Deletion of List of fictional games (2nd nomination)

Comment: meets , plenty of books discuss this as {{u|Andrew Davidson|Andrew D.}} has brought out, that said, suggest that not every fictional game mentioned be included, only those that are notable/have at least one |reference ie. included in one of the books listed above/is a key plot point in a notable work, be included
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:LISTN||WP:RS)

Comment: While I agree with the concept of LISTCRUFT, this article needed pruning, which I see an editor has done (although pruning might be too mild a term to use for what was done), rather than deletion. Seems to pass 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:LISTN)

Comment: but restore some of the arbitrary slash and burn with a sprinkle of RS fertilizer, not that is required per . Perhaps later splitting up the list in a few lists would help, with a first divide between "games" (mental) and "sports" (physical). Another might be commercial parodies (or is it parody commercials?) for sketch/talk shows (e.g. SNL, Kimmel,…) where it isn't integrated into a larger work. Not all of the books listed above work here, ''Literary Gaming'' is more about literature in games, than games in literature. In spite of that, I'm sure many other sources can be found
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:LISTN)

Comment: Perfectly valid list article, as others have already stated is clearly passes 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:LISTN)

Comment: This article fails , , , and . It's a complete joke of an article that belongs on some fan website and was created over 14 years ago when standards on Wikipedia were much lower
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:LISTN||WP:LISTCRUFT||WP:OR||WP:INDISCRIMINATE)