Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/37Games

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. Considering that after sources were unearthed by Phil, all the !votes were to keep (and one "delete" changed to "keep", albeit weak), it is not implausible to think the other commenters who opined to "delete" might similarly reconsider, which sways this closure towards keep instead of what would clearly be a "no consensus". ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 03:49, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

37Games[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) (in Chinese)

Fails WP:GNG, WP:NCORP. Outside of press releases this company lacks significant coverage from reliable secondary sources. The1337gamer (talk) 15:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) The1337gamer (talk) 15:29, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. The1337gamer (talk) 15:31, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~. Article topic lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. (?) Only hits in a video game reliable sources custom Google search are press releases. There are no worthwhile redirect targets. Please ping me you find more (non-English and offline) sources. – czar 15:45, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. I'm unable to check the quality of the Chinese-language sources, but I defer to Phil's assessment of them with his experience in the area. This said, I still have no idea what kind of coverage these sources contain (press releases? original reporting? blurbs? full articles?), apart from that I now have links from major outlets. – czar 16:47, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Not a notable company. I also recall that the page had been created several times before as 37 Entertainment Inc but was also deleted due to the same reason. AdrianGamer (talk) 16:08, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-notable. Not a lot of coverage outside of company press releases. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 17:33, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete' per WP:NCOMPANY. The article does not show the the significance of the subject. --Anar chyte 22:13, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete an article about a company that does not show it notability/significance. (CSD A7). Article tagged with {{db-company}}. Wiki you now, Wiki you later! (talk) 13:55, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It clearly asserts notability in the second paragraph ("38th amongst top 100 internet companies in China", "second biggest browser game platform"), though as long as the references fail to load, it's unsubstantiated and nevertheless lacking reliable, secondary coverage. Still good enough for defeating the speedy. – czar 14:27, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

don't delete just change two reference source Czar mentioned that are failed to load.I changing them to article of portals of Tencent and Sina, which rank no.2 and no.4 traffic among Chinese websites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gamefant (talk • contribs) 02:03, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If the company is significant for those rankings, where is the reliable, secondary source coverage? Can you help us find Chinese-language sources? – czar 19:27, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Have you check those two newly added article i mentioned above, which are mainly talking about the ranking and market share. Are they reliable, secondary source coverage? Besides, just find one coverage from Forbes, http://www.forbes.com/sites/russellflannery/2015/05/07/new-online-game-billionaire-clan-emerges-in-china/. Sanqi Interactive Entertainment is official name of the whole group. This name could be found at the bottom of 37.com. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goodmanishere (talk • contribs) 04:30, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Being included on that list of top Internet companies doesn't count for much on its own. We're finding mostly press releases or passing mentions (such as inclusion in a list) for this company (at least as "37Games" or "37.com"—we might find more if we use the "Sanqi" name), such that we don't have complete evidence of significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources. (?) We need to have actual non-press release content in order to write a balanced article, otherwise it's better off redirected or deleted. Forbes would be a start, but it's more usable for an article about Sanqi than about 37Games, no? And I'm having trouble establishing whether the short QQ and People.cn short articles are (1) reputable and (2) discuss the company in more than a passing fashion. – czar 13:09, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Sanqi" actually is the Chinese pronunciation of 37. – [user talk:goodmanishere] 11:09, 7 July 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goodmanishere (talk • contribs)

Keep I was intending to close this as delete but after some digging there are a raft of reliable sources out there in Chinese. Pace avoidance of systematic bias, it is notable and should be kept. Note that the Chinese article (now linked) has been tagged for the equivalent to WP:PROMO since December 2014, which means that it too needs better sourcing. I've added Chinese searches for sources so others can get an idea of the coverage out there—also pinging Czar per his request above. Philg88 ^♦talk 06:42, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Philg88, thanks for this. I'm not familiar with Chinese-language reliable sources. Which of those hits are reputable, and not just rehashes of press releases? (Or is there a list of such domains somewhere in project space, perhaps something on par with WP:VG/RS?) Could you help with my QQ/People.cn question above? – czar 13:09, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Czar: News stories with in depth coverage here from 163.com, and here from Sina Corp. I don't know about RS for video games but there is certainly sufficient coverage in "mainstream" sources. Don't forget, the reliable sources don't need to be cited in the article - they only need to exist. Cheers, Philg88 ^♦talk 15:25, 6 July 2015 (UTC):Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:19, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:19, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:19, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Philg88 ^♦talk 06:42, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There is enough coverage in reliable sources to make this article pass WP:ORG. I found and added a news source in just 5 seconds. I also found coverage in Chinese language, as already pointed by Phil. The subject passes our notability threshold. Jim Carter 13:10, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jim Carter, you added what is unabashedly a press release... Certainly not reliable, independent, or a "news source". Others may exist, but that's exactly why we're searching. – czar 13:35, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Philg88 ^♦talk 15:17, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.