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. JForget 02:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

EbilGames[edit]

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

If the company is tethering on the verge of non-notability (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Artix Entertainment (4th nomination)), then their site that holds their more obscure games surely is even less notable. Pcap ping 16:51, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- Pcap ping 16:52, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Pcap ping 16:52, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. -- Pcap ping 16:52, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I don't think the company is notable enough for inclusion, but I can recognize that it is debatable. The company's website on the other hand is clearly out of our scope. Where did all of these articles come from? Them From Space 16:00, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. Nifboy (talk) 18:45, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, nothing but promotional, and no real notability Alan - talk 02:37, 6 February 2010 (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.