Deletion of GameTZ.com(3rd nom)

Comment: as bad faith nomination yet again by yet another |SPA bent on deleting an article they don't like. This is ridiculous to have to keep defending this article every other week from obvious bad faith AfD nominations. The article clearly meets , and GamePro is definitely a reliable source in the gaming community (and therefore, by extension, the rest of the world). There is nothing anywhere in any of the policies and guidelines on Wikipedia that says that all (or even most) references have to be online references. There are some topics which are more easily rsearched using good old fashioned libraries using sources which are not (and may not ever) be available online
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Single-purpose account (WP:SPA||WP:N)

Comment: The sources include itself, USENET, a blog, and "a small, one man, company dedicated to creating and operating Internet communities." Not |reliable sources. The WIST story only mentions the site in passing. The two GamePro references do not link to any articles viewable online. Not |a verifiable source from where I sit. The article on GamePro itself casts doubt as to it's reliability as well
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:V)

Comment: Nominating this again after four days is ridiculous. Further, there seem to be sufficient |reliable sources to make a small but adequate article. The |conflict of interest issues worry me some, so I'd encourage article authors to be especially strict about |original research and unintentional bias, but none of those things are cause to delete this article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:COI||WP:OR)

Comment: Fairly obvious bad faith nomination, and the article has numerous verifiable sources, thus passing 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V)

Comment: per . This was covered in all nominations and the deletion overturn log
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: as mentioned above nonreliable sources come short of |notability guidelines
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)