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 The information about the company appears to be within the Enigma: Rising Tide page, and there is no advocacy for a redirect. Mandsford 17:29, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tesseraction Games[edit]

Tesseraction Games (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Procedural nomination. I've declined a speedy on this, as Enigma: Rising Tide (published by this firm) has its own article so it's conceivable that the firm is notable, but as it stands the article has no third party sources at all, and a quick skim doesn't show any third-party coverage (although videogame magazines don't always make it online, so that's not evidence of absence). Procedural nomination, so I abstain.  – iridescent 08:36, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have gone over the notability guidelines for organizations and this one seems to fail the necessary tests. The company was very small, existed only very briefly, contained no notable individuals, and other than the above-mentioned video game, does not appear to have done anything other than file a lawsuit in the U.K. I vote for delete. KDS4444Talk 09:59, 24 January 2011 (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.