Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Castaway Entertainment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 no consensus Mr.Z-man 02:58, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Castaway Entertainment

Castaway Entertainment (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Page has been a crystal ball since 2004. While I don't know if the company has closed up shop yet, they haven't had any news in 2 years. Page should be recreated once the company establishes itself. Burzmali 00:32, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete. This company does not exhibit any of the signs of a notable company... like actually producing something. -FisherQueen (Talk) 01:08, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Notability established through being formed by employees of Blizzard North. I have removed the crystal ball related info. Fosnez 02:10, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
    Notability is not inherited. Burzmali 12:06, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Provided speculation is removed (as Fosnez has done), it's a verifiable article about a company that has meets the notability criteria (coverage in independent sources and so forth). The company is a subject of interest in itself, quite independent of any hypothetical future product, because of the team's profile in the game industry. (I'd also add that irrelevant, non-notable game development companies don't usually get publishing deals from one of the biggest game publishers in the world). -- Vardion 03:18, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
    How can a publishing deal for an product that was never announced, be notable and not a crystal ball?Burzmali 12:06, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
    A publishing deal with a billion-dollar company is notable in and of itself, even if the product never eventuates. (For references in media to the deal, see Turlo Lomon's sources below). -- Vardion 20:51, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Company has not released anything in 3 years. Notability is not established; people leaving a company and creating their own (possibly competing) company is not notable.. OSbornarf 04:33, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment So Bill Gates and Steve Jobs leaving their companies to start a new one (but not releasing anything for three years) would not be notable?(I think that would be VERY notable... what have Bill and Steve been been working on for three years? Must be big!) I agree that the article needs fleshing out, but the sum of its parts (Employees) makes it notable, considering the Blizzard North history. - Fosnez 07:19, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Please remember that notability is not inherited. An article about a company can't solely be about the company's founding. Where is the WP:N besides that? Burzmali 12:06, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
    Microsoft has released a number of major products over the years. Perhaps when it was started it was not notable enough of a Wiki article- if Castaway Entertainment does release something major that warrants their own Wiki article, then I would say keep. OSbornarf 17:01, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
    I believe Fosnez's argument is that if Bill Gates left Microsoft and started a new company today, we would consider that company notable even before it released a product, simply because it's Bill Gates. That the same rationale should be applied here — the team in question has a track record which generates interest in whatever they're doing now, even if their past activities took place under a different banner. -- Vardion 20:51, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - Company cannot inherit notability from founders. No source given to back up Vardion claim. SolidPlaid 06:43, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
    Which claim? The team's profile in the industry is demonstrated by the articles that accompanied the company's founding (an anonymous start-up doesn't get that sort of attention), and the deal was widely reported in industry media too. Turlo Lomon has provided a few citations for both below. -- Vardion 20:51, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Notability does not expire. The people founding this make it notable. Turlo Lomon 07:21, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Neutral I'm not convinced that a company is automatically notable because of it's founders if nothing has been created by them yet. Just like if a new band is created from the lead singer of a popular established band and the lead guitarist from another band, but they do not release an album or perform on stage for three years, does that make the new band notable? I'm not sure --Brian(view my history)/(How am I doing?) 07:50, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Comment At the time this happened (9 people from Blizzard's development team walking off to create their own company), this was considered a significant event, and it was documented as such. It is clear in the notability, the notability is not temporary. Turlo Lomon 07:55, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Surely then the trade journals have written about how these guys haven't produced squat? What I'm getting at here is if they are so notable, why hasn't their lack of product provoked comment anywhere that can be cited? SolidPlaid 08:58, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Found an interesting reference that should be added. [1] Turlo Lomon 09:21, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
And more. [2] [3] [4] The information from these articles really needs to be added to main one. Turlo Lomon 09:34, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
With regards to the lack of product — games can take years to develop, and the fact that the company hasn't released anything yet isn't necessarily going to be considered strange. -- Vardion 20:51, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
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.