Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flying Lab Software
- Flying Lab Software (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No significant coverage of this company; fails WP:CORP. Only coverage is press releases, routine mentions, and directory listings. Games like Rails Across America might be notable, but notability is not inhereited. Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:36, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete No independent, reliable sources (WP:N), and WP:NOTINHERITED from its games (which themselves are of questionable notability for an encyclopedia). This 2010 IGN article reads like a press release, and these RPS articles don't establish notability for the company. czar · · 17:02, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 14:38, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:38, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete. Here's a source review:
- A small story in Wired about a release of one of their games. It's about the company mostly, in the context of the game, and quotes the CEO. This is a reliable source. But it's a short story and doesn't have much material that would be of use in an article.
- A podcast on Gamasutra.com, in which a couple executives are interviewed. This isn't really a secondary source, as it's an interview, and it's for the most part about a game, not the company.
- Other than that, all I can find are a variety of press releases, announcements of patches and game launches, etc. Nothing, in short, that can be considered a reliable source for the purposes of notability.
- Doesn't meet the WP:GNG or WP:CORPDEPTH requirements, unless more evidence of significant coverage in reliable sources can be found. --Batard0 (talk) 19:04, 3 November 2012 (UTC)