User talk:Wrtiii3644

Notability of Salmonblaster

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Salmonblaster, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Salmonblaster seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Salmonblaster, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 23:02, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Salmonblaster (under various titles) keeps getting deleted because it is an article about a band that does not assert the band's significance or notability. I know that may sound really critical for a band you know and love and think is really cool. To offer some (hopefully) regularity and objectivity to assessing this issue, we have a guideline for deciding whether to include band articles, at Wikipedia:Notability (music). Please take a look at that guideline and let me know if you think your band meets it (and how). You can leave a response here. I'll see it on my watchlist. Cheers!--Chaser - T 01:43, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to ignore our policies by introducing inappropriate pages to Wikipedia, you will be blocked. IrishGuy ^talk 01:46, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Holy Crap, Please stop what I am sitting here reading one persons message and now I get another for ... sake, How about one of you contact me a messenger or something so we can actually speak like normal people and have a conversation that is cohesive and makes sense? Wrtiii3644 01:50, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok Chaser, I read all that so what is the problem? Other than now you all have your backs up against this band and me as well.. I dunno I am very annoyed right now cause this is absolutly silly. Wrtiii3644 01:54, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And Now we are supposed to be discussing this but yet you have already deleted the entire article as I was about to at least save a copy of all my typing.. seriously here guys this is getting pretty f... silly Wrtiii3644 01:56, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a copy at User:Wrtiii3644. Please leave a message here once you've had a chance to compare it to the linked guideline. (btw, I didn't delete anything. You can see who deleted a page by checking it's deletion log; but let's discuss this as you wanted instead of dragging the deleting administrator into it.)--Chaser - T 02:07, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First, you continue to recreate a deleted article. Second, the article was a copyvio of this. Third, the band just isn't notable. IrishGuy ^talk 02:07, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well I don't have any proof to back up the notable part and yes it was from that website I am sorry I did not get into citing it quite yet cause I am still new to all this, still got no idea where I am supposed to find the templates and stuff short of copying them from other places and such, and your idea of non-notable hell you must be blind cause I could list 25 bands that are way less notable and have a wiki page just off the top of my head. I thought this was supposed to be a encyclopedia of sorts anyways Wrtiii3644 02:21, 24 August 2007 (UTC) Wrtiii3644 02:21, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is. That's why we have rules about having verifiable sources to establish notability of material we include here. As to the other bands, see WP:INN. Come back when you have evidence of this group's notability.--Chaser - T 02:23, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Three Chords... One Capo

A tag has been placed on Three Chords... One Capo, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. --Onorem♠Dil 03:06, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When Weeks were Weekends

A tag has been placed on When Weeks were Weekends, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. --Onorem♠Dil 03:08, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Album articles

Please work on establishing notability for the band before creating articles for their albums. You placed a speedy tag on Four Square (band), but you didn't ~~dispute the speedy deletion of this article on its talk page~~ provide reliable sources that verify its notability. There is nothing on that article that asserts notability, and without the band article, there is no chance for the album articles. --Onorem♠Dil 03:12, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, Working on it.. Sorry first time doing this. I guess my main concern is what I can put and can't put due to copyright stuff, I am not a writer by anymeans and even so don't think it should make any difference if I just change the wording some. What exactly do I need to show? Wrtiii3644 03:17, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BAND shows the general criteria for notability.

WP:RS shows what is considered a reliable source to verify notability.

Adding the History section is definitely a good first step. There was nothing at all asserting notability when the entire article consisted of a list of members and a list of albums...

It's also important to remember to write from a neutral point of view. --Onorem♠Dil 03:22, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok So I am trying to look at other band pages and compare to mine and see what I need to put where, but I am not seeing the difference in where other pages are notable and where mine is not? Wrtiii3644 03:28, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Without knowing which bands you are comparing to...

The important thing is to show where reliable 3rd party sources have written about the band. --Onorem♠Dil 03:32, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can we try not deleting this stuff and maybe telling me what the problems are? Like really I apologize that I have never done this before, but maybe I could get a little help from your guys side.. just maybe? Wrtiii3644 03:41, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:6087963.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:6087963.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:34, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Four_Square.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Four_Square.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:58, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Whenweekswereweekends.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Whenweekswereweekends.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 13:45, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of My E.P.

The article My E.P. has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unreferenced article with no indication of notability

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Jax 0677 (talk) 16:16, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]