The result was delete. The main contention here is whether the one reliable source satisfies the general notability guideline. As has been argued by those voting delete, multiple sources are required; though there are some special cases where one source is enough, no-one has provided any reason that one should be enough in this case. Thus, the consensus is to delete the article, according to the GNG. ItsZippy ( talk • contributions) 19:28, 14 July 2012 (UTC) reply
This article is about a paper puzzle, which is also implemented as a computer game (Facebook app) which lacks the multiple significant coverage in independent reliable sources needed to establish notability. Of the article's sources, lordwordworm.com is a primary source, and reddit and digg are not reliable sources. This leaves a Gamasutra blog post which is from the inventor of the game (not independent), and a CityNews, a local Canberra magazine which provides coverage about the game and company. This is insufficient to establish inclusion in Wikipedia. Whpq ( talk) 13:38, 22 June 2012 (UTC) reply
While I'm sure you have an explanation for missing that text on several passes over the page, what's more germane is that this is exactly the sort of situation leading to why WP:COI exists. Ravenswing 03:41, 9 July 2012 (UTC) reply