Deletion of Liberty Games

Comment: This article seems to barely squeak by . Two reviews from major UK publications (Daily Mail and Guardian) that were more than passing mentions is enough for me
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: The Guardian and Daily Mail articles don't do it for me.  The DM article is borderline at best.  It's not a trivial mention but it reads like they merely reprinted whatever promo materials (including that photo) Liberty Games supplied.  There's not even a byline.  The publication is certainly reliable, but I don't think this article is.  It's impossible to tell if anyone associated with the DM even saw one in person.  The Guardian mention is even less useful; it's only a mention on a top 10 list in a ''blog''.  Finally, neither of these articles is about Liberty Games; they're both about individual, different products ''made by'' Liberty Games, which is just not the same thing.  (It's possible for a company to be notable but not its products and vice versa.)  I don't think these sources meet , much less the slightly more stringent guidelines at  that kick in when a commercial interest is involved
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:CORPDEPTH)