Kings itself, I disagree with concerns about notability — the article is supported by multiple reliable, independent sources, and the game has demonstrated clear cultural relevance. RGMNotTrue (talk) 18:26, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for more votes, so far only two !redirects and one user is disputing whether the article meets WP:CORPDEPTH
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 18:07, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OnceLost Games

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

Fails WP:CORPDEPTH outside of The Wayward Realms or Julian LeFay. The Wayward Realms is a viable WP:ATD. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:22, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Companies. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:22, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The nominator's ATD suggestion misapplies policy. Yes, The Wayward Realms and Julian LeFay mention OnceLost Games, but that's expected since they're naturally related topics. The question isn't whether other articles mention the company, it's whether the company itself has sufficient independent coverage to warrant its own article per WP:NCORP and WP:GNG.
OnceLost Games clearly does:
- The company's founding story itself received significant coverage as a notable industry event (multiple Bethesda veterans reuniting after decades)
- Coverage specifically discusses the company's internal challenges, business decisions, and organizational changes (Phoenix departure, publisher negotiations, personnel conflicts)
- The studio has multiple notable founders (Peterson, LeFay, Lakshman, Goodall, Heberling), not just one person whose biography could contain everything
- Significant coverage of the company's business strategy, crowdfunding success, and development approach exists independent of game feature discussion
- LeFay's death generated substantial coverage specifically about his role at OnceLost Games and the company's future
Merging to The Wayward Realms would create an awkward situation where we're cramming company history, founding details, business decisions, and personnel matters into a game article. That's backwards. Games are products of companies, not the other way around. The current structure (separate articles) properly reflects how sources treat these topics.

The fact that information appears in multiple articles doesn't violate any policy. WP:ATD is an alternative when content doesn't meet notability requirements, not a mandatory action when related articles exist. OnceLost Games meets WP:CORPDEPTH with significant, independent coverage beyond routine announcements. MightyLebowski (talk) 20:29, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to The Wayward Realms. Article drastically overstates the amount of independent coverage the studio has received save for its founding, most of which are derived from the game or the studio's members. Go D. Usopp (talk) 05:48, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No Wikipedia policy requires that coverage be "purely independent" of related topics to be considered notable; WP:GNG explicitly states that significant coverage "does not need to be the main topic of the source material", and OnceLost Games has received substantive coverage in independent, reliable sources discussing the company's operations, founding, business decisions, and organizational challenges. MightyLebowski (talk) 07:51, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, as shown below, almost all coverage that The Wayward Realms has received is derived from the studio's members, so by your logic, we should go ahead and delete The Wayward Realms too. I'm trying to understand why anyone would want to confuse people and merge two distinct articles using (incorrect) Wikipedia policy logic that (when applied consistently) would lead to both being deleted. If you read The Wayward Realms article, the Development section is a mess, and is largely unrelated to the actual development (instead discussing internal game studio conflicts, members of the studio, business strategy, etc.). MightyLebowski (talk) 13:38, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment in response to this, I have made a source assessment table of the sources to demonstrate my reasoning in making the nomination.

Source assessment table
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexkane/2019/09/27/daggerfall-designer-ted-peterson-on-his-new-rpg-studio-oncelost-games/		~ "Articles written by Forbes staff are reliable. Articles written by Forbes contributors do not have the same editorial oversight and may not be reliable."		~ Partial
https://kotaku.com/julian-lefay-the-elder-scrolls-daggerfall-bethesda-1851786769			Mostly about Julian LeFay's history as a game developer and death, trivial mention of OnceLost games as part of his accomplishments	✘ No
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgCyFyvicis	Posted by OnceLost games	User generated		✘ No
https://www.pcgamer.com/gaming-industry/the-father-of-elder-scrolls-julian-lefay-has-died-his-legacy-will-live-on-in-every-realm-every-quest-and-every-moment-of-wonder/			Mostly about Julian LeFay's history as a game developer and death, trivial mention of OnceLost games as part of his accomplishments	✘ No
https://www.gamesradar.com/games/the-elder-scrolls/father-of-the-elder-scrolls-julian-lefay-has-passed-away-and-his-team-say-his-legacy-will-live-on-in-every-realm-every-quest-and-every-moment-of-wonder-in-the-upcoming-fantasy-rpg-the-wayward-realms/			Mostly about Julian LeFay's creation of The Wayward Realms and death, trivial mention of OnceLost games	✘ No
https://gamerant.com/wayward-realms-elder-scrolls-fantasy-rpg-stealth-snuff-flame-good-why/		GameRant is a Valnet property	Mostly about Wayward Realms	✘ No
https://dgoodall.substack.com/p/wayward-realms-kickstarter	Announcement post by devs	User generated	About Wayward Realms	✘ No
https://www.pcgamesn.com/the-wayward-realms/funding-kickstarter			About Wayward Realms, trivial mention of OnceLost Games	✘ No
https://www.pcgamer.com/the-designers-of-the-original-elder-scrolls-are-making-a-new-rpg/			About Wayward Realms, trivial mention of OnceLost Games	✘ No
https://www.escapistmagazine.com/classic-elder-scrolls-developers-launch-new-studio-oncelost-games/			Minor announcement, run of the mill	✘ No
https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/former-bethesda-developer-julian-lefay-known-as-the-father-of-the-elder-scrolls-has-died			Mostly about Julian LeFay's history as a game developer and death, trivial mention of OnceLost games as part of his accomplishments	✘ No
https://www.pcgamer.com/former-elder-scrolls-devs-announce-grand-rpg-the-wayward-realms/			Mostly about Wayward Realms, trivial mention of OnceLost Games	✘ No
https://www.gamesradar.com/former-elder-scrolls-devs-reveal-the-wayward-realms-a-new-fantasy-rpg-on-a-scale-never-attempted/			Mostly about Wayward Realms, trivial mention of OnceLost Games	✘ No
https://www.nme.com/news/former-elder-scrolls-developers-announce-the-wayward-realms-3009084			Mostly about Wayward Realms, trivial mention of OnceLost Games	✘ No
https://www.pcgamesn.com/the-wayward-realms/funding-kickstarter			Mostly about Wayward Realms, trivial mention of OnceLost Games	✘ No
https://www.pcgamesn.com/the-wayward-realms/kickstarter-elder-scrolls			Mostly about Wayward Realms, trivial mention of OnceLost Games	✘ No
https://www.pcgamer.com/games/the-elder-scrolls/father-of-elder-scrolls-steps-back-from-game-development-because-of-cancer-we-are-preparing-to-say-goodbye-to-a-true-legend-of-the-industry/			Mostly about Julian LeFay, trivial mention of OnceLost games	✘ No
https://archive.org/details/PC.Games.N050.1996.11-fl0n/page/n123/mode/2up	Primary source interview		Long before OnceLost Games was formed	✘ No
https://www.imperial-library.info/content/julian-lefay-in-conversation-with-pc-games-magazine	Primary source interview		Long before OnceLost Games was formed	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

I think it speaks for itself, tell me if you take issue with any part of this. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:10, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Response to source assessment table: I appreciate the detailed breakdown, but it misapplies WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH in several critical ways:

On the Forbes source reliability objection: You marked it reliable and significant but questioned it because it's Forbes Contributor content. Per WP:RSPS, Forbes Contributors articles can be used when the author has subject matter expertise. Alex Kane covers gaming professionally and this is a substantive interview specifically about OnceLost Games' founding. Even if we set this aside entirely, there's still sufficient coverage.

On the "trivial mention" characterizations: This is where the assessment fundamentally misunderstands WP:CORPDEPTH. Multiple sources you marked as "trivial" actually contain significant discussion of OnceLost Games:

Escapist Magazine (marked "minor announcement"): The article is literally titled "Classic Elder Scrolls Developers Launch New Studio, OnceLost Games." Coverage of a company's founding by notable industry veterans is significant per WP:NCORP (few companies get an announcement article written about them upon their formation unless they're notable).
Kotaku, PC Gamer, Rock Paper Shotgun (LeFay death coverage, all marked "trivial"): These articles discuss OnceLost Games as LeFay's current company, quote company statements, discuss the company's future plans, and analyze what his death means for the studio. This isn't passing mention but substantive discussion of the company's circumstances and operations.
PCGamesN funding article (2022): Discusses OnceLost Games' investor search, management structure, volunteer workforce, development philosophy, and business strategy. You marked this "trivial mention" but it contains multiple paragraphs specifically about the company's operations and funding challenges.

The dispute is whether coverage meets WP:GNG's standard for "significant coverage" versus trivial mentions. Per WP:GNG, significant coverage "does not need to be the main topic of the source material." Sources discussing The Wayward Realms while extensively covering OnceLost Games' founding by industry veterans, internal conflicts, business strategy, and creative decisions provide significant coverage of the company itself, not mere mentions.

Further explanation: WP:CORPDEPTH requires "significant coverage" not "articles primarily about the subject." Coverage of OnceLost Games' founding, business decisions ($8M publisher rejection), organizational structure (40+ volunteers), internal conflicts (Phoenix departure), funding strategy (Kickstarter pivot after rejecting crowdfunding initially), and operational challenges is significant coverage even when appearing in articles that also discuss related topics like The Wayward Realms or Julian LeFay.

Your standard would require game studios to have dedicated profile pieces to qualify for articles. That's not Wikipedia policy. WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH are satisfied by "significant coverage" across multiple reliable sources, which clearly exists here. The aggregate coverage provides detailed information about the company's formation, operations, personnel, business strategy, and organizational challenges.

Finally, per WP:NEXIST, notability is based on whether suitable sources exist, not on the current state of citations in the article. The sources clearly exist (multiple reliable gaming publications have covered OnceLost Games' founding, business operations, and organizational developments). Even if the article (being brand new) could be improved with additional citations, that's not grounds for deletion/merging. The topic meets notability requirements because independent, reliable sources about the company are available in the real world.

OnceLost Games has significant, policy-compliant coverage (even if it's alongside other related coverage), and therefore its own article is clearly warranted. MightyLebowski (talk) 08:21, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As someone who has seen actual profile articles on companies numerous times, this is drastically overestimating the non-triviality of these sources. I am fully aware of the policy that significant coverage does not need to be the main topic, and even by those standards, it is trivial. But, given how vehement your argument is, it is unlikely we will ever see eye to eye, so I will wait for others to chime in about my source analysis. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:25, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm genuinely puzzled why the coverage of OnceLost Games' founding, business decisions, organizational structure, and operational challenges in these sources should be characterized as trivial when the coverage of The Wayward Realms in those same articles is presumably sufficient to establish its notability. Many articles on the game are primarily about the founders (not the game itself), so should we merge The Wayward Realms into Julian LeFay's or Ted Peterson's article? After all, the only reason The Wayward Realms is notable is due to the founders being former senior Bethesda employees. I don't imagine you would propose that, so I'm just saying your logic doesn't make much sense. Both OnceLost Games and The Wayward Realms have received sufficient, non-trival media coverage to make them notable. MightyLebowski (talk) 16:12, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, I'm not particularly convinced The Wayward Realms is notable either, and I believe that coverage of both the game and the studio are trivial in all of those examples, but it did get a decent amount more coverage even if it is largely hype or speculative. It's enough that I'd be fine with "letting sleeping dogs lie" until the game is actually released and very likely becomes notable, unless the game lapses into being vaporware or is cancelled. On the other hand, the studio itself has almost nothing of substance, and did not even release a single game thus far. Merging it into the game would be uncontroversial in my eyes.

If we were going by the letter of policy then IMO both Wayward Realms and the studio should be merged into Julian LeFay's page, as he appears clearly notable for his role in creating Elder Scrolls, as well as his death. I am less convinced Ted Peterson passes WP:NWRITER. A lot of the sourcing there is weak. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:50, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion logic seems trigger-happy.

I cited WP:NEXIST earlier for a reason: an article shouldn't be deleted or merged just because of citation issues. The question of notability is based on whether it has non-trivial mentions in WP:RS, and I think it's well-established that all of the articles being discussed (including this one) have significant mentions in reliable sources (main subject or not).

I understand you want thorough sourcing, which is valuable, but we shouldn't start deleting or merging articles just because they have sourcing problems. I brought up the article comparisons to show that The Wayward Realms (and, from your perspective, Ted Peterson) would be deleted too under this logic, which goes too far. That's why deleting or merging this article also goes too far and applies policy more strictly than intended. MightyLebowski (talk) 19:57, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

the problem comes when the topic of any given article only has one usable source. this can't even fly as a stub. people often set three usable sources as the baseline for an article for this exact reason

also, no one voted to delete or merge. usopp and i voted to redirect, which means that, ideally, no content will be carried over, and bottom row of a qwerty keyboard suggested the same consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 13:56, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It has enough mentions to warrant notability, but you say it can't even be a stub? Lol. Using wikilawyering to justify a redirect on separate notable topics is wild. MightyLebowski (talk) 18:58, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

redirect to the wayward realms. regardless of what lebowski wants to say (which has really gone into bludgeoning, please stop), this article really doesn't have much to stand on. think of it as a team cherry case, where the dev team's only "notability" comes from passing mentions when it comes to their products. except unlike team cherry, this one might just be too soon. no opinion on what to do with the wayward realms for now consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 13:51, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Bro, you're just wikihounding and following me from our disagreements in the Nine Theses. Nobody is bludgeoning except you... it's a conversation about a singular point relating to notability. MightyLebowski (talk) 18:48, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
if you wanna call it that, i was actually wikihounding zxcvbnm lol consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 19:02, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More opinions on the source assessment are welcomed, so far consensus leans towards redirect
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 18:09, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Misato Katsuragi's Reporting Plan

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

No in-depth coverage for this "game". There's a Famitsu release announcement of the game: [22], Inside news story announcing the shutdown of the service: [23]. Short list entries by Keen Gamer and CBR: [24], [25]. Suggesting redirect to List of Neon Genesis Evangelion video games per WP:ATD. Mika1h (talk) 13:20, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Anime and manga, and Japan. Mika1h (talk) 13:20, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:30, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - no indication of a foreign language-competent WP:BEFORE. From a quick search, there is a cnet announcement when it launched, this piece in Markezine (published by Shōeisha), and this in Gigazine describing it as groundbreaking. No reason to believe there isn't more (in addition to the coverage already in the article), but combined, this is enough for GNG. DCsansei (talk) 02:05, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A bit rich calling me incompetent and then posting a bunch of sources that are basically glorified press releases. --Mika1h (talk) 08:44, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I think there's enough for this game to meet GNG. In addition to the mentioned sources, there is coverage from 4Gamer and Inside which are reliable per WP:VG/RS. MidnightMayhem (talk) 03:12, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect Per nom. None of the sources shown have given me the impression they are any more than WP:MILL release announcements when run through a translation tool. They aren't WP:SIGCOV and there is no indication that there are more detailed reviews out there. If anything, bringing up these sources as the "best" made me far more confident in its non-notability. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:34, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Neon Genesis Evangelion video games – Per above. Svartner (talk) 13:57, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as above - whilst there are some alright sources, we could characterise most of these as WP:ROUTINE pre-release coverage as is normal for games media when commenting on press releases or announcements of a game or service. That alone tends not to be enough to get over the line. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 22:08, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Sufficient coverage and passes GNG. Go D. Usopp (talk) 02:13, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Misato Katsuragi has a page, so perhaps another merge target to consider? IgelRM (talk) 18:30, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Misato Katsuragi Agnieszka653 (talk) 00:22, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Neon Genesis Evangelion video games-is a better option I see, as went through the suggested additions of citations and they do seem to suggest a more press release like tone, than actual reviews or in depth coverage. Not opposed to the suggested Merge target as suggested above either as the Misato Katsuragi article does have a section for other media in which this would fit as well.Lorraine Crane (talk) 01:50, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: So far, redirect looks likely, but more discussion would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 04:45, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 23:08, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Redirects