Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Psyop (company)
as the subject fails . The studio's works having received awards or nominations thereof might make the individual works (potentially!) notable, but the studio |does not inherit this notability. Most of the sources found by Cunard above include just trivial mentions of the company (sometimes just one per source) in connection to a film or commercial the studio produced, while failing to actually detail the company or its operations. Sources that do focus primarily on the company are #1, #2, #4, #5, and #8, of which #8 is a news blip, and #1 and #2 only name-drop some of the company's works and then move on. The remaining two do something similar, although each has a bit of extra info (such as both mentioning the founders and #5 going over its design philosophy). This, plus , as mentioned above by Unforgettableid. All in all, this is not |significant coverage and would rather result in a stub acting as a . Note that potential (or evident) COI interference is an argument that an article requires more maintenance, but not strictly an argument for deletion
— User:Lordtobi, 09:47, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:NCORP||WP:NOTINHERITED||WP:ORGIND||WP:SIGCOV||WP:DIRECTORY (Wikipedia:Notability)