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. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:28, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hardcore Gamer[edit]

Hardcore Gamer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

The only sources used in this article is from Hardcore Gamer itself and there does not appear to be any secondary sources on the website. GamerPro64 04:30, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:50, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:50, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:51, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:51, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - It does seem like the magazine did get some news coverage in 2009, regarding its attempted sale on Ebay and subsequent buyout. While various gaming news sites covered it, it did notably have an article written about the situation in the New York Times, here. 169.232.162.112 (talk) 19:13, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Also covered by Kotaku. I don't see anything else, and nothing to indicate this subject is notable under the WP:GNG (though it's a need-haystack situation given the number of results for "hardcore gamer"). Add an entry at list of video game magazines (as it did publish in print) and then redirect. --Izno (talk) 15:46, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete for now, without prejudice against recreation with multiple reliable sources showing in-depth coverage to satisfy WP:GNG. At this point, it's an article sourced entirely to the subject's own website. That's no good. My search for sources found one good one, but all other nontrivial coverage is about that single event -- the company's listing itself on ebay. The search terms are hard, though, and I wouldn't quite rule out the idea that more could be out there. For now, though, an entirely self-sourced article about a company is WP:TNT worthy. Specifically Oppose Redirect to the list article, which has been poorly maintained. At this point, it includes only notable examples, rather than being a linkfarm/directory of anything that exists, so if this article ceases to exist, it shouldn't be included there. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 03:25, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.