You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

The article Eraversum has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article, which appeared to be about a real person, individual animal, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the notability of the subject may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. NawlinWiki (talk) 13:16, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why deleting of Eraversum?[edit]

Hello,

I would like to ask you to reconsider your decision about deleting of Eraversum article. If you had tried to read it, you would have found out that the article has nothing to do with the A7 rule because it is describing an important and newly published online game I like and I play with many other players which I believe is sufficiently important. The links were included in the under-most part of the article. Sorry for that but I wanted to add formats and other neccessary formal stuff just after the publishing of firt version. y.s. Lord Sirius

I'm sorry, because it looks like an excellent game - but there really is no indication at all as to why the game is notable. Please follow this link for more information about what the Wikipedia definition of notability for websites is. Once the game is notable, there can be an article about it (although it needs to be more neutrally written, but that's easy enough to fix), but the notability has to be there first. Hope this makes sense. --bonadea contributions talk 14:07, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, give me time to go through the link, thanks

Ok, let me explain my attitude and my opinions on this issue. I believe that this game of Czech origin is notiable despite the fact it exists only shortly compared to other games of competition. I would like to emphasize the fact that the massive conglomerate Gameforge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogame, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gameforge) which seems to be the major competition is represented on this encyclopaedia. This would severely disadvantaged, harmed and handicapped our game. Secondly, it is played by quite a lot of players whose number is daily increasing as you might have noticed. Furthermore, its unique setting which is the subject of copyright of the respective owners is being enlarged and enhanced by newly published stories and tales which are based in the world of Eraversum. The Game was also presented at the Fantasy Festival at Chotebor, Czech Republic, where it was representing the area of science fiction and fantasy web browser games. Those are my reasons; I hope you respect the presumptions of innocence and the act of disproving my statements so - lease, tell me your reasons why you do not want to represent Eraversum on Wiki. Y.s. Lord Sirius.

Gosh - ladies and gentlemen - may you tell me why are you constantly deleting my Eraversum page from wiki??? I would like to protest very strongly against the methods the wikiadmin NawlinWiki is using - no communication and totally blind actions. I have stated clearly my arguments and no respond from your side came! This is a scandal!

The thing is, there are no reliable secondary sources for the game's notability. That it has a growing number of players is not in itself a sign of notability, I'm afraid. There has to be coverage in reliable sources that are not associated with the game itself, or with the company that produces it.

As regards the other Wikipedia articles, you mention, OGame and Gameforge, firstly, there is a principle that the existence of another article can't be used to justify the existence of this article. Secondly, from a cursory inspection, both articles appear to have several third-party sources verifying the notability of the subjects. Hope this makes sense. --bonadea contributions talk 17:38, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have been told by the wikiadmins that the article does not contain enough of secondary sources - will you be so kind and give me any empiric example what do you mean by your sentence? Actually no, it does not make any sense, you want me to prove notability of something and at the same time you tell me that there is no way in using of CORPORATE and OFFICIAL sources which seems to be the most notable and thruthful - because logically they seem not to tell lies unlike other possible sources. For me as the wikipedist it is also the easiest way how to write articles by quoting of official sources. I thought that Wiki is a serious encyclopedia but your splendid effort can damage its contents - it is like to compare The New York Times with The Sun. Y.s. Lord Sirius.

There might be a misunderstanding concerning the term "notable", which is used in a rather specific sense in Wikipedia. To quote this page: Wikipedia covers notable topics—those that have been "noticed" to a significant degree by independent sources. A topic is deemed appropriate for inclusion as a standalone article if it complies with WP:NOT and has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. Notability does not directly affect the content of articles, but only their existence. This means that the subject must be covered in independent sources in order for it to have an article. Primary sources, such as a company website, can be used to reference facts in the article, as long as notability is established in secondary sources. --bonadea contributions talk 20:12, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Eraversum[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Eraversum requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. bonadea contributions talk 14:03, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Eraversum[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Eraversum requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. bonadea contributions talk 17:31, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]