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 keep. John254 23:21, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Magic Bullet Productions (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Alan Stevens (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

A minor, recently formed production company that produces audio spin-offs of the Doctor Who series such as Kaldor City. Kaldor City seems to be notable, but none of the sources actually discuss the production company in any more depth than to mention their name. I'm also nominating Alan Stevens, whose only claim to notability is that he runs this company. Mangojuice^talk 13:47, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't recently formed, it was formed eight years ago, making it, now BBV are out of the picture, either the oldest or second oldest spinoff production company still operating. Faction Paradox is definitely notable as well-- see its page. Dayofthetriffids (talk) 16:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As for Alan Stevens, he's also written books and articles, and has been a frequent contributor to a number of Doctor Who/Blake's 7 related zines and magazines. See the article.Dayofthetriffids (talk) 16:22, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd vote against a deletion: I can't see how Kaldor City can be notable but the company producing it isn't. Sounds like it's more a case of the articles not being very in depth, which would suggest a need for contributions, not deletions. Sheriff Bernard (talk) 22:36, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Singularity 00:15, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep both. The production company is notable for its work (I agree if the production is notable that makes the company that makes it notable, too), plus as noted it's not a new company. Stevens is notable for having internationally distributed books (via Telos) and for having one book published by Manchester University Press which pushes him past the notability threshold. 23skidoo (talk) 00:24, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep if the articals can be slightly expanded and tweaked, which I'm sure is possible since Alan Stevens had some notible works I'm sure.--Wiggs (talk) 01:06, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• At most, the two nominated articles should be merged. I offer no opinion which should redirect. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 01:53, 29 March 2008 (UTC)\[reply]
• Keep References at the bottom seem to show at least limited notability, enough for a stub. Calvin 1998 ^(t-c) 02:49, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep References already included in the article indicate it already has quite a bit of notability. I see no reason to delete. Celarnor ^{Talk to me} 06:18, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the reasons given above. Wolf of Fenric (talk) 14:02, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as both subjects are notable. Sheriff Bernard (talk) 21:48, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 17:58, 30 March 2008 (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.