Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blitwise Productions

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. --MCB (talk) 08:17, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blitwise Productions (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Anon nomination from talk page: This page sounds more like marketing than encyclopedia. It is a worthy entry, but should be rewritten with more facts and less editorializing. 89.1.107.148 (talk · contribs). To which I add: skirts A7 with a single uncited claim; otherwise, I'd say the dreaded letters NN (not notable) apply ➔ REDVEЯS knows how Joan of Arc felt 19:47, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. A search on Google for "Blitwise Productions" produces an unusually high number of ghits for what I usually find nominated at AfD, and does include a few interviews and reviews of their games, however most of the links are there solely to download the games. Having played Pocket Tanks previously, I can also say that they're nothing too exceptional, so they're not getting any notability points off of that. The article is written rather spamishly, as pointed out by the anon above, and while that can be cleaned up, I'm not sure it's possible to find enough references to justify inclusion. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:21, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This search string removes most of the irrelevant links, but I'm still not finding too much of use: "Blitwise Productions -download -site:blitwise.com" (sorry, making that one a link doesn't work.) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:21, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete sigh, this gets old. Fails WP:OR, has no references, etc, etc, etc. Give it some refs and take out the OR, then it meets WP:N.--Sallicio^{${\displaystyle \color {Red}\oplus }$} 18:29, 26 February 2008 (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.