Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wavedash 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 for lack of encyclopedic notability. bd2412 T 21:03, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

=[[:Wavedash Games]]=

:{{la|Wavedash Games}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Wavedash_Games Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Wavedash Games}})

Fails WP:GNG/WP:CORPDEPTH Kleuske (talk) 12:25, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:54, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:54, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:56, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Comment - It's a pretty poorly written article, but [https://www.redbull.com/us-en/wavedash-games-and-the-rise-of-the-platform-fighter Redbull Games] and [http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2017-05-03-wavedash-games-secures-USD6m-in-series-a-funding Games Industry Biz] both have pretty in-depth articles about the company, (And have a consensus for being reliable per WP:VG/S) so I'm not so sure I agree with the vague assertion that it fails the WP:GNG... Sergecross73 msg me 16:20, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:22, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Delete -- WP:PROMO with a good doze of WP:TNT. A company with a small round of funding; article likely created for promotional purposes. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:15, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
Comment - Article was not written for promotional purposes. I'm a beginner to Wikipedia and thought I'd try my hand at starting a page. I heard about the company because I used to live in the Bay Area and have a friend in that area who follows gaming and she happened to mention that. I've never written one before. I know I made mistakes and not up to snuff for the advanced Wiki people. But I won't allow you to say that it was for promotional purposes. It wasn't. It was a beginner taking a shot at making a page. PS. Does it seem logical that a company that specializes in design and writing code on computers would create a "promotional" Wiki page that numerous users have disparaged as poorly sourced and/or poorly written? What's the logic? Falconcannothearthefalconer (talk) 10:55, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
:Comment - People aren't accusing you of being promotional, they are just assuming it. Please assume good faith. Anyway, WP:ITEXISTS is not a reason that an article should be on Wikipedia. Any companies must satisfy the guidelines at WP:CORP If you can come up with several significant references for it to satisfy notability guidelines then you are free to do so in order to prevent its deletion, otherwise you should consider those guidelines when next creating an article. To clarify, most of the current refs are from primary sources or unreliable ones._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 23:16, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
Delete as lacking WP:SUSTAINED coverage. --Izno (talk) 14:14, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

:The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate]]. talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.