Deletion of Gore: Ultimate Soldier

Comment: mdash; questionable  indeed, but there's a possibility it could be improved
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/448613.asp 36 reviews on Game Rankings, http://uk.gamespot.com/pc/action/goreultimatesoldier/news.html?mode=all&om_act=convert&om_clk=newsfeatures&tag=newsfeatures;header;more 22 reviews on Metacritic. Even accounting for overlap, that's more than enough to create a solid reception section. Articles provided by http://uk.gamespot.com/pc/action/goreultimatesoldier/news.html?mode=all&om_act=convert&om_clk=newsfeatures&tag=newsfeatures;header;more GameSpot and http://uk.pc.ign.com/objects/017/017216_articles.html IGN show enough evidence to create a development section. The subject easily meets notability requirements. Just because the article is currently underdeveloped is not a reason to bring it to AfD, |consider its potential, not its current state. I'd hardly consider the article "extensive", its barely off stub levels, and the one reference it does have in the article is a reliable source
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Potential, not just current state (WP:POTENTIAL)