Deletion of Stilwater

Comment: Subject is not notable.  No reliable third-party source explicitly discusses the subject in detail, thereby showing that there is ''no significant or substantial coverage'' per  and .  Article's nature is more of a virtual travel guide than one discussing conceptualization and development of the virtual setting, hence a violation of  and /GL
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NOBJ||WP:NOTGUIDE||WP:VG)

Comment: per Sabre. No sign that this topic could support its own article (and no, a two-sentence Reception section and a link to Google doesn't cut it for me). Agree with nom that the majority of this current article is not suitable for wikipedia (), so that's where the culling comes in. &ndash
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: Without substantial coverage in reliable third-party sources, this article can't meet the |general notability guideline, let alone its burden of proof in our |verifiability policy. The only coverage in reliable third-party sources is trivial, mentioning the name of the location, but not offering any meaningful facts that we can verify
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:V)

Comment: I see that LGRdC has added some references with comments about the city (see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stilwater&curid=6866029&diff=231781387&oldid=231637943 this diff for example).  While these barely make this notable, we still have the issue that the content of this article falls somewhere between a fictional travel guide and a game guide, both which are details that WP does |not cover.  These points can be added to either game article with a more succinct version of the city, but a full article is still not justified with these references
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)