Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Behdad Sami Interactive


 * 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 Behdad Sami. (non-admin closure) —MRD2014 📞 contribs 18:50, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Behdad Sami Interactive

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:TOOSOON as this video game company has only produced one game Atlantic306 (talk) 00:35, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm not too sure how to respond to an AFD. I believe I did it incorrectly when I edited the Behdad Sami Interactive page last, so my apologies. I don't believe this page should be deleted because every company has to start somewhere, so by saying they only have one game is not a good enough reason to remove their company. Behdad Sami Interactive is an LLC, with its HQ in California. They have enough sources to find credible. This page was also created yesterday, despite this company being around for almost 3 years now, and there are other sources out there. I'm not sure what exactly what you would like we to show you, as far as sources go. I work closely with their CEO, and they have a few products waiting to be launched, and not just video games. Given how young the page is, I don't believe this company should be deleted especially for the reason of only having "one product". Hipster Whale who has one of the biggest games in the world, only has 3 games, so nomination to delete this page based on it only having one product doesn't seem logical or fair, especially when they have other products in the works, in addition to global notoriety.--Hoopindreams (talk) 04:32, 23 March 2017 (UTC)


 * I think you're missing the point of the deletion a little bit. The number of games isn't really the important part here. Its whether or not it meets the WP:GNG - Wikipedia's rule for whether or not something should be able to have its own article or not. This is basically achieved by locating third party sources (so not from Behdad Sami or their press releases) that cover the subject in significant detail. So, for example, if you could show that, a website like IGN or Wired had written an article centered around them, that would be a good argument not to delete the article. See WP:VG/S for a list of commonly accepted or rejected sources for proving this sort of thing. Sergecross73   msg me  16:56, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, looking at the article itself, there's already a source, this one from Vice which would be pretty useful towards showing notability. It's pretty long and centered around the developer. So this is a good example. If you can find more like this, I'd be inclined to !vote keep actually. Sergecross73   msg me  16:59, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:45, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:45, 23 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - fails WP:GNG. No widespread, in-depth coverage. WP:TOOSOON. SW3 5DL (talk) 18:12, 24 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep - Well, aside from this Vice article which is just as big as Wired or IGN, there is also this article from geek.com, which is a very reputable source. There is also this article from the German tech blog Appgefahren, as well as this article from the number 1 Apple web blog in Indonesia. I think the VICE article is the most globally reputable source, however the other three websites are very reputable and cover Behdad Sami Interactive and their first game. There is also a ton of other 3rd party websites, blogs, and youtubers that have covered this game/company, but as far as reputable sources go that I believe Wiki would be looking for, the four articles I have posted here I believe should allow this page to remain, and not be deleted. Not to mention, they could have a few other articles released soon.--Hoopindreams (talk) 03:38, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment The Vice article is not "intellectually independent" and is a classic advertorial and relies solely on an interview with Behdad. Classic quote in that article which makes me chuckle is "Being the thorough journalist I am, I immediately got onto Google to check out the man behind the missive." so lots of independent fact checking went on for that article. The second article is also not "intellectually independent" and contains this "In his email to me, Sami said he believes Get ‘Em will “revolutionize not just mobile gaming, but gaming as a whole.”. The last two are blogs which are usually excluded from assessing notability.  -- HighKing' ++ 10:48, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - As per nominator and SW3 5DL, WP:TOOSOON. Most references consists of reviews about the only game they made, little about the company itself. One game isn't enough for notability. TheDeviantPro (talk) 10:37, 28 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep - well seeing what Sergecross73  said, "I think you're missing the point of the deletion a little bit. The number of games isn't really the important part here", your arguement about his "one game" not being enough shouldn't matter too much. Vice is covering his company and game, as well as other tech/app websites/blogs, regardless of it being a review, they are still talking about this company and it's game. I'd say with Vice covering it alone, it gives this tons of credibility, but in addition to that there is geek.com and the other blogs in Europe and Indonesia. That makes this company global in my opinion.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.87.39.17 (talk) 04:23, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The preceding comment is the only edit on wikipedia by this ip. Atlantic306 (talk) 00:00, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete - per WP:TOOSOON. ZettaComposer (talk) 18:59, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 15:58, 31 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep - I stand very confident in what I said above. The Vice article, geek.com, and both articles in Europe and Indonesia, more than qualify this page from remaining. This game developer is known worldwide and has someone as major and credible as Vice discussing their game/developer. This is in my opinion enough reason to keep them, in addition to the other sources listed above. It's not too soon.Hoopindreams (talk) 18:56, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Delete/Redirect?
 * Redirect to Behdad_Sami -- not independently notable. Wikipedia does not need two articles on these closely related topics. K.e.coffman (talk) 22:51, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades Godric 16:39, 8 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment "The number 1 Apple web blog in Indonesia" is not a viable Wikipedia source. sixty nine   • speak up •  21:49, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect - Per K.e.coffman's suggestion above. Lack of independent notability is the key issue here. So long as the company has only one game of note, it makes no sense to have separate articles for the game and the company. The suggested Behdad_Sami is the logical redirect target, since it already covers the article subject.--Martin IIIa (talk) 12:03, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree that a Redirect is good for now per K.e.coffman. ZettaComposer (talk) 13:58, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect as per K.e.coffman's suggestion. -- HighKing ++ 10:48, 13 April 2017 (UTC)


 * 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.