Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shittymorph
This one is borderline but the arguments for deletion appear more cogent. Yes, the articles in CNET constitute significant coverage in a reliable and independent source.  calls for multiple sources of this kind. It may be thought that the host of sources about his participation in the beta testing are enough to satisfy this. I don't think so: they all have largely the same content and are clearly not intellectually independent of each other (which is also called for in ). They also don't meet the bar for significant coverage. In general, the abundance of sources on this one aspect makes me think the article could also fall under . To sum up: the subject fails /
— User:Modussiccandi, 17:44, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:BASIC||WP:ONEEVENT||WP:GNG (Wikipedia:Notability)