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. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:44, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sead Studios[edit]

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

Promotional company directory listing. Zero sources in the article, and searches don't reveal anything better. Fails WP:GNG, fails WP:CORPDEPTH, and fails the proposed new notability guideline for corporations as well. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 13:35, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. So Why 14:14, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. So Why 14:14, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions. So Why 14:14, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete unreferenced advertising, fails WP:GNG. Theroadislong (talk) 14:21, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I already tried speedy as A7, it was declined by SoWhy. I don't think it is quite blatantly promotional enough to be G11ed though. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 14:27, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~. I declined the speedy on the article based on the claims it contains, since a subsidiary (of a subsidiary) of a notable company can almost always be redirected or merged into the notable company's article or a list of their subsidiaries per WP:ATD and usually, that's what I would !vote for in such an AFD, considering that Media Prima already contains a list of subsidiaries and the studio might be a useful search term. However, after searching for it, I could not even find any sources that confirmed that this subject is actually a subsidiary (never mind any sources that would establish notability), so that removes the ATD possibility. If anyone can confirm that they are a subsidiary, consider this a redirect-!vote. Regards SoWhy 14:30, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- On second thought, redirect to The Amazing Awang Khenit. The show seems notable enough and the studio's name is a potential search term. Regards So Why 14:34, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete if there is anything that is significant and sourced, it should be merged with the parent company article. Elmmapleoakpine (talk) 18:49, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I don't believe it merits a redirect as there is nothing notable about this company. Fails GNG and WP:NCORP HighKing⁺⁺ 14:35, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- How is notability relevant when it comes to deciding whether to redirect? The studio's name is a plausible search term for people familiar with the show imho. Regards So Why 14:53, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how plausible it is for someone to be searching for The Amazing Awang Khenit (an animated cildren's series) using "Sead Studios". In the unlikely event that they are looking for Sead Studios, landing at The Amazing Awang Khenit isn't going to help them much and wont be where they wanted to end up. Redirects are cheap, but we don't have to throw every search term at the nearest thing that is tangentially related to it. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 15:02, 7 March 2018 (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.