Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Gauntlet (tabletop games producer)

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 and I don't see a 3rd relist being viable. A discussion on whether to merge or maintain as a standalone can continue on the Talk Star Mississippi 13:41, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Gauntlet (tabletop games producer)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Not meeting WP:NCORP; the sources are far away from the subject Edit.pdf (talk) 07:36, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Games and Companies. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:35, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge - If citations are still insufficient to provide SIGCOV, I recommend merging this article into either Brindlewood Bay or Indie role-playing games in the communities section, after The Forge. Nodicenomasters (talk) 12:51, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I slightly edited the above for clarity about SIGCOV. Nodicenomasters (talk) 23:57, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:13, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Easily meets GNG. Polygon is an established reliable source independent of subject with multiple articles providing SIGCOV. Here's a separate independent source we could add [1] —siro χ o 08:52, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I checked every source in the article, and I couldn't find any that have WP:SIGCOV about The Gauntlet. The source mentioned in this AFD has one paragraph of significant coverage, but in that same paragraph the author states they have a conflict of interest because they have been paid to work on The Gauntlet's magazine. Feel free to ping me if folks find more sources. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:26, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Did you check the Codega Polygon article for "gauntlet" without the "the"? That article alone provides a fair bit addressing the subject directly and in depth, much more than a passing mention, eg "Gauntlet Publishing is one of the older publishing presses to champion independent and underprivileged voices...Like many publishers, both large and small, Gauntlet Publishing uses Kickstarter to fund its projects....By creating a tentpole game of its own, Gauntlet Publishing allowed marginalized authors the opportunity to write for a larger game without compromising on their visions or asking them to write for less than their idea’s worth...Independent presses like Gauntlet Publishing... are centered on the authors and artists that they work with, allowing them to retain control of their work. And, perhaps most importantly, they are keeping money flowing into and through a growing community of game creators."

That coverage seems sufficient for NCORP, especially when combined with the Carter Polygon article which provides a paragraph or so of SIGCOV as well, more than a passing mention, though less in-depth. —siro χ o 08:16, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah thank you, I missed that one. Looks like two meaty paragraphs of significant coverage. My typical cutoff is three paragraphs, but let's say that one passes. Would still need two more sources for me to feel comfortable that this is a GNG pass. –Novem Linguae (talk) 08:20, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:14, 28 June 2023 (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.