Deletion of Quackpotwatch

Comment: Fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB)

Comment: Fails  miserably. Main content of website is conspiracy theories and libelous statements. No documentation. Admits under http://www.casewatch.org/depos/bolen.pdf deposition his vicious lies are just "euphemism." No evidence of reliability or credibility. Nothing but propaganda|opinions prefaced with "I believe" and "I think
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB)

Comment: Fails . The existence of a feud (I'm loathe to call this a "controversy") does not necessarily make a website notable
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB)

Comment: fails . Plenty of Ghits, but they seem to mostly be attacking (or praising) the subject. I couldn't find any independent "non-trivial published works," signs that it "has won a well known and independent award," or any indication that content is "distributed via a site which is both well known and independent of the creators." Not-notable. Also, I'm suspicious of how all but one of the sources cited come from the same place. And all but one of the external links in this article come from the same two people. This seems to be a non-notable feud of narrow scope. Not encyclopedic
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB)

Comment: Fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB)

Comment: Fails  as well as being a fork from quackwatch. Would be better to merge some of it back into quackwatch page
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB)