User talk:Will Larter

July 2010

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give Son of gutbucket a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. Steamroller Assault (talk) 23:51, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Son of Gutbucket

The article Son of Gutbucket has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable comp

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:20, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've just seen your message at Help:Edit summary/feedback. I'm sorry you've found the help pages confusing - yes, there's a lot of detail there, and it is easy to get lost. I think the message "Non-notable comp" is an abbreviation for "This is just a compilation album, and doesn't deserve an entry in the encyclopedia". Wikipedia doesn't aim to have an article on every album, only those that are noteworthy in some way. The criteria for inclusion are at Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Albums, singles and songs. If you can edit the article to show that the album meets these criteria, then please do so, and remove the four-line "Proposed deletion" notice from the top. If you need a better explanation than this, then I suggest you ask at User talk:Koavf, since it was that editor who added the notice. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:32, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly As John of Reading said above, this article does not meet the notability requirements for music-related articles. These guidelines do not explicitly mention compilation/sampler albums, but the principle is the same: you need to have significant third-party coverage. Failing that, unsourced articles that do not assert notability have to be deleted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:26, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sources Every article on Wikipedia needs to be notable. To establish notability, it needs to be asserted in the article (e.g. "X was the president of France" or "Y sold seven million copies" or "Z has the world record in long jump") and that assertion has to be substantiated by sources. These sources have to be verifiable and credible. WP:ALBUM maintains some resources for finding album reviews (although I would reckon that they will not be helpful in this instance.) Articles within Wikipedia should link to one another (see WP:ORPHAN), but Wikipedia does not publish original research; therefore, any claim on Wikipedia should have a third-party source (that is, not the subject of the article itself, nor Wikipedia) that substantiates it. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. If you're still unclear on a Wikipedia policy or guideline, see WP:HELP. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:21, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Son of Gutbucket for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Son of Gutbucket is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Son of Gutbucket until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:45, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]