Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parroty Interactive

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 redirect‎ to Microshaft Winblows 98 as a sensible ATD. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 20:26, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Parroty Interactive

[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)

DePRODed with the rationale that the page "deserves to stay". WP:ILIKEIT is not a valid rationale, and no actual sources were provided by the person. The company appears to fail WP:NCORP/WP:CORPDEPTH with a lack of coverage in reliable sources. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:26, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and California. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:26, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

With all respect to procedure, I think one is allowed to restore a PROD if an anonymous IP interferes with such a message. IgelRM (talk) 18:31, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IP editors are not considered a "lesser class" as far as Wikipedia is concerned, unless there is obvious evidence that it is vandalism or purposeful disruption. In this case it doesn't seem that way, just someone who thinks it may be notable, making it a valid dePROD. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:52, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: lacks sources to meet WP:GNG. — 🌊PacificDepths (talk) 08:08, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect: The brief LA Times review of one product is the best reference but is insufficient to meet WP:NCORP for this Palladium Interactive division. However, a redirect to Microshaft Winblows 98 could be an ATD. AllyD (talk) 08:45, 30 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.