Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryan Davis (video game journalist)


 * 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   merge to Giant Bomb. j⚛e deckertalk 14:22, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Ryan Davis (video game journalist)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Lack of reliable sources that aren't about his death wirenote (talk) 16:27, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 17:07, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:08, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:08, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:08, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:08, 30 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - per coverage not about his death, copious mentions in other articles (arguably not useful as sources but do prove notability), as well as the relativity large coverage of his death. Sam Walton (talk) 17:18, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Be aware - we typically don't have articles about people who's death might have been something noted by a lot; I'm trying to recall the sources at the time, but there's a lot of personal feelings about Davis' passing but nothing that really went back to establish him as a notable person - famous, yes, but not notable. We definitely want the focus on what he did in the game journalism facet (and do have to agree that if Gerstmann is notable, we should be able to do the same with Davis as part of that whole mess) --M ASEM (t) 17:57, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Seems to be enough sources and coverage to warrant keeping the article. Neptune&#39;s Trident (talk) 20:11, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 13:36, 8 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Only references are about his death. Links provided by Samwalton9 aren't about the subject; just quotes from him, or ancillary references. Fails notability. -- Mikeblas (talk) 13:45, 8 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 03:09, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

 Merge and Redirect to Giant Bomb. When 90% of the references are talking about the subject founding a brand it doesn't inspire confidence in this stand alone article. No opposition to re-creation once there's a article that's going to be more than a BLP-compliant stub. Hasteur (talk) 12:48, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge to Giant Bomb. I think he has enough to scrape by the GNG between the myriad of obit sources and non-obit sources about leaving GameSpot, but I've been watching this article since his death (missed the AfD tag somehow) and I think this article would remain a permastub. He is primarily known for Giant Bomb and everything that needs to be said about him (as covered in RS) can fit into the founding of Giant Bomb section. czar ♔   03:44, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge to Giant Bomb as per, while an element of notability is certainly demonstrated, this article is pretty much doomed to be a permanent stub - given the subject is dead and unlikely to generate further independent coverage. Probably better understood in the context of the site's article. ~ mazca  talk 09:42, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge to Giant Bomb per arguments above.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:42, 28 July 2014 (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.