Regeek
Welcome! edit
|
April 2012 edit
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Jägerbomb has been reverted.
Your edit here to Jägerbomb was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sAv_52Vthk) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline. If the information you linked to is indeed in violation of copyright, then such information should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file, or consider linking to the original.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 11:00, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
The article Edubb has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Although this band has music videos, it appears to fail WP:BAND. There seems to be little to no press coverage, and no charted recordings.
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. TeaDrinker (talk) 23:01, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
The band meets the WP:Band guidelines as well as the WP:Song guidelines. I am now confused as to why the contribution remains proposed for deletion. Please revisit the article and kindly advise me of how to proceed. --Regeek (talk) 11:54, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
- The article is no longer proposed for deletion, but rather presented to the community for discussion regarding the viability and appropriateness for inclusion in the encyclopedia. You can find the discussion and participate here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edubb. Best regards, Cindy(talk to me) 13:26, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your response Cindy, the articles page clearly states: This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. The discussion I took part in, but it is not really a discussion, but a forum to vote whether or not to delete. The band meets the WP:Band guidelines as well as the WP:Song guidelines, why would a deletion be considered if the guidelines are met?
- Discussion can only take place if you participate. It is futile to assert notability of the article here on your talk page. Go to the discussion page and present your thoughts there. It is not a forum for voting, but rather a forum to discuss recommendations, based on Wikipedia's deletion policy, specifically relating to notability. Go to the discussion and present "how/why" the subject specifically meets the notability criteria. Any assertions will land on deaf ears if you fail to present the rationale in accordance with the notability guidelines. Good luck. Best regards, Cindy(talk to me) 14:05, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you Cindy I will commence as you suggested then.--Regeek (talk) 14:13, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
- I've gone through and looked at the article in regard to the notability guidelines. Honestly, I do not see how the Whooty article meets the notability criteria for songs. The Edubb article lacks verifiable notability. The only criteria that I see could possibly be met is through placement in national rotation on any major radio or music television network. That said, we would need reliable sources that specifically state as such, to verify the claim. At this point, I would request that the article be userfied to a subpage of your userspace until such time that notability can be verified. Hope this helps. Best regards, Cindy(talk to me) 14:26, 4 May 2012 (UTC)