Deletion of Chess Titans

Comment: It's the nominator who needs to "take a good read at ".   ''cannot'' be a reason for deletion. It says that, once a topic has received enough coverage to be classed as notable, it doesn't need continued coverage to maintain that notability.  (So, for example, a book that was widely reviewed in the 1970s doens't become non-notable just because nobody's said much about it in the last 30 years
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTTEMPORARY)

Comment: Apart from every GNG/non GNG quarrel: It is simply ''insane'' for whoever is not a Borg that a piece of software included in one of the most popular operating systems worldwide is considered "non notable". If our house rules make it so, then it is our notability rules that have to adapt.  and  are ''guidelines'' (even if an important one), that should be applied with a grain of salt, or even |ignored if this is better for the readers and the 'pedia. One has ask herself, before nominating: what advantage to the readers does deleting this article accomplish? Is the encyclopedia and our readers' experience better or worse without this article? In this case I feel the answer is obvious: the removal of this article is of no benefit. Please remember we're here for the readers
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NOTINHERITED||WP:IAR)