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 Delete Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:42, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Police inspector blog (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

The article is borderline spam and judging from the username of the creator, there's a strong suspicion of conflict of interest. Assertions about the importance and popularity of the blog are unreferenced and while the blog may or may not be notable enough for inclusion, the article in its current state is unacceptable. Pichpich (talk) 15:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 16:04, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - self-referenced, non-notable stub about a blog. Bearian (talk) 19:41, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• delete It may have many readers but I can't find any reliable sources talking about it so fails WP:WEB. JoshuaZ (talk) 19:29, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Not notable stub about a blog.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 19:55, 21 February 2008 (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.