Deletion of Motley Moose

Comment: fails the |notability guidelines.  For those of you new to Wikipedia, *COUGH*canvassing*COUGH*, topics are usually considered appropriate for an article if they have been written about in a non-trivial manner by multiple |reliable sources, independant of the subject.  This aricle fails the notability guidelines because, while information can be found on the subject's existance, the subject's notability hasn't been proven.  Not every blog can be written about on Wikipedia.  The sources have to be ''about'' the blog itself, they can't merely mention it or refer to it.  There has to be in-depth discussion of the blog, which hasn't happened yet
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:RS)

Comment: An interesting one, this, as it seems to be a faction of one politics blog taking their ball elsewhere. Whilst I'm conviced of the notability of Peter Jukes|the blog's creator and of MyDD|its birthplace, I'm not so sure that this is really the sum of those parts. I'm concerned that this doesn't really |describe the site in an encyclopedic manner, offering ''detail on a website's achievements, impact or historical significance'' (my italics), rather falling back on one link, which is more-or-less the author's poltical agenda. The link that really argues best for inclusion is http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/11/215330/858/425/595547 this one, which gives importance to the site. However, on its own it isn't really sufficient. I'll try to find more, but the case is shakey without more support of its significance. As an aside, please can we keep this discussion |civil (having read the talk page of this AFD)? Remember this AFD is not a political huddle, merely discussion of an article about one
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB||WP:civil)

Comment: no comment on the notability of the article itself, but there are a lot of comments misunderstanding , some from the same editors. For the sake of the closing admin, you can probably leave that issue now
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS)