Deletion of Defense Devil (2nd nomination)

Comment: While you're right that the Animeland web reviews don't seem to exist, the magazine review clearly exists (verified because it's on the official website) and would constitute some form of coverage considering that it was in a print magazine. (It's listed in the general "magazine" section along with interviews and other columns, so definitely not minor) The MangaNews reviewer names say "MN Team" on them and if you go on their profiles say "http://www.manga-news.com/index.php/membre/Koiwai editor and columnist" and "http://www.manga-news.com/index.php/membre/Shaedhen MN columnist", so these are staff reviews. Manga Sanctuary contains https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.manga-sanctuary.com+Defense+Devil several staff reviews. Planete BD https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.planetebd.com%2F+Defense+Devil has mini reviews. Splash Comics http://www.splashcomics.de/php/rezensionen/alle/0/2800 also has reviews. This should be enough to satisfy notability and all sources mentioned &M/ORS|are considered reliable by the Anime and manga WikiProject's consensus. {{small|Lastly, just a sidenote (not targeted towards you personally Juhachi) that this project as a whole needs to start considering foreign licensing as an indicator of notability; when we see a series has been licensed in North America we usually consider it as notable because it has the heft of actual translation and publication behind it and resulting reviews, but because it's published in a foreign country who's language we can't read, we somehow consider it different even though the markets for anime and manga there are just as large, if bigger. (There's certainly an implicit anglophone bias) The fact that it was licensed in three different countries alone should be enough for notability. Of course AFD isn't a place to discuss policy, but I still wanted to bring this up
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Attribution (WP:A)