Deletion of Magic: The Gathering deck types (4rd nomination)

Comment: this kind of sourced, secondary coverage (in this case, of deck typologies) is encyclopaedic and appropriate for WP. I see a lot of  in the delete comments, but no clear policy basis - this is not any kind of "gameguide", but reliably referenced analysis, which is the kind of thing WP should have. The encyclopaedia includes a list of poker hands and a whole series of chess strategy articles; I don't think this one is any closer to GAMECRUFT than they are
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT)

Comment: meets WP:N, with plenty of independent sources that cover the topic in depth found in the article.  Arguments for deletion are mostly  arguments. We have articles on chess strategies because they are notable. This game isn't chess, but it is probably the second most important non-computer game created in the last 50 years.  This isn't a manual or game guide.  It describes (very) basic strategies.  FYI, I've not played this game since about a year after it came out
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:JNN)