Deletion of Age of Chivalry (Mod)

Comment: Yet another non-notable mod games. The article has no |non-trivial independent reliable sources to keep this page alive in Wikipedia
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:SOURCE)

Comment: can someone clarify which PC Gamer magazine issues it appeared in, and what the features actually entail? If it's just a mention, or a "we've put it on a coverdisk, here's the blurb", then that's too trivial for . If it's actually a substantial review or interview then it needs correctly citing (perhaps in a Critical reaction section
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: keep per above. |Notability is adequately asserted
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTE)

Comment: In the Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Deletion#Closed|dozens of recent AfDs on video game related things, the big thing is always reliable sources proving notability. This article has two, so what's left but ? I disagree with UnaLaguna that having articles on several mods decreases the value of such articles. News doesn't get less notable when the New York Times of that particular day has more news
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:PROBLEM)