Deletion of The eBossWatch Worst Bosses List

Comment: Fails the notability criteria of , which sets out what is needed for a website to be considered notable.  In short, the policy requires the website's content to have been "''the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself...''"  the policy specifically mentions that press releases, advertising and newspaper articles that merely mention the website are not considered "non-trivial".  Social networking sites and blogs are not "published works".  If the website hasn't been subject of such published works, it can still be notable if it a) has won a notable award or b) it is distributed by a respected, independent medium independent of its creators.  Social networking sites and blogs are specifically excluded from the last criteria.  This website does not pass any of the three notability limbs of 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB)

Comment: Not only based on notability, but |BLP concerns. Whatever these people did to be named a 'worst boss', it doesn't really assert that they deserved it unless they went through a legal due process and could be completely made up. As for the references above, they didn't lead the news, they were just talked about in short bursts to fill an empty one-minute timeslot and get in a happy talk one liner, hardly sealing notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP)