Deletion of Muslim Massacre: The Game of Modern Religious Genocide (2nd nomination)

Comment: The notability guidelines for video game Wikipedia:TOY#Video_games do not discuss anything about lasting impact or media coverage after the initial release. The subject is covered by multiple reliable sources, thus meeting |the general notability guideline
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: A note about my  closure, SNOW is based on a demonstration that a discussion will blatantly close in a particular way, it does not require any specific criteria. My close was based on the fact that the keep votes are supported by policy, making the nominator's argument null. &mdash
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)

Comment: I may be missing something, but it looks like there are plenty of |reliable sources that establish |notability. I also thought that OT#NEWS pertains primarily to articles about events and not necessarily concrete objects like video games that are backed by print and/or online sources
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:N||WP:NOT)

Comment: subject has received significant coverage in a wide range of multiple reliable sources, most of which specifically discuss this game and the controversy in detail, rather than just making passing mentions. This article therefore satisfies  and , the sources satisfy , so I can't see a valid reason for deletion. Whether the article was notable at the exact time of its creation is not relevant now, as long as it has become notable at some point since then, which this has. Also, it is not necessary to show ongoing media coverage and interest in order to pass  because TEMP|notability is not temporary
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:V||WP:RS||WP:N||WP:NTEMP)