Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Star Arcade


 * 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. Consensus that the subject is not notable after relisting. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 17:47, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Star Arcade

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I prodded it with the following rationale: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline and the more detailed Notability (companies) requirement. " It was deprodded by User:Kvng with the following rationale "depth of coverage is debatable, this is not an uncontroversial deletion, please use WP:AFD". I do not consider coverage here to be sufficient. 16 references but they don't seem to be sufficient. They have reliability issues - and that's discounting several which are very much self-published (PR announcements from company's own blog, etc.). Many of the reminder are niche online trade journals-like equivalents. And many focus on routine coverage ("startups that got fnding this week are..."), or are based on rewriting company's PR stuff (ex. : "Finland-based mobile social gaming network Star Arcade has announced its games have been downloaded more than 5 million times.... Source: http://www.star-arcade.com/corporate/view/press/StarArcade-5milliondownloadsPressRelease-18July2011.pdf )". The company seems to have been nominated or won some awards which however are niche and don't establish notability. There are As I discussed in my Signpost Op-Ed, this is a good example of Yellow-Pages like company spam. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 12:06, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 06:24, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 06:24, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 06:24, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete as noticeably detailed but summarily nothing actually convincing for the applicable notability, nothing else noticeably convincing overall. SwisterTwister   talk  22:21, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:00, 25 May 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vipinhari  &#124;&#124;  talk  16:21, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. I put two good sources on the talk page, but it's not enough to constitute significant coverage. czar  19:28, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete, does not pass the general notability guidelines. Tom29739 [ talk ] 00:29, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Appears promotional and not notable. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk)  02:36, 10 June 2016 (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.