Deletion of AdvertCity

Comment: The article has been ed with sources, but from an in depth read, they are all essentially the same news release about how the game's on Kickstarter. The nominator is highly incorrect in his assertion that those sites are not reliable sources, see /S, but it lacks . In terms of post release critique there is very little, and the article uses weasel words to cast it in a better light, such as using user reviews, which shouldn't be used in a Wikipedia article. The game lacks notability and does suffer from recycling of similar sources. Yes, it is hard for an indie game to get on Wikipedia, but that's kind of the point. Wikipedia is not a directory of indie games, if your game doesn't get on Wikipedia that doesn't mean it sucks. Just that it didn't pick up notability from the media
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Citation overkill (WP:BOMBARD||WP:VG||WP:SUSTAINED)

Comment: In support of the comments about the sources being poor: The Rock, Paper, Shotgun references are simple announcements. If these are the best sources available, which seems to be the conclusion at the RSN discussion, then the article is pure . The Destroid ref is no better
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:SOAP)