Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meteor Studios


 * 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 keep.  / nomination withdrawn per 's research/edits. Star  Mississippi  14:41, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Meteor Studios

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

While the bankruptcy had a little pickup, nothing lasting. All I can find are credits to their films, but it's unclear that they had a prominent role (so undue) in the creation thereof, and no viable AtD as many are blue links. The award nomination is a deadlink, but it does not appear to be a notable won, nor is there evidence they won. Star  Mississippi  18:12, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation, Organizations, Companies,  and Canada.  Star   Mississippi  18:12, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment The VES Award seems notable. The links to it were removed by as nonfunctional. I found a working site listing the nominees and winners, but neither Meteor Studios nor any of their works are listed in any category. That could be because the page lists the names of individuals and not their employer, but I have no way of knowing which, if any, of these people worked at Meteor Studios. Several new sources added by Cielquiparle appear to be reliable and grant notability, but I can't access them at this time. Argento Surfer (talk) 11:57, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. I see the problem at the time of nomination, but the article has since been improved with the addition of several other acceptable sources. Even more sourcing would obviously be welcome, if possible, but what's in the article now is sufficient for notability. Bearcat (talk) 15:20, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Indeed, it was essentially a weak sub-stub (two sentences) with a list of works at nomination. Have expanded significantly to tell a coherent and complete story, as this really was the largest visual effects studio in eastern Canada, groundbreaking in its own way in introducing CG to TV and film (even though CG has since fallen out of favour and is now often regarded as "humdrum"). While it started out with a mission to create cost-effective CG on TV budgets, in the end it turned out to be financially unsustainable and went bankrupt, leaving 130 vfx artists unpaid for three months' work. The case of Meteor Studios thus became a symbol for the vulnerability of vfx artists (in contrast to union- and guild-protected Hollywood workers), according to Variety magazine. Anyway, for SIGCOV satisfying WP:NCORP and WP:GNG, I would point to the 2002 feature article in Millimeter (identical to this one on Digital Content Producer); the 2005 feature article "Meteor Streaks Into Effects Orbit" in The Montreal Gazette; the 2008 post-bankruptcy article in The Montreal Gazette; and the 2009 article in Variety magazine. Even though the articles incorporate quotes from interviews, they also incorporate many facts as reported by those respective publications. In addition, the article now includes information on the 2002 Emmy Award (couldn't work out the VES thing mentioned above) and additional coverage about individual film projects that appeared in Playback: Canada's Broadcast and Production Journal. Pinging in case you are available to review the article as it stands now: Meteor Studios. Thank you. Cielquiparle (talk) 11:53, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Wow. Thanks for flagging as somehow Twinkle didn't watch this despite the nomination. I will withdraw. AfD shouldn't be clean up and that's certainly not how I intended it, but glad it crossed your watchlist to find the sourcing. I don't think the interviews are an issue at all as they're complementary. Star   Mississippi  14:24, 2 November 2022 (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.