Talk:Ghost Ship Games

Request for Comment - Redirect
I'd like to change the article to redirect back to Deep Rock Galactic - ReneeWrites (talk) 16:52, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
 * As it currently stands there does not appear to be widespread coverage in reliable, independent sources where the focus is on the studio rather than the game (see: WP:NOTINHERITED about how notability isn't inherited - I'm not disputing DRG's notability). 6 of the 8 sources on the article page are primarily about DRG, the two remaining sources that aren't, are not independent sources. One links to a blog post from DRG's publisher Coffee Stain Studios, and the other is a press release from Embracer Group published to Yahoo about how they acquired the studio. (The article: , the article's source: ). - ReneeWrites (talk) 16:52, 4 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Oppose: The studio have released only one game so far, of course their press coverage is going to heavily mention that game. There are plenty of developers with only one game to date (and some who haven't released anything yet) which are notable enough for articles and I see no reason why Ghost Ship aren't. This article contains the same amount of information on the company itself as an article about any other developer of their size and age would, it's not as if the majority of the article is copied from DRG's page. The first source, for example, is an interview with the studio head hosted by PSU that says a lot about the history of the company and the development of DRG as opposed to just talking about the game itself. In regards to the desire for third-party sources, I have replaced the GIbiz and Yahoo articles with stronger third-party ones from wfctech and Gematsu respectively. I hope this helps. Mr. Rapture (talk) 21:56, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Here is a source discussing the company (click full text and scroll down for the English version.) There are a few other similar-looking ones (often in Danish), discussing it as an example of a successful Danish game company. --Aquillion (talk) 21:40, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Wrong venue This should be discussed at AfD, not in an RfC. –LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄ ) 05:34, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
 * That is untrue. Redirects can be done via any form of consensus-building, including an RFC; there is no requirement to send them through AFD. All that is required to turn an article into a redirect is some indication that there is a consensus to do so. --Aquillion (talk) 07:57, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Another option would have been to go via WP:PAM and propose a merge which would then give you a redirect as part of the merge.Gusfriend (talk) 11:05, 10 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Support, as they only have one game. When they have two or more notable games an article on the studio is worthwhile, but not oneshots. --Seggallion (talk) 17:29, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * That alone doesn't inherently make them unnotable. There are plenty of companies who have articles despite having only one game. Neon Giant and Typhoon Studios for example. There are even articles on studios such as 31st Union, Cloud Chamber or The Initiative who have yet to release a single game. As I said above, this article contains the same amount of information on the company as one about any other developer of their size, age and output is expected to have. Mr. Rapture (talk) 00:40, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose: With the company just having announcing creating theor own publishign division, more creadnance and purpose is given for a seperate article to exisist as this can also be mentioned in it's own section on the page. Dave247 (talk) 06:16, 17 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Support: I can't find any notable sources which mention the company but not the game, which suggests to me that it's not notable separately from the game.
 * Moriwen (talk) 20:32, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The RfC has already closed. IceWelder  &#91; &#9993; &#93; 21:43, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Oops. Embarrassing. Ignore me, then. Moriwen (talk) 22:47, 6 April 2023 (UTC)