Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guild Software

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 No Consensus to delete. In reviewing the discussion below I cannot see any consensus to delete. Opinions are split between keeping the article outright and redirecting to their notable product. Further discussion on the possibilities of a redirect or merge can take place on the articles talk page if anyone is interested. Eluchil404 (talk) 05:47, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Guild Software

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

This is a non-notable company. The article is only two sentences long, and it even says this video game company has only made one video game. OCNative (talk) 06:32, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Meets GNG via following sources:

Comment The first article is indeed a local media source.
The second article is of questionable reliability, as clicking on the WTN Media link, the page says, "Through events, publications and online services, WTN Media helps you convey your brand message and brings you closer to your clients and prospects. With a redesigned web presence and updated line of offerings, WTN Media is a valuable partner for your marketing efforts."
The third article is most definitely not a reliable source because it is a customer testimonial! Teamspeak sold their service to Guild Software, and the CEO of Guild Software is simply providing his company's testimonial as a customer of Teamspeak.
Of the three articles described above, the first one is the only one that meets WP:RS. According to WP:COMPANY, "The source's audience must also be considered. Evidence of attention by international or national, or at least regional, media is a strong indication of notability. On the other hand, attention solely from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability; at least one regional, national, or international source is necessary." The first article is from local media while the second and third fail WP:RS, therefore notability has not been established under WP:COMPANY. OCNative (talk) 01:34, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 16:25, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 16:26, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to the game The game is notable; the founder is notable. If the company ever makes another game, they'd be notable also, but at this point there is no real justification for an article DGG ( talk ) 20:56, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The above references contain sufficient information about the company itself to source a solid article. Company passes GNG via nontrivial coverage in multiple secondary sources; number of games published is irrelevant. AfD hero (talk) 22:37, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment See my comments above explaining why those sources are not adequate to establish notability for Guild Software. OCNative (talk) 01:34, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Very well, here are more sources. not hard to find...

[1]
[2]

AfD hero (talk) 02:31, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The first link is still local press while the second is media of limited interest. OCNative (talk) 08:36, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to jump through any more hoops. As nominator, perhaps you would consider spending a few minutes looking for sources yourself. AfD hero (talk) 17:06, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have already looked. Had I been able to find sources that met the criteria of WP:COMPANY, then I would not have nominated this in the first place. OCNative (talk) 05:11, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I find the Inside Mac Games and JSOnline articles together satisfy the general notability guideline, although I would not object to DGG's redirect. Marasmusine (talk) 11:36, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
'Redirect to Vendetta Online - as DGG says, if they release another notable game, they might meet the notability criteria, but they don't at the moment PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 00:55, 24 May 2011 (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.