Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deep Thought Games, LLC

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. —Cryptic 05:00, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deep Thought Games, LLC (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

No verifiable sources give any indication that this company is notable --Pak21 13:03, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This is basically an advert for their games. There is no reason why this company is notable M♠ssing Ace 13:39, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. --Sc straker 16:05, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Self-admitted "low-volume publisher". Clarityfiend 01:17, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• There is a longer related debate on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Board and table games#Deep Thought Games, LLC about 18xx game articles in general. I want to state here that I don't have a particular objection to deleting this page -- there was no intention of advertising (we can't build orders as fast we get them so we certainly don't need more) but only providing more complete information about 18xx games, and I tried to provide information about all the publishers of all the games. The more general question is about the notability of individual games in the series, and what type of publication constitutes a reliable source for a niche area. In particular, I am confused as to why Counter Magazine is not considered a reliable source while Sumo Magazine was, when they share the same editor (Stuart Dagger) and many of the same frequent contributors. Obviously, none of these niche publications have the reach of something like Games, but they seem to be very similar and meet the criteria of a reliable source. JTamplin 02:48, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep From the referenced discussion, at least one person has agreed that Counter Magazine is a reliable source. This invalidates the verifiable argument above and argues for notability. JTamplin 15:37, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: User:JTamplin is the founder of Deep Thought Games. --Pak21 15:38, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Was there any doubt, as it is listed in the first line of the article as well as on my user page? If I was trying to hide it I must be really bad at it -- I also wrote the bulk of the 18xx articles you merged. Or are you suggesting that I should not participate in the discussion? Would you care to comment on the verifiability criteria? JTamplin 01:09, 10 October 2007 (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.