User talk:Mementix

Your submission at Articles for creation: TEMA indicator (June 23)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Anarchyte was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:TEMA indicator and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

--Anar chyte 08:34, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Mementix, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! --Anar chyte 08:34, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:TEMA indicator concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:TEMA indicator, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:36, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:TEMA indicator

Hello, Mementix. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "TEMA indicator".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 23:50, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Backtrader

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

no indication of meeting notability guidelines. Google searches not finding any significant coverage in independent sources.

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. noq (talk) 11:13, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

hey

if BT is so great, you should have included sources saying so. If we include everything that somebody says is great without requiring any proof, we'll be flooded with spam and then the only ones who'll ever bother with wikipedia again will be automated spambots, because nobody will bother reading something that everyone knows is flooded with spam. Tragedy of the commons.

If you've got proof of BT's notability, you should damn well include it. If you don't have any proof, then you shouldn't complain when it gets removed. And know what 'notability' means.

And if you want to pick out other articles which you believe need to be removed, go right ahead. You can tag them for deletion; that'd be very helpful! Thanks! DS (talk) 15:10, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retired

Following the use of inappropriate language, false assumptions and incorrect statements given above by DS (talk)

I apologize for having hurt your feelings with my inappropriate use of the "d" word. DS (talk) 23:17, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]