Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Valhalla Simulation Games

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. Its not clear there is anything meaningful to merge. Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:41, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Valhalla Simulation Games

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

This is not a notable company. Coverage lacks WP:CORPDEPTH and does not rise to the level of "significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources" as required by Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). In addition, the article creator and only significant contributor has a clear COI associated with the subject. Deli nk (talk) 17:57, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Newimpartial (talk) 18:19, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:28, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:28, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Yunshui ^雲 _水 10:16, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hoax? FloridaArmy (talk) 13:22, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Looks like it, I did a WP:GOOGLETEST on the first 5 pages and there was only one related site which was not a mirror site - [1] ^{[Username Needed]} 14:24, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - If it is, then it's been going on long enough to merit a mention at the List of long-running hoaxes? ^{[Username Needed]} 14:28, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    - I really don't think VSG or Outime are hoaxes. Listed here, photograph here, plus the book cited in the article (though I couldn't find an e-book copy to check out the reference itself). Whether they're notable or not is a different matter. Mortee (talk) 19:35, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great find and another editor added a museum's entry with a photo of their game.. My searches had come up empty so I am glad others have superior Google foo. Does inclusion in a museum of one of their games and solid coverage of it there establish notability for the parent software company that made it? This article is where the game is covered. FloridaArmy (talk) 21:06, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The individual credited in the article as being behind the game, Marc W.D. Tyrrell, is a fairly prominet anthropologist. If someone can find a source stating he is the same person that would be great. I couldn't find one. FloridaArmy (talk) 21:11, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure it is warontherocks Marc Tyrrell, not hypnosis Mark Tyrell, but I can't find a RS. There is a copy of Outime at Noble Knight, btw, which might alleviate hoax concerns. Newimpartial (talk) 03:29, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as I think the Museumofplay link, with the Heroic Worlds good, helps with notability. BOZ (talk) 01:55, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It doesn't appear to be a hoax, but I can see why that possibility was raised. There really is a scarcity of sources - nothing (including the Museumofplay and Heroic Worlds references) that could be considered "significant coverage" as required by WP:ORG. Slideshow Bob (talk) 20:03, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per BOZ. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 06:33, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 07:48, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- an unremarkable video games company; fails WP:CORPDEPTH / WP:NCORP. No soources to this effect have been presented at this AfD, and there's nothing better. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:22, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- not a video games company :-) Mortee (talk) 04:35, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Unfortunately, I have to agree. A shame to lose information, but to keep it wouldn't be consistent with our basic coverage guidelines and I'm not going to spend my year's WP:IAR allowance arguing for it. Mortee (talk) 04:35, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Not a hoax, but also not notable. The scant few sources available on the company are not enough to meet the GNG.64.183.45.226 (talk) 17:31, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep works that are part of museum collections are notable. FloridaArmy (talk) 00:03, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Question wouldn't that apply to Outime but not the company that wrote it? Mortee (talk) 01:02, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ultimately it comes down to whether to cover the maker independently or in a combined article. But given policies such as wp:preserve deletion isn't an appropriate outcome. We often see this chicken or egg argument that the works are notable but not the artist / author or the author / artist is notable but not the works. That's a merge discussion. No need for deletion in either case. FloridaArmy (talk) 01:32, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Since the only thing I could reliably verify about VSG is that they wrote Outime (from the museum page I added to the VSG article), I'm not sure there's anything to merge, but fair enough. I'm all for preservation where possible. Mortee (talk) 03:36, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't much so a merge seems reasonable. The anthro professor behind the company is interesting. FloridaArmy (talk) 04:06, 31 January 2018 (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.