Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. Sputnik's Society Pages (2nd nomination)
per nom.  I recommend that Cymbelmineer review ,  and  to gain a better understanding of what constitutes a reliable, independent, published source which discusses the subject in significant detail.  Links to other websites don't qualify.  The website in question doesn't qualify.  A website of this "Dr. Sputnik" doesn't qualify.  To quote: "Questionable sources are those with a poor reputation for checking the facts, or with no editorial oversight. Such sources include websites and publications expressing views that are widely acknowledged as extremist, or promotional in nature, or which rely heavily on rumors and personal opinions. Questionable sources are generally unsuitable for citing contentious claims about third parties, which includes claims against institutions, persons living or dead, as well as more ill-defined entities. The proper uses of a questionable source are very limited
— User:Ravenswing, 20:22, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:RS||WP:WEB||WP:V (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)