Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/QuanticLab

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. Sandstein 20:13, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

QuanticLab[edit]

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

Game developer who has only one game, still in development. Testing house has notable clients, but that does not push notability on to this company. Article is unsourced and unverified - only sources are primary or reprinted press releases. Addionne (talk) 00:12, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no independent sources indicate notability; fails WP:N. - Biruitorul ^Talk 04:08, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails WP:ORG Mabiller (talk) 04:59, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
some independent sources were added in the References column, also few information were deleted(information that could not be verified via an external press release) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adhiriscau (talk • contribs) 12:47, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Press releases, blogs and forum posts do not count as reliable sources. - Biruitorul ^Talk 13:29, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 15:08, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:08, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:08, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@Biruitorul, do romanian publications count? there are several interviews in electronic format in some local and national newspapers. We also have an article published in November 2007 in one of our national gaming related magazine "Level", but no electronic format is available for that entire article(only this) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adhiriscau (talk • contribs) 12:06, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Provided that the sources are reliable, they can be in any language. The important thing is that they be reliable, as defined in the guideline. - Biruitorul ^Talk 22:23, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak delete or redirect~~ - the Polish source, dailybusiness.ro, seems reliable. It's a short interview with Seicarescu Stephen, the company founder. The only drawback is that it tells us more about E3 than it does about Quantic. The last paragraph does give some information about Quantic's finanaces for 07/08. Without additional sources, this is a candidate for merger to a broader topic per Wikipedia:N#cite_note-2. Perhaps Software quality assurance. Marasmusine (talk) 09:46, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
New references links were added, pleas verify if links can be considered as reliable Adhiriscau —Preceding undated comment added 14:28, 14 April 2011 (UTC).[reply]
Weak keep or redirect - The new links look reliable to me, thanks. Again, I think they tell us more about other topics (e.g. games testing) than about Quantic, but the company is mentioned enough times for me to change to weak keep. Marasmusine (talk) 19:49, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Nothing there, ~~no refs~~, no assertion of notability, just a sketch of an article. Szzuk (talk) 17:29, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There are refs but they aren't inline, confused me a bit. I went through them, mostly they mention the company has been a quality testing outfit. i.e. they play the game and send bug reports, they have just made their first proper game i.e. made one from scratch. It isn't enough, it just looks like 10 guys sat in a Romanian basement working hard to make a crust. Good luck to them but non notable for now. Szzuk (talk) 17:35, 21 April 2011 (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.