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

Jim Rossignol

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

Questionable notability. Minimal notability from scarce documentation of his RPS career and founding Big Robot. Go D. Usopp (talk) 01:52, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Video games, and United Kingdom. Go D. Usopp (talk) 01:52, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - Minimal citations exists in the article, but co-founding RPS arguably meets point 3 of WP:JOURNALIST. Nil🥝^Talk 03:07, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Journalism, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:40, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kuju (company)

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

Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. Most of what's out there are trivial announcements and press releases. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:53, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and England. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:53, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Appears rather well established per MCV, how much of a BEFORE was done here? IgelRM (talk) 11:38, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly enough to make me do an AfD. If you do have some proof of notability besides being old or a success in Britain, then you are free to show it, of course, I am always willing to withdraw if I have missed something major. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:09, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The page you referenced clearly indicates an article does not require international importance to be included. The company has published a number of significant titles and is seen as very successful within the UK gaming scene, so I see no reason it warrants deletion.

This article has survived for nearly 20 years, so it's reasonable to expect someone would have already AfD'd the article if it didn't meet the criteria for notability. GeekBurst (talk) 23:05, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No it's really not reasonable to expect that. Many articles survive for that long. In fact, I'd assume that a large chunk of the articles on Wikipedia are non-notable, just ignored or off in a dusty corner somewhere. The bar for "spam" is pretty low, and just includes blatant promotion, while articles that seem fine, but are made for promotion with no reliable sources, are allowed to pass simply because they look okay. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:36, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: This article just needs a cleanup, it doesn't need TNT. I can see this company has released a number of titles, including some fairly significant ones. A lack of international significance doesn't preclude inclusion in Wikipedia, otherwise companies that only operate in a single country wouldn't have their own articles. GeekBurst (talk) 23:01, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You have not offered any actual policy based evidence it should be kept, simply saying that it made "significant" titles. This may be, but that just means the titles are notable. Notability is not inherited by a company for notable things they made. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:31, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I Am going to point you to Wikipedia:Subjective importance GeekBurst (talk) 00:05, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Subjective importance is about how things are NOT notable even if some people believe them to be important. Having WP:SIGCOV is really the only thing that can prove notability, full stop. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:02, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Found one piece of SIGCOV: 5-page article in Edge magazine: [1]. Mostly about a game they made but there's enough about the company itself. Unfortunately one article is not enough for notability. Can't think of any WP:ATD target either... --Mika1h (talk) 22:50, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[2] Article on Kuju's delve into VR development, counts as sigcov.

[3] also works too. Go D. Usopp (talk) 01:39, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Passes GNG, though more work is needed. [4] as an additional sigcov source besides the sources I listed. Go D. Usopp (talk) 01:43, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rabbid Peach

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

this character is not notable for an article Aomaf (talk) 20:51, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment that's...not really much of a reasoning at all? What makes you feel it isn't notable?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 20:59, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
just is random character for make an article about Aomaf (talk) 21:05, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A character being random is not a reason for deletion. A character is notable if they pass the general notability guidelines. This applies to anything, actually. λ NegativeMP1 21:55, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note I am not saying the character is notable. I have no opinion. I'm just pointing out that this is not a valid deletion argument backed up by what is normally expected from these discussions (citing policy, source analysis, etc.). λ NegativeMP1 21:57, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:29, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete Insufficient justification for an AfD, but on looking at the sources it seems most of them only discuss the character briefly, in one short paragraph or less, so not exactly WP:SIGCOV. The last reference (Ref. 25) might be the most in-depth, but it's also an opinion piece. Many of the sources focus on a dance video involving the character, not the character herself. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 21:44, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Rabbids#Characters as a WP:ATD, they do seem to be notable enough for a series page, but this is getting into an unnecessary degree of specificity. This character does not have the significant coverage to be standalone notable. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:55, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak merge as creator. I do believe that it hits WP:THREE (Gita Jackson, Laura Kate Dale, and the Edge Spain piece), but I am also not a fan of using THREE for characters unless the significant coverage is especially significant, or if there's a ton of smaller pieces that demonstrate the character receives a mass of discussion that amounts to substantive commentary. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 22:11, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Mario + Rabbids Kingdom Battle, where most of the information on Rabbid Peach is already contained in development and reception. Some more bits on the reception of the Instagram account can be merged here, as well as anything else deemed necessary. The significant subject overlap means this subject fails Wikipedia:NOPAGE. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 00:28, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Mario + Rabbids Kingdom Battle. Has practically no relevance outside of that game and its sequel, and any information relating to the social media account can be mentioned as being part of the marketing for the game. Computerfan0 (talk) 19:43, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Mario + Rabbids Kingdom Battle. Minuscule notability as a character. Go D. Usopp (talk) 01:32, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GXCW

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

Cannot find reliable sources, seems like possible WP:PROMO created by WP:SPA. Largely references the company's official announcements and PR pages. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:03, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Companies. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:03, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No significant coverage in reliable sources. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 12:25, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:41, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: doesn't have enough reliable sources. Darkm777 (talk) 00:40, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Toi8

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

A search for reliable sources in WP:VG's search engine only turns out a few handful of results regarding his involvement in specific games, not about the artist himself. A google news lookup is largely the same story. ExoNeos (talk) 01:56, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Video games, Anime and manga, and Japan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:32, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Passes WP:NCREATIVE #3 due to his significant role in Tokyo Mirage Sessions. REAL_MOUSE_IRL talk 21:11, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I don't think WP:NARTIST is passed, as he is not the sole character designer for those games. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:40, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hidari (illustrator)

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

A google news search only provides a wacom tablet showcase by crunchyroll of him. A japanese source search provides little of the illustrator himself, only the works he is credited on. ExoNeos (talk) 02:18, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Video games, and Japan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:30, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Meets WP:NCREATIVE #3. REAL_MOUSE_IRL talk 21:21, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paragon Studios

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

Hardly any coverage besides its closure, fails WP:NCORP. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:30, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Companies. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:30, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:43, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to NCSoft#Former. Go D. Usopp (talk) 04:50, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to NCSoft#Former GeekBurst (talk) 21:02, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edelweiss (visual novel)

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

Article fails WP:GNG, see also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edelweiss (visual novel). Rainsday (talk) 07:32, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 10:13, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you elaborate? The sources I provided seem sufficient to meet GNG? W3ryfrate (talk) 10:23, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This game lacks reliable, third-party coverage. Rainsday (talk) 10:40, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe so. I added additional references if you want to check for yourself. Both the original game and the fandisc have a page on Kotaku.^[1]^[2] The MangaGamer localization has been covered by Anime News Network^[3] and the release of the fandisc has been covered by Siliconera.^[4]

I also cited the official website of the development company OVERDRIVE as well as the publisher itself, MangaGamer. While for Reception I cited an article by UK Anime Network^[5]. There's probably more sources if I dig for it. W3ryfrate (talk) 12:42, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG with only trivial coverage. Obviously, I'm open to change it if anyone finds Japanese coverage of a significant nature. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:09, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You can see above the citations, it seems like enough coverage? W3ryfrate (talk) 13:58, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It does not. Sources have to be both independent and secondary, as well as more than just a trivial mention. Simply having a page or a short announcement is not significant coverage, but a trivial mention. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:24, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All the sources cited in the article are independent, except for the plot section and the introduction section, there, alongside other independent sources, I also cited MangaGamer and OVERDRIVE's official website. The articles cited cover the game's plot as well as technical information, and some have even a review of the game + fandisc. W3ryfrate (talk) 14:33, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, multiple resources are cited from independent and reliable sources which cover the content of the article adequately. W3ryfrate (talk) 14:07, 24 July 2025 (UTC)— Note to closing admin: W3ryfrate (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD. [reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. Jumpytoo Talk 16:41, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The standard for video games is 2-3 reviews from reliable publications for notability. On MobyGames I see two reviews from a NeroHelp which is a Russian site I see no previous discussion on, and Gaming Target where one person said in 2009 on WP:VGRS was unreliable. The UK Anime review is OK as its an Andy Hanley review per WP:A&M/RS, so if either of the other two publications are deemed reliable this is keepable. Jumpytoo Talk 16:48, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ "Edelweiss". Kotaku. 2022-04-08. Retrieved 2025-07-24.
^ "Edelweiss Eiden Fantasia". Kotaku. Retrieved 2025-07-24.
^ "MangaGamer Announces Trial Version for Edelweiss". Anime News Network. Retrieved 2025-07-24.
^ Sahdev, Ishaan (2010-02-21). "MangaGamer Annnounce Edelweiss Eiden Fantasia". Siliconera. Siliconera. Retrieved 2025-07-24.
^ H., A. (2012-10-12). "Edelweiss / Edelweiss: Eiden Fantasia (PC)". UK Anime Network. Retrieved 2025-07-24.

Keep: Sources 6 and 12 are listed as RS and cover this computer program/visual novel. Seems to pass coverage for video games. Also some note in the anime community, source 6 in particular. Oaktree b (talk) 20:25, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to MangaGamer. Source 6 is a press release from MangaGamer, it's a primary source. Only secondary source in the article currently that is both significant coverage and reliable is UK Anime. Not enough for notability. --Mika1h (talk) 22:44, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What about Siliconera? Also Kotaku? Plus, the Story section of the article seems to come directly from ANN editors, might be wrong though. W3ryfrate (talk) 17:29, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand what you are seeing on Kotaku, it's just a directory listing. There is no actual coverage of the game. Siliconera is also just copy and pasting a press release directly from the company... ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:18, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They're both third-party coverage of the game by reputable sources regardless, without counting the other sources mentioned in the othe thread NeroHelp and Gaming Target (this one is iffy since it's on the unreliable list but the discussion was in 2009 and may be outdated). W3ryfrate (talk) 21:01, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shanghai Mini

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

Fails WP:GNG. Very little content with a lack of sources required to provide notability. Go D. Usopp (talk) 09:45, 24 July 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) 09:45, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I found one review [5]. Not seeing anything else. Timur9008 (talk) 13:06, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Reviews by IGN: [6] and Pocket Gamer magazine: [7]. Borderline notable game, 3 reviews, 2 on the shorter side but I think it's just enough for notability. --Mika1h (talk) 08:50, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per demonstrated reviews, it clearly does not fail the GNG. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:31, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noise Factory

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

Non-notable company that fails WP:NCORP. Was deproded suggesting to merge, but there is nothing to merge and it only gets a token mention in that article. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:55, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Companies. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:55, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:15, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Yet another non-notable company that completely fails WP:GNG with no significant coverage. Galaxybeing (talk) 11:58, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Not notable. The only coverage available is about the games the companies produced and how the closure would effect them. The company itself has no articles about themselves, and considering they have closed down this is unlikely to change - either way articles can't be kept because they may become notable in the future. GeekBurst (talk) 17:06, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Physics Abstraction Layer

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

Non-notable engine that fails WP:GNG. Was dePROD'd due to incoming links, but the vast majority of them are just transcluded from a template. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:45, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Computing. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:45, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Go D. Usopp (talk) 04:50, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Illuvium (company)

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

Fails WP:NCRYPTO and WP:NCORP. Most of the in-depth coverage is focused on Kieran and Aaron Warwick, not the company. Gheus (talk) 03:33, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Cryptocurrency, and Companies. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:40, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Native American video game characters

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

Fails WP:LSC. Very indiscriminate list with a concerning lack of topical relevance, completion is impossible without filling the list with lesser-known individuals from games that may not have articles. Not encyclopedically helpful. Go D. Usopp (talk) 18:24, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Ethnic groups, Lists, and North America. Go D. Usopp (talk) 18:24, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:44, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep References show the media covers this. Dream Focus 23:44, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:INDISCRIMINATE list, I'd support it if the criteria were tightened to only characters with articles, but Category:Fictional Native American people in video games has so few that I don't think a full list is merited at this time. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:05, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: This meets the criteria for a stand-alone list because there are reliable secondary sources that discuss the subject of the list as a set. In addition, all items in a stand-alone list do not have to be notable; just the topic itself. Rublamb (talk) 14:33, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and improve: The problems identified in the nomination can and should be solved by formulating proper inclusion criterea and putting them into practice. Like, only including Native American video game characters which are discussed by reliable secondary sources. Daranios (talk) 15:09, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That is a given. All items in a stand-alone list are required to have a source. Rublamb (talk) 16:57, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I'm having a hard time commenting on this one. The title is called "List of Native American video game characters" but the list is organized by video games? And a bunch of the entries are of "characters" that...don't even have names listed? So it feels more like it should be "List of video games with Native American representation" or something? But its hard to see if either framing satisfies WP:NLIST. None of the WP:VAGUEWAVE stances above make any sort of policy-based assertion to it. People keep saying "the article has sources", and that's great, but its littered with MobyGames, Gamefaqs, Steam storefront pages, etc, that are considered unreliable WP:VG/S, WP:USERG, and ineligible for proving notability. I'd like for this article to exist. But it's an absolute mess as is. Sergecross73 msg me 13:11, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for sharing WP:VG/S; the unreliable ones are from my effort to add needed sources. I will review and remove as needed, ASAP. The sources that matter here are not for individual characters, but for the general topic of Native American video game characters. There are several articles for that, which is what is needed for a stand-alone list to meet notability, including:
- "Video Game Minority Report: Lots Of Players, Few Characters". Science Daily. University of Southern California. 30 July 2009
- Valdez, Chad (2024-03-26). "Indigenous Representation in Video Games". Cultural Survival.
- "Native Americans in Video Games: Current Representation". DIRECTV. 29 November 2021.
- Morley, Julie (30 November 2014). "A Brief History of Native American Representation in Video Games". Cliqist.
Another option, not yet discussed is merging into Indigenous people in video games. Rublamb (talk) 14:20, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for this. These types of sources look like they would probably be NLIST satisfying at least. As long as they (or other reliable) sources can still source a decent list, then there's probably a path forward here. Inclusion criteria could really trim out some bad examples too. (Low hanging fruit like "character must have a name.) Sergecross73 msg me 17:33, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

" Indigenous people in video games." is a much broader category, because there are many indigenous people / groups in various continents of the world. So imo it's better for Native American video game characters to have their own list. -Artanisen (talk) 19:08, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This list was organized by video game name. Rublamb changed it to per character name. I agree that's better. Thank you for reorganizing the list. -Artanisen (talk) 19:05, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Bare minimum, the list is in dire need of organization; it currently does not sort by year, game, or character. It should also be formatted closer to List of video games with LGBTQ characters, with games from the same series combined as one entry and characters from those series grouped together; there's no reason to list every instance of T. Hawk, Nightwolf, Turok, etc. separately. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 15:01, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and clean-up per Sergecross73. The clean-up part is important because there are lots of unsourced entries. Limiting this to a navigational aid to notable characters would create more clarity and reliability. This is a good candidate for expansion into prose. Shooterwalker (talk) 16:36, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Native Americans are very underrepresented in video games. They need and deserve attention and awareness. The criteria is that the video game character is described as of Native American origin. Sometimes they are Indigenous peoples of the Americas. This is the most comprehensive list of Native American video game characters as far as I know. Much time and effort went into making this list. It's also valuable for people who do research about this topic. Related references are difficult to find, because there's so little attention and support for Native American video game characters. You're free to add better references. -Artanisen (talk) 18:48, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Don't get me wrong, the underrepresentation is unfortunate, but none of this is a valid reason to keep this or any article. Please try to focus (or learn) valid arguments for keeping articles. You're lucky everyone is doing the heavy lifting for you in this particular situation. Hinging on your argument alone, the article wouldn't be kept. Sergecross73 msg me 15:56, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – List meets criteria as it is discovered by independent sources as a list and any issues with the article can be solved without deletion. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 19:12, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Parsoft Interactive

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

Contested PROD a long time ago. Fails WP:NCORP, with a lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:35, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Companies. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:35, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:57, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Robomodo

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

Fails WP:NCORP. Article doesn't include any references to significant coverage of the company. Searching there is SIGCOV of the games they developed but not the company itself or they are primary sources (see these: IGN interview, GameSpot interview News about XBLA game. Mika1h (talk) 17:48, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Illinois. Mika1h (talk) 17:48, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: They made several triple-A Tony Hawk's games FMSky (talk) 17:56, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete "They made games" is an insufficient rationale, because notability is not inherited. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:45, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 5. Their most infamous game which they were greatly associated with and far more reliable on hindsight. Go D. Usopp (talk) 02:24, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"most infamous game" isn't necessarily the best target for an encyclopedia, nevertheless redirect to Tony Hawk's should be fine by me. IgelRM (talk) 07:11, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with it. Go D. Usopp (talk) 04:52, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would not agree with a redirect. While that may be, they still made a bunch of Tony Hawk games and others, and it would be WP:SURPRISE to send them to one particular game. A redirect has to make more sense than letting the search function do its job, and this does not. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:52, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is a specific section Tony Hawk's#Robomodo era (2008–2015), which we could anchor to? Would that alleviate SURPRISE? IgelRM (talk) 19:40, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OpenSpace3D

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

I'm having a difficult time finding sufficient in-depth coverage from independent sources to meet WP:GNG. This is not, however, my area of expertise, so I would appreciate help in locating such sources, as much of it looks promotional. JTtheOG (talk) 01:03, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Products, Software, and France. JTtheOG (talk) 01:03, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Found this, unfortunately that is all I could find and it still doesn't pass GNG. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:49, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yesterday, I nominated what people found “a lot” of articles for deletion in a “short space of time”. They were extremely short and obviously non-notable. Today, this user seemingly entered my page and chose to nominate this article in apparent retaliation, which I translated from Spanish Wikipedia. Do whatever you want, I don't care, I just wanted to stress the correlation of events for you to judge the behavior of this editor. Aldorwyn of Rivendell (talk) 07:06, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Whether it's retaliation or not, it doesn't mean pages that you personally create can get a "free pass" from passing notability standards. If it was a spurious nomination and you could easily counter it with presented sources, you'd have more of a leg to stand on here. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:03, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would be fascinated to hear how English MPs and Supreme Courts Presidents are "obviously non-notable". This fundamental misunderstanding of Wiki policies most certainly warrants further scrutiny of your past edits. JTtheOG (talk) 08:19, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So my “misunderstanding” warrants further scrutiny on this article just because I happened to have created it, and you thought reverting my yesterday tags and nominating this for deletion would “teach my a lesson”?, great. And that's not retaliation? Ok, delete it if it makes you happy and keep self promo articles of 3 lines about a defunct magazine of 70 years ago in “your” Wikipedia, I just don't care. Aldorwyn of Rivendell (talk) 10:30, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
BTW you are incurring in Wikipedia:Harassment#Hounding Aldorwyn of Rivendell (talk) 10:33, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As it reads there: "Many users track other users' edits, although usually for collegial or administrative purposes. This should always be done with care, and with good cause, to avoid raising the suspicion that an editor's contributions are being followed to cause them distress, or out of revenge for a perceived slight." Aldorwyn of Rivendell (talk) 10:34, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:IQUIT is a heavily discouraged argument on AfD discussions. Keep it focused on the facts of whether sources exist rather than stoking irrelevant drama to distract from the issue at hand. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:35, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't quit, and I don't care, just do whatever you want. You just chose to undo all my prods yesterday and to keep this one in pushback and retaliation and you are ganging on me due to personal differences, not this article quality or the quality of the other articles. That's your behaviour. Good luck. You can ban me if you want. Aldorwyn of Rivendell (talk) 11:47, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Bring that to ANI if the behaviour bothers you, this isn't the venue for it. Oaktree b (talk) 13:46, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Aldorwyn of Rivendell, this is a content discussion, not a behavior discussion. Please provide reliable references that establish OpenSpace3D's notability per these guidelines: WP:RS and WP:NCORP. We will decide about the article's deletion based on those guidelines and the article's references, not the nominator's motivation. Right now, the existing references are inadequate but hopefully you can find something better. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 01:54, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So my “misunderstanding” warrants further scrutiny on this article just because I happened to have created it: Yes. It is reasonable to assume that your fundamental misunderstanding of Wiki policies on notability would be reflected in your article creations.

and you thought reverting my yesterday tags and nominating this for deletion would “teach my a lesson: I'm not a teacher, so no. JTtheOG (talk) 19:42, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No coverage found about this game engine. In French websites I can only find social media or university mentions of it [8]. Sourcing now in the article is primary or in non-RS. Oaktree b (talk) 13:45, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I was unable to find any WP:42 web sources. I found this mention in a book, but it seems too short to meet WP:SIGCOV. I also found this other book mention which I was unable to assess for reliability or SIGCOV, but even assuming it's okay, one source isn't enough. OutsideNormality (talk) 00:36, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Laudable of the editor who found the book mention, though even with that the subject still fails WP:SIGCOV. Iljhgtn (talk) 11:31, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Point of View (company)

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

Disputed PROD that gave no sources. Fails WP:NCORP, and yes I did search for "Point of View Inc" in magazines and still found very little. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:19, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Companies. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:19, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:34, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Its mentioned a few times in relation to the (troubled) development of Sonic Xtreme, so if nothing else could be found, I'd be against deletion if it could be redirected there (or elsewhere if they've got a more important role, but I mostly know them from their work with Sega.) Sergecross73 msg me 17:54, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 05:36, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I did some indepth google searching with some time boxing to their earlier period. I can only find very minor mentions. I think this is not notable

Czarking0 (talk) 06:00, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Circus (company)

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

Fails WP:NCORP, cannot find significant coverage in reliable sources. The JP page isn't much better in this regard. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:13, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Companies. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:13, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:35, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – I disagree with the nominator, the ja.wiki article is well in-depth/referenced. Svartner (talk) 16:37, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Simply saying WP:SOURCESEXIST is not a valid argument. Please state these "sources" here that prove notability. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:51, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 05:34, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, on the basis this appears to be a very specialist company and the Wikipedia article is unsourced apart from the company website. It's very difficult, with such a generic name, to find independent reliable non-industry sources about the company. As such, fails WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. Sionk (talk) 09:20, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It isn't difficult to find related sources, but this article is mostly a list of games anyway. Fine with delete. IgelRM (talk) 11:22, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Out of Gas (video game)

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

Disputed PROD, but PROD did not give any reviews that might make the article pass WP:GNG. Unsourced and seems to completely fail WP:GNG. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:12, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:12, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: There are 3 external links listed in the article, but these sources are all directory-esque game listings, and there are no critics that have reviewed the game on those websites; only a few user-generated reviews are available.

As far as I can tell Allgame is the only source where a critic could've reviewed it (we'd need an archive to make sure since the website has been down for 11+ years), but I'm not sure if a single source reviewing it is enough to satisfy GNG. ApexParagon (talk) 15:00, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I found the All Game Guide source [9] and [10]. Not seeing anything else though. (nothing on Newspapers.com, Gale Research, etc) Timur9008 (talk) 16:20, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Not convinced there's enough coverage of this one to meet GNG. Nintendo Power reviewed it as part of a roundup of new games. Game Pro (UK) gave it a preview but it doesn't look like they reviewed it. Retro Gamer had a single screenshot of it! Adam Sampson (talk) 23:22, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 04:15, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Fujisankei Communications International#Game Boy. Nintendo Power and Allgame pieces are both fairly short, Allgame doesn't contain any critical commentary, GamePro is an extremely short preview. Not enough coverage to meet GNG. Could also be redirected to Realtime Associates but I think the publisher is the more notable company. --Mika1h (talk) 15:27, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict (video game)

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

Disputed PROD with the rationale that it had one review from Nintendo Power so other reviews must exist. However, besides the Nintendo Power review, and one review in Ultimate Nintendo: Guide to the NES Library, others in reliable sources don't seem to exist, so it doesn't pass WP:GNG. Unsourced since its inception. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:29, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:29, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, just about? I found a preview and lukewarm review in Famitsu; they named it in katakana as コンフリクト, so that might be a useful search term for other Japanese reviews. Adam Sampson (talk) 03:57, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That is a good find. That said, the Nintendo Power mentions of that era almost seem like glorified advertisements, so I won't withdraw the AfD. WP:INDISCRIMINATE still seems problematic with regards to this game even if GNG may (possibly) be passed. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:42, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I have the same concern about Nintendo Power - as Nintendo's own magazine, with Nintendo extracting licensing fees for anything published for the NES, they were clearly very reluctant to say anything negative about a game (in this case two of the Famitsu reviews complain about the game being slow-paced; the NP review mentions it but spins it as an advantage). I'd be happier if there was another more independent review out there. Adam Sampson (talk) 12:44, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 02:35, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zack Scoular

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

Only sources in article and found in WP:BEFORE are WP:ROUTINE news clippings, with which one can only make little more than a database entry of statistics and not an encyclopedic article, thus failing WP:NOT. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" _(hihi) 14:18, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Video games, Motorsport, Australia, and New Zealand. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" _(hihi) 14:18, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" _(hihi) 14:22, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Finished runner-up in a Formula Regional championship and a multiple-time race winner at Formula Three level—fairly notable as a junior driver. WP:SIGCOV is found here: [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19]. There are several race reports at the level that go beyond trivial mentions. MB 2437 22:19, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll make an SA table when a I'm home from work but many of these are interviews with the subject which would not be independent, and/or focus on other topics, such as the championship he's competing in, or the 00r0 Motorsport video game team. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" _(hihi) 22:59, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm not !voting until I read other opinions, but I think this is a good example of bare notability. Under different interpretations of WP:GNG, I think the big determining factor is whether or not interviews are considered as independent- I've heard differing opinions between AfD and AfC.

My source breakdown:

- Formula Scout [20], [21] I think are both GNG compliant, but are on the shorter side. Since it's the same outlet, we can count that as one source.

- VelocityNews article about going to Europe ([22]); I think this is GNG compliant, but others may have concerns about independence.

- NZ Herald [23]. I can't view this because of the paywall, but given that this is a notable organization (The New Zealand Herald), I'd assume it's good. However, I don't want to make assertions about it unless I can actually read it.

- Feeder Series interview [24], good if we are allowing interviews.

- Stuff comes from a notable outlet, but once again is an interview.

Main determining factor in my opinion is the NZ Herald article and whether or not interviews count as acceptable under GNG. GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 01:31, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You should be able to view the paywalled Herald article via archive.org here Nil🥝^Talk 11:24, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Include iRacing controversy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.89.249.120 (talk) 21:07, 18 July 2025 (UTC)~~ [reply]

This discussion belongs at Talk:Zack Scoular. MB 2437 21:30, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

if hes not deleted, theres no reason not to add this to this persons wiki 76.90.212.34 (talk) 03:53, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:34, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per MB2437's comment. Electricmemory (talk) 13:47, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep plenty of sources that establish notability. David Palmer//cloventt ^(talk) 20:37, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pixonic

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

Apparently only has 2 games according to their website. Fails WP:Company. Open to a Merge with My.Games and placing it in a new subsidiaries section. If it's parent company is not notable, then delete this and I will consider a discussion on the parent company. Servite et contribuere (talk) 16:41, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, Cyprus, Netherlands, and Russia. Servite et contribuere (talk) 16:41, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with My.Games. I personally am 50/50 on whether that article's subject is notable, but it needs a major rewrite anyway. If My.Games is notable, then I doubt Pixonic would be under WP:INHERITORG. Merging the two articles (and expanding coverage using reliable sources) may help ascertain notability. Gommeh 🎮 18:05, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is there more support for the proposed merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 18:57, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect to My.Games would be fine in any case. IgelRM (talk) 19:51, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: delete (non-admin closure). Qwerfjkl talk 14:20, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting Category:Abandonware games (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: "Abandonware" is a loaded term. Strictly defined it means software that is not presently being sold directly by a publisher, but it is used solely in the defense of software piracy, with the connotation that all such software is "abandoned" and copyright restrictions no longer apply to it (which is completely untrue). If that were the only problem we could just rename the category "Video games not presently being sold directly by a publisher", but the category is also excessively large and impractical to keep up-to-date, especially because the removal of a game from the marketplace is rarely accompanied by any sort of announcement. Martin IIIa (talk) 00:13, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

With that rationale, we could nominate Category:Indie games too? It needs strict criteria but deletion seems too much, Keep. IgelRM (talk) 22:05, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Martin IIIa (talk) 00:30, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NONDEF. Also too overly broad as a secondary concern. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:00, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:SUBJECTIVECAT. Although this category currently includes two of my favourite games of all time, labelling them "abandonware" is unfortunately subjective. It may be de facto true that the original owner will not do anything to invest in developing or supporting game anymore, but that doesn't mean that legally speaking it is now fair game (pun intended) to throw the source code online for old fans to enjoy (even though I'm strongly inclined to condone that if the owner makes no effort to make money off of it anymore, e.g. by putting it on Steam; I hardly regard it as "piracy" when you make practically impossible for willing consumers to give you money). I don't think the size of the category is a problem, nor that it cannot meet WP:DEFINING; it just cannot be given an objective definition of "abandonment" in anything other than practical and financial terms. But without legal terms, there is no clear threshold. NLeeuw (talk) 04:13, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Project Moon

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

Company fails WP:CORPDEPTH with a lack of significant coverage. There is coverage of one specific controversy involving the studio, but that alone does not confer inherited notability on the studio itself. Contested PROD that claims WP:SOURCESEXIST, but no examples given, nor could I find any in any language. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:04, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and South Korea. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:04, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The sources exist, independently from the controversy.[25][26][27] Inven is a video gaming outlet, but the latter two — News1 and Pressian — are legitimate news media commonly cited here and their coverage goes beyond simple mentions, reporting about the company's prospect. They are not in the article yet, but I can add them. Emiya Mulzomdao (talk) 12:26, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:CORPTRIV. The 2nd and 3rd articles are very clearly "standard notices, brief announcements, and routine coverage". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:59, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is not a routine coverage. It's Suwon city goverment investing on the company, which is rare and far from standard. Reports related to the controversy also satisfy audience requirement since newspapers like Yonhap News Agency, Kyunghyang Shinmun, and The Hankyoreh are some of the biggest news agencies in the nation. All of these are best compiled in the article about the company. Emiya Mulzomdao (talk) 12:42, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is a brief 1-paragraph article that says that someone invested in the company. This falls under WP:CORPTRIV as "of a capital transaction, such as raised capital", or something similar. Who did it is irrelevant. I think my point has been made though, so I won't push it further besides stating my opinion you are incorrect. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:01, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Suwon's investment agreement is always a focal point of the regional newspapers due to the major perks and development in the special case city economics, which are stated in the articles, so I disagree with that. Emiya Mulzomdao (talk) 12:45, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Emiya Mulzomdao's sources grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 19:09, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 12:07, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 14:32, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brace Yourself Games

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

Fails WP:CORPDEPTH, coverage of the company consists of trivial announcements and mentions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:32, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Canada. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:32, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Its notability is connected to Ryan Clark, question is whether those Independent Games Festival nominations etc are sufficient for WP:NARTIST. IgelRM (talk) 14:03, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It does seem that Clark passes WP:NARTIST due to his primary role at the studio he founded, creating numerous notable games. However, I can't find any RS about him either. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:58, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Its notability is also connected to its partnership with Nintendo on Nintendo's arguably best known IP. See, e.g., coverage from IGN, Inverse. Thewritestuff92 (talk) 20:57, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Cadence of Hyrule is unquestionably notable as a game given how incredibly rare it is for Nintendo to license their IP to an indie. However, that is not "inherited" by the studio. Given that it was essentially a one-off situation, it doesn't seem that the studio in itself is notable due to it. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:26, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 05:11, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Crypt of the NecroDancer. The studio's best known and most notable work, so any developer info would fit in the Development section. Go D. Usopp (talk) 10:03, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is there any more support for a Merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:23, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BitComposer Interactive

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

Disputed PROD - company fails WP:CORPDEPTH with its coverage consisting of minor announcements. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:09, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Companies. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:09, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:27, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Copying my PROD dispute message for convenience: GamesMarkt. IgelRM (talk) 16:14, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Specifically Ein Jahr bitComposer: "Gründung in der Krise war Glücksgriff", bitComposer startet durch. IgelRM (talk) 20:19, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 22:38, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Not eligible for a Soft deletion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:36, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, not significantly covered in reliable sources ApexParagon (talk) 03:01, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you comment on above, Gamesmarkt was clearly a reliable source? IgelRM (talk) 07:42, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, it seems to require a subscription, so I cannot confirm that. Even assuming it is reliable though, that is just one of several necessary to pass NCORP. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:17, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MCV on bitcomposer licenses; perhaps THQ Nordic is a redirect target. IgelRM (talk) 19:39, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Big Robot

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

Fails WP:NCORP with a lack of significant coverage. As its PROD was contested years ago, I am forced to nominate it for deletion. Jim Rossignol is a possible merge target, though it is also unclear whether that page is notable. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:19, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and United Kingdom. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:19, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OPPOSE - The prod was removed due to my comment on the notability. [28] It had multiple mentions in national and international news sites, including The Guardian, PC Gamer and Channel 4 Education's website, as noted on the PROD placer's page. The consensus was to remove the PROD. Conditions 1, 2, 3 and 4 were all met.

If notability fails, I would think merging with Sir, You Are Being Hunted was more applicable than pure deletion. If deletion is the way, please place in my personal space so I can archinve before deletion if possible. Chaosdruid (talk) 12:05, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notability requires more than just a trivial mention. Simple mentions in the media do not fulfill significant coverage. If there is significant coverage you are free to link to it, but the used sources appear to be about a specific game. BTW, I am not suggesting that Fallen City isn't notable and it very well might be, but notability isn't inherited from that. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:45, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merging with Sir, You Are Being Hunted wouldn't work so well since they also developed The Signal From Tolva. There isn't an obvious single locale for redirection. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:46, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:31, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. We have two different suggested Merge target articles here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:14, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. RPS merge makes less sense, with no association other than the founder being alumnus of the website's editorial. Rossignol has questionable notability. Go D. Usopp (talk) 01:48, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Jim Rossignol per WP:ATD. --Mika1h (talk) 23:00, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The article on Rossignol appears even weaker in notability and I would suggest to nominate that for deletion as well. Redirect to Rock, Paper, Shotgun instead. IgelRM (talk) 07:40, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Week Delete/Merge: Big Robot was a small indie studio founded in 2010 and reportedly became inactive after around 2022, with its website going offline by 2019, suggesting that the company is now defunct. Coverage is limited to trade and niche gaming sources: While one of its titles 'Sir, You Are Being Hunted' received some attention and its follow‑up 'The Signal From Tölva' had modest critical reception, the studio lacks substantial independent coverage in major media outlets, gaming journals, or academic analysis.--Policking (talk) 16:50, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BlitWorks

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

Besides the Hobby Consolas piece, this company would seem to lack enough WP:SIGCOV to pass WP:NCORP. Possible COI concerns with the article's creator so they may not have considered notability when making the article. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:06, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Spain. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:06, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feature on co-founder Miguel Ángel Horna from Vandal, Blitworks "joining" Larian Studios from Game Developer. IgelRM (talk) 13:13, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep just move it to draftspace, it's better to improve a created article than to create the same article that was deleted

⟨⟨BeastBoy-X-Talk!⟩⟩ 16:21, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Just make it a draft" doesn't work when it will never be notable. Larian Studios is a possible merge target though since BlitWorks became Larian Barcelona. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:49, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think a merge/redirect to Larian Studios would be fine by me. IgelRM (talk) 07:36, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 05:11, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 05:53, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Redirects

[:1-1] "Edelweiss". Kotaku. 2022-04-08. Retrieved 2025-07-24.

[:2-2] "Edelweiss Eiden Fantasia". Kotaku. Retrieved 2025-07-24.

[3] "MangaGamer Announces Trial Version for Edelweiss". Anime News Network. Retrieved 2025-07-24.

[4] Sahdev, Ishaan (2010-02-21). "MangaGamer Annnounce Edelweiss Eiden Fantasia". Siliconera. Siliconera. Retrieved 2025-07-24.

[5] H., A. (2012-10-12). "Edelweiss / Edelweiss: Eiden Fantasia (PC)". UK Anime Network. Retrieved 2025-07-24.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]