Mercunium

March 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to PV, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot.

• Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
• Cluebot produces very few false positives, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been detected as unconstructive, please report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• The following is the log entry regarding this warning: PV was changed by Mercunium (u) (t) making a minor change with obscenities on 2010-03-23T13:24:13+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 13:24, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Per vaginam

Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, Per vaginam. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as yourself. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Vaginal bleeding. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will to continue helping improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Vaginal bleeding - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Megablix (talk) 13:35, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello. Per the notice you received above, a tag had been placed on Per vaginam requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. Please note that after review, I have declined the deletion request on the basis that the page appears to be a disambiguation page rather than a duplicate of the topic covered in the other article, so you do not need to worry about this article being speedily deleted, and there is no longer any need to place the template {{hangon}} in the article. Please note that speedy deletion is only one of three deletion processes on Wikipedia; my decline does not prevent users from invoking the separate, longer term deletion methods of proposed deletion or bringing the article to articles for deletion. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. --RL0919 (talk) 23:50, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of BBSlink

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

No evidence of notability whatsoever. Subject fails WP:PRODUCT and WP:GNG. Sources fail WP:RS. Google yielded nothing even remotely suggesting encyclopedic notability. The only reason this is not being tagged for Speedy Delete is because CSD A-7 does not apply to products.

While all constructive 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. Ad Orientem (talk) 06:05, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

BBSlink

I saw you removed the PROD notice. Unfortunately I'm not seeing any evidence of notability and am strongly inclined to send the article to AfD. If you have some RS sources that I missed (always a possibility) feel free to let me know. I will hold off on the AfD nomination for a day. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:57, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of BBSlink for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article BBSlink 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/BBSlink 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Boleyn (talk) 09:57, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:BBSlink Logo.gif

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BBSlink Logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:26, 12 April 2015 (UTC)