Deletion of Sensible Erection

Comment: I have a conflict of interest as a member, so I won't be participating in the straw poll, but I'll point out some relevant information.  As per Rankiri,  is the most relevant guideline here.  Calling this article  is completely ridiculous, suggesting a misunderstanding of the guideline.   isn't relevant because it only requires more than primary sources when claims are contentious.  As a member for six years, the only notability that I've heard of would be: occasional showcasing on the NZ Web Awards, the SERPG project by unassociated member Brass, and close ties with Hard from Sexy Losers and other semi notable webmasters of NSFW sites
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB||WP:SPAM||WP:V)

Comment: per . http://www.google.com/search?safe=offq=%22Sensible+Erection%22+weblog+OR+blog+OR+serpg+OR+sensibleerection Google Web shows no apparent signs of notability. No results on http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=%22Sensible+Erection%22&cf=all Google News. The article's leading paragraph is written in an overly promotional tone and most of its content seems unverifiablehttp://www.google.com/search?safe=off&q=%22Sensible+Erection%22+%22Saint_Marck%22+OR+%22teh+matt%22
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB)

Comment: Nothing but 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Spam (WP:SPAM)