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. Tone 22:18, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pokerstrategy.com[edit]

Pokerstrategy.com (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Vanity page featuring self-aggrandizing, false claims, with no significant news or independent reliable source coverage (plenty of their own promo stuff exists tho). It is a poker information site with some traffic, but lags far far behind a similar much more prominent poker information site that was recently deleted at AFD. Another comparison. Blatant, dishonest spam. 2005 (talk) 12:39, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 12:51, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Per above. Obvious spam. Rray (talk) 13:06, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete You gotta know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em...and in this case, we can fold this spammy, unreferenced, non-notable subject matter. Ecoleetage (talk) 13:25, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:05, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete (G11) as processed meat from Hormel. I think pop-up ads can accomplish the same thing here. MuZemike (talk) 16:17, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 22:08, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - just for a change, I'm going to check for News items with something other than google. Nope..., still unnotable. Marasmusine (talk) 11:00, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as advertising and WP:SPAM. Does not seem to be independent reliable sources. --Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 17:31, 10 January 2009 (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.