Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beyond Software (2nd nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. ✗plicit 12:57, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Beyond Software

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:NCORP. Previous AfD was pretty flimsy and doesn't seem to have demonstrated there were sufficient sources. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:28, 30 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) 12:28, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree that it fails WP:NCORP and also fails WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 16:30, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Beyond was a very important developer of games. Lords of Midnight in particular. It needs improvement, but to delete is simply to deny knowledge. MrMarmite (talk)
- So where's the part where they pass WP:NCORP or, more importantly, WP:GNG? The claim that deleting this article is the denial of knowledge also makes no sense. They'd still be mentioned on the pages for the games they made... λ NegativeMP1 00:15, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails GNG, and NCORP as well seemingly, but failing GNG is a more significant issue. λ NegativeMP1 00:15, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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