Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Red Barrels

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Outlast. as an ATD. Liz Read! Talk! 22:43, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Red Barrels (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. There seems to be no significant coverage. The focus of the sources are the Outlast games, not the company itself. Suggesting redirection to Outlast as an alternative to deletion. Mika1h (talk) 18:48, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you referring to the edge article currently on the page?--CNMall41 (talk) 21:59, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that gi.biz is SIGCOV, but that Edge article (about Assassin's Creed) only has a passing mention to the company. --Mika1h (talk) 12:57, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's why I was wondering as the Edge article on the page is no where near meeting WP:ORGCRIT. The gi.biz is an industry publication so while it meets ORGCRIT, it is still not enough and not that strong of a reference to meet NCORP standards. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:15, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: It appears their sole product, the Outlast series, would be more notable. Could this be retooled into a series article? IgelRM (talk) 11:27, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:46, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:10, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete fails NCORP. No significant coverage. The Edge article is questionable as a reliable source. In any case, the coverage in that article is about the story of a person, not the company. Canada Media Fund article is routine coverage pertaining to funding, and commentary about funding, as noted in NCORP, is not acceptable as sourcing for notability. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 06:03, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Coverage of funding for a company is not acceptable for notability criteria per NCORP, including in g-biz. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 06:07, 31 December 2024 (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.