Deletion of Grand Prix Racing Online

Comment: The fastest way to actually get an article deleted is to spend your time attacking the nominator and/or other !voters. This AfD is '''not a vote''' - it will be the strength of your arguments that determines whether it gets deleted. "You are a disgrace" is not an argument. "You are a competitor" is not an argument. "You are a worthless piece of trash" is not an argument. If you want the article kept, make it meet |notability guidelines, and none of you are doing so. Wikipedia is not intended to be a location to ''promote'' anything, it's an information source about ''notable'' things. Editors who are being solicited and attacking others are playing into the hands of those who have !voted for deletion
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: I can't find significant coverage for this |website
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB)

Comment: The article states that the site has 100,000 users.  This alone (if it could be referenced by an independent, reliable source) could go a long way to establishing notability.  Can any of the major contributors to the article produce a |qualified source to confirm this information is true
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:REF)

Comment: Major concerns regarding edits of talk page regarding this site being a copy of another and being operated by banned users of the first version. All edits with related information were quickly undone. I'm unable to find any resources or anything but most generic information or forum postings on Google. It seems the only reason this article might have survived this long because a speedy delete tag was deleted about a year ago without any given reason; I know they can be objected to by any editor, but preferably with use of {{hangon and under promised good faith they would improve the article... which the removing editor did not do here. Also seems the CSD was put on the talk page by mistake which is another reason it likely survived. I see it also went through an orphan tag but only superficial links were added. There are many issues here in general, as it still lacks any outside references or third party citations or signs of notability even if all of those coincidences and possible mistakes are overlooked.  or  as suggested by Joe Chill seem to fit, as this appears to be little more than a listing of a fan-based sports site without external recognition
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:DIRECTORY||WP:WEB)

Comment: No reliable sources establishing  notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB)