Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Green Ronin Publishing

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. Sandstein 19:30, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Green Ronin Publishing[edit]

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

Non-notable game company; unsourced save to their own website since December of 2006. Orange Mike | Talk 15:37, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~. A quick search of Google News revealed the following links: A, B, and C. These should be sufficient. Disclosure I own a Green Ronin product, and have played several others. - Jorgath (talk) ^(contribs) 15:59, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- reply in order, those are: a press release (never a reliable source, nor evidence of notability); a passing mention (one paragraph about one book) in a journalist's GenCon article); and one paragraph in a gaming website writer's blog. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:13, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Revised: Neutral. You are correct, and I didn't evaluate those closely enough. However, it strikes me as odd that they aren't covered more - I swear I've seen things about them in RS. I'll give it a better shot later, but for right now my only argument would be WP:ITEXISTS, so I'm going to be neutral here. My only request is that there not be a snow delete before the 7 days are up, so that I can have time to fix it. - Jorgath (talk) ^(contribs) 18:08, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
keep A variety of news articles and a number of well known products leads me to believe that Green Ronin Publishing is notable. The Steve 08:53, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails WP:CORP. ukexpat (talk) 17:44, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Query for more experienced editors. I know notability is not inherited, but it seems to me that it's more reasonable for a company to inherit its product's notability than vice-versa. In this case, shouldn't Green Ronin be notable simply because its some of its products, especially Mutants & Masterminds, have strong notability? - Jorgath (talk) ^(contribs) 18:16, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- reply - I think that falls under WP:NOTINHERITED. Publishers of notable works, even authors of notable non-fiction works, may not necessarily be notable, even though the works are. The late lamented TSR [for which I wrote]], and even EGG himself, are nowhere as notable to non-gamers as D&D itself was (and is). --Orange Mike | Talk 18:37, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:02, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:02, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I'll have to verify, but I believe Green Ronin has been a nominee or recipient of a few industry awards; coverage of these awards should qualify as RS (sadly, much of this sort of coverage was in publication like the now defunct Gamer Report, which you'd have to dig through archive.org to find.) There was also a period in which Dungeon/Polyhedron in which they recognized the existence of various third-party publishers; there might be some third-party coverage in that form as well. In it's current form, the article does not have enough RS, but I believe the sources are out there.

That being said, I'm not sure the current article says a whole lot, but if anyone is willing to do a little work, I might be able to check my Dungeon back issues for a cite or two. -Sangrolu (talk) 20:49, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Look at the Google News links above: there's tons of coverage such that it meets WP:GNG, and failure of an SNG does not disqualify an article for existence if the GNG is met. Jclemens (talk) 02:39, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Wifione ^Message 06:39, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To agument my above Keep, two Green Ronin supplements were just nominated for Origins awards: link. For those of you not familiar with the awards, they are the highest awards in Green Ronin's industry, and will likely generate additional RS coverage of the company in the near future. Jclemens-public (talk) 16:33, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

weak Keep the awards are likely enough. I'm mainly going IAR here, Green Ronin is a pretty major company in the field. Hobit (talk) 13:48, 24 March 2012 (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.