Deletion of ArticleAlley

Comment: The article does give evidence of notability under , where it states ''"The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself. This criterion includes reliable published works in all forms, such as newspaper and magazine articles, books, television documentaries, websites, and published reports by consumer watchdog organizations."''The Google Books citations, of which there are several, cite ArticleAlley.Com as a source. Each of these books were published by independent sources
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB)

Comment: if the conclusion is delete, I'd recommend a  of the article for
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Userfication (WP:USERFY)

Comment: the article was speedied A7 last week, and 34pin6 had http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Versageek#Are_you_serious.3F commented to the deleting admin.  This was brought back ''after'' a speedy delete.  Forgive me for sounding like I'm not |assuming good faith, but it makes me wonder if there's some |conflict of interest going here
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Assume good faith (WP:AGF||WP:COI)

Comment: Of the three main sections in the article, two are completely unreferenced. Of the few references the article does have, most aren't considered to be |reliable. But mostly, I can't—and nobody else seems to be able to either—find any sources that are ''about'' ArticleAlley
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: No evidence whatsoever of any significant coverage by anything remotely  that I can find. Please see Wikipedia:Search engine test for why Alexa, Google Books and other rankings are irrelevant for this discussion
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)