Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pixel Defenders Puzzle

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn, more aware of what's considered a reliable source now. Will start working on rewriting the page. (non-admin closure) pinktoebeans ^(talk) 17:56, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pixel Defenders Puzzle

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Pixel Defenders Puzzle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSOFTWARE, only reference is Metacritic which doesn't link to any reliable sources. Previously PRODed but no improvements have been made since. pinktoebeans ^(talk) 13:49, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. pinktoebeans ^(talk) 13:49, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I don't exactly follow the "Metacritic which doesn't link to any reliable sources" part of this AFD nomination, because it already links to several WP:VG/RS reliable sources, like Digital Spy [1], Slide to Play [2], Touch Arcade [3], Eurogamer [4] and Pocket Gamer [5]. Beyond that, there is some coverage in The Times and The Guardian [6] [7]. Should be enough to meet WP:GNG, which requires multiple reliable sources with a significant coverage of the subject. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 15:39, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Jovanmilic97. Article needs a rewrite regardless. IceWelder [✉] 15:51, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Jovanmilic97, but also in favor of rewriting the article per IceWelder. MarioJump83! 01:25, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as described in this discussion the game has significant coverage in multiple reliable sources so that WP:GNG is passed and deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 03:04, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.