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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:09, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Universal Games[edit]

Universal Games (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

I prodded it a year ago with the following rationale: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline nor the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar." It was deprodded by an editor (no ping, they are topic banned from deletions now) with no meaningful rationale (despite the fact that I explicitly asked for one in the PROD). The article hasn't improved since and is still unreferenced. As I discussed in my Signpost Op-Ed, this is a good example of Yellow-Pages like company spam. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:35, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Games, Companies, and Nevada. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:35, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Universal Interactive, the most plausible redirect for this. This company has no N to speak of. Nate • (chatter) 21:18, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. The redirect target states that Vivendi's Havas Interactive, which was renamed Vivendi Universal Games the next year, which is different IMHO to this article in question. Sadly, this article has no refs I can find which could plausibly meet WP:NCORP, but if there's another redirect target (maybe Titanic: The Board Game, but that's also borderline notable...), I'd be happy to change to redirect per WP:ATD. VickKiang (talk) 02:25, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting due to difference of opinion on whether the suggested redirect is appropriate to this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:23, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I am unable to find any references which establishes notability of the topic company. I am also unconvinced that we have identified a good redirect target and there is nothing in the article that suggests one. HighKing⁺⁺ 21:12, 30 August 2022 (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.