Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thatgamecompany

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. WP:SNOW MBisanz ^talk 23:25, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thatgamecompany[edit]

Non-notable "indie" game company. The games are probably notable, the company is not. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 22:16, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I'd have to concur that it's not notable. While the game itself might have achieved notability the game studio has yet to do so. Likewise we should discuss deleting the founders Kellee Santiago and Jenova Chen as well. Vasant56 (talk) 22:33, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - certainly more notable than many indie studios. The notability of their games has led them as a company to receive significant popularity and attention. I believe producing an indie game as well received and as talked-about as Flower certainly establishes the notability of the company it's self. Here are a couple of examples of articles from reliable sources which discuss the actual studio: 1, 2, 3 ("when you're trying to expand videogaming's horizons single-handed and on a shoestring budget (thatgamecompany) really takes the biscuit") and this event was mentioned by various sites. However I do agree that they founders article may not be notable. ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 22:57, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- In the latest Listen UP podcast from 1UP, well-known people in games journalism discuss Thatgamecompany and their distinctive style and identity as a games developer - Mp3 link. ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 10:18, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per ChimpanzeeUK. – Cyrus XIII ^(talk) 00:44, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 01:04, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per ChimpanzeeUK. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 04:54, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The company's software has attracted interest well beyond the boundaries of the standard video game press [1], their games are notable (a quick glance at google shows that Fl0w is notable [2]). Most small mainstream developers fail to get anything like this much press. Someone another 10:56, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – notability is easily established. MuZemike 17:44, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Nom confuses Notability with importance and only offers an irrelevant JNN argument. MLauba (talk) 22:23, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep You're right the game itself has gained notoriety by its innovative departure from the standard has given it its notoriety. The game didn't happen organically, it took the creative juices from the company which in itself is notable. (IMHO) --HJKeats (talk) 17:27, 27 February 2009 (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.