Atimeman444

October 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not replace pages with blank content, as you did with this edit to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Promid, as this is confusing to readers. The page's content has been restored for now. If there is a problem with the page, it should be edited or reverted to a previous version if possible; if you think the page should be removed entirely, see further information. Thank you. Mephistophelian (contact) 23:05, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ElKevbo (talk) 23:06, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. – Connormah (talk) 23:24, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. Your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. – Connormah (talk) 02:09, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Offering advice

The article was tagged for deletion because you restarted it seventeen minutes after it was deleted despite a closed debate with consensus as delete. I was one of the voters at the debate and I agree with the deletion because there aren't any significant and reliable sources to support an appropriate article. Adding Amazon and iTunes are not significant to establish notability, any artist can have an iTunes or Amazon page but they need to indicate their significance to have a Wikipedia article. What would help the article go through properly and be accepted would be to add significant sources such as news coverage, but alas I found none and thus voted delete. I strongly suggest visiting the welcome message that you removed earlier and learn how to properly edit Wikipedia. If not and you continue blanking and replacing pages with other content, your block will be extended to indefinite. You appear to have good intentions but you must learn how Wikipedia works and what establishes notability.

Additionally, you claimed that Tgeairn and Qworty were attacking you, but quite the contrary, they were not. They were only tagging the article as G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, "page that was previously deleted via a deletion discussion, is substantially identical to the deleted version, and any changes do not address the reasons for which the material was deleted". Please note that removing the speedy tag while it is displayed will not save the article and may cause administrators to delete the page quicker as a result of your disruptive editing. As mentioned at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Promid, closed debates must never to be edited as it is an archived debate and, with this case, there was clear consensus that Promid was not notable. If you want third-party opinions, please take your concerns to Wikipedia:Deletion review.

If you need additional help, as mentioned, please visit your welcome message, or contact me at my talk page. SwisterTwister talk 02:23, 10 October 2012 (UTC)