Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BitComposer Interactive

BitComposer Interactive

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Disputed PROD - company fails WP:CORPDEPTH with its coverage consisting of minor announcements. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:09, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Companies. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:09, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:27, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Copying my PROD dispute message for convenience: GamesMarkt. IgelRM (talk) 16:14, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Specifically Ein Jahr bitComposer: "Gründung in der Krise war Glücksgriff", bitComposer startet durch. IgelRM (talk) 20:19, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 22:38, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Not eligible for a Soft deletion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:36, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, not significantly covered in reliable sources ApexParagon (talk) 03:01, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you comment on above, Gamesmarkt was clearly a reliable source? IgelRM (talk) 07:42, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, it seems to require a subscription, so I cannot confirm that. Even assuming it is reliable though, that is just one of several necessary to pass NCORP. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:17, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MCV on bitcomposer licenses; perhaps THQ Nordic is a redirect target. IgelRM (talk) 19:39, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Just relisting to see if there is support for the last minute redirection suggestion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:58, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose the redirect suggestion. All the article mentions is that a few franchises were purchased from them, it's insufficient to help the reader more than letting the search function do its job. We shouldn't rush to redirect pages to pointless targets regardless of how helpful it will be, the search exists for a reason. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:32, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. It appeared those franchises were rather significant from the articles, but I agree for delete. The German WP article also cites GameStar but I wasn't able to find anything beyond those two sources. IgelRM (talk) 16:24, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete-lacks SIGCOV , agree with nom's point ,mostly passing mentions and seems mostly focuses on the games that the company published. Not opposed to Redirect to the more notable games they Published.Lorraine Crane (talk) 15:12, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]