Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anime Pulse
Nom's attempt to find independent sourcing here seems to have been sufficiently genuine and broad enough that we can safely say that, for the moment, all that exists to support the notability argument is the award, which can truly be utilized to establish notability standing alone: the purpose of SNGs is to provide insight on where we should exercise the benefit of caution when deciding how much weight to give a limited number of existing reliable sources, or to postpone procedural deletions on the presumption that sourcing is just difficult to find or in active development.  But SNGs cannot completely obviate the need for independent, in depth coverage in reliable sources as required under GNG and other relevant policies: at the end of the day one still needs to prove the existence of this coverage (and at a certain degree of weight) in order to satisfy the notability burden: the front line SNG standards can only slightly nuance this reading where sources exist, and even then it is not appropriate to wait forever for such speculative RS to manifest.  Here, the nom's work (and for what it's worth, the thimble's full of independent research I did as well) have suggested nothing is out there to change the notability assessment at this time, and the arguments that pending industry awards might change that dips too much into .  Delete for the present time, pending the possibility of future sourcing
— User:Snow, 02:35, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:CRYSTAL (Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not)