Talk:Crytek/Archives/2019

RenderDoc merger
Not sure if this is the right place to put this discussion? But merging RenderDoc's article into this page would be extremely misleading, Crytek has had nothing to do with the project for 4 years and barely anything aside from gating its release before then. If there shouldn't be a separate page for whatever reason it'd be better just to delete it. Baldurk (talk) 09:46, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Looking at the discussion, I have to agree RenderDoc has nothing to do with Crytek and the merge shouldn't have been completed. But since the AFD was closed with intention to get rid of the RenderDoc article, I have no issue with leaving it as a redirect to Crytek while the merged content at Crytek can be removed. I only merged it procedurally per the deletion discussion. Courtesy ping   The editor  whose username is Z0  11:22, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification, . Since Crytek doesn't have a strong relationship to RenderDoc, it would be better to delete the article. —  Newslinger  talk   11:26, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I feel like the whole nomination for deletion / merger into Crytek and now a still active redirect was based on shoddy research. And now as it stands, at least remove the incorrect redirect. Opinion - From my vantage point RenderDoc meets standards for notability and is one of the premiere tools in it's category. I understand that it's a bit of a specialty but certainly for graphics programmers it is an important tool. Perhaps now that some time has passed, basic research will prove that out to your satisfaction. Also weird that several of the Wikipedians involved now show as being banned Djmips (talk) 10:30, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, if think RenderDoc is notable (i.e. it meets the sourcing requirements outlined in the general notability guideline), you're welcome to draft a new article based on independent reliable sources. Please refer to Help:Your first article for details. However, the version of the RenderDoc article before it was merged (per the deletion discussion) does not contain any sources that would count toward the guideline. —  Newslinger  talk   10:38, 8 September 2019 (UTC)