Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flying Lab Software


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 00:01, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Flying Lab Software

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No significant coverage of this company; fails WP:CORP. Only coverage is press releases, routine mentions, and directory listings. Games like Rails Across America might be notable, but notability is not inhereited. Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:36, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete No independent, reliable sources (WP:N), and WP:NOTINHERITED from its games (which themselves are of questionable notability for an encyclopedia). This 2010 IGN article reads like a press release, and these RPS articles don't establish notability for the company. czar   &middot;   &middot;  17:02, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:38, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:38, 30 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Here's a source review:
 * A small story in Wired about a release of one of their games. It's about the company mostly, in the context of the game, and quotes the CEO. This is a reliable source. But it's a short story and doesn't have much material that would be of use in an article.
 * A podcast on Gamasutra.com, in which a couple executives are interviewed. This isn't really a secondary source, as it's an interview, and it's for the most part about a game, not the company.
 * Other than that, all I can find are a variety of press releases, announcements of patches and game launches, etc. Nothing, in short, that can be considered a reliable source for the purposes of notability.
 * Doesn't meet the WP:GNG or WP:CORPDEPTH requirements, unless more evidence of significant coverage in reliable sources can be found. --Batard0 (talk) 19:04, 3 November 2012 (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.