Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stu Galley


 * 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   no consensus. Lack of participants, defaulting to "no consensus to delete"; NPASR. Salvidrim!   &#9993;  13:02, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Stu Galley

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

tagged for notability for 5 years; couldn't confirm notability Boleyn (talk) 19:54, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 12:39, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions.  &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 12:39, 16 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Neutral: Galley is "borderline" notable as a game designer and it seems this could be argued either way. A few media sources have published interviews or descriptions of his career with Infocom, but his notability is basically restricted to the interactive fiction gaming community so the WP:Generally notable people guidelines may not be met with respect to the gaming community more generally.  Anyways, here are three sources I came across:
 * He was interviewed as part of the GET LAMP documentary (which was released under a Creative Commons license, so I can note that the documentary's interview with Stu Galley is viewable on the Internet Archive).
 * An interview published in the Commodore 64 magazine Zzap
 * A description (~3 paragraphs) of Galley's career with Infocom was published in "The Imps of Infocom are still alive and kicking", Computer Game Review. April, 1996. Vol. 5, No. 9. Pages 83-88. --Mike Agricola (talk) 23:13, 16 January 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 01:34, 22 January 2013 (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.