Deletion of Final Fantasy gameplay

Comment: Oh, absolutely, it's well sourced and certainly meets . But I disagree with you on OTGUIDE &ndash; large tracts of this article read (to me at least) exactly like an instruction manual for a game. Just to be clear though: I'd be willing to change my !vote if someone did a rewrite; I'm not saying that all the content is hopeless
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:NOTGUIDE)

Comment: I'm unsure right now, but Hobit does have a valid point regarding not necessarily violating . However, I ''am'' concerned about the high quantities of original research present as well as relative lack of real-world relevance. Moreover, this http://www.gamespot.com/gamespot/features/video/15influential/p16_01.html source in the "Reception and Legacy" section indicates that the ''Final Fantasy'' games – not the series' gameplay – have been considered influential. "Well-sourced" doesn't necessarily equate to meeting  when all you do is include information sources not necessarily relevant to the series' gameplay (most of them culled from other ''Final Fantasy'' WP articles) and attempt to blend them together
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:GAMEGUIDE||WP:N)

Comment: It's a really well sourced article from what I can tell. Lots of independent  and the like. I'm going to look more closely at it later, but I don't think this is as open and shut as the discussion to date would indicate.  At the very least it should be a merge to somewhere (Final Fantasy I should think
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: per  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTGUIDE||WP:GAMECRUFT)