User talk:The Audient Void

November 2007

Your recent edit to International Journal of Comic Art (diff) was reverted by an automated bot. You have been identified as a new user or a logged out editor using a hosting or shared IP address to add email addresses/phone numbers or YouTube/Imageshack/Photobucket/Flickr or related links to a non-talk page. You can restore any other content by editing the page and re-adding that content. The links can be reviewed and restored by established users. Thank you for contributing! // VoABot II (talk) 23:32, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hope for the Flowers

A tag has been placed on Hope for the Flowers requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears 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.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Coppertwig (talk) 00:00, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. Before putting the speedy-delete tag, I did a google search to try to figure out whether the book had any special notability. I guess I wasn't thorough enough. All I found were a couple of online book reviews, which didn't seem enough. Amazon is supposed to have ratings of how many copies of a book have been sold, but I couldn't find it -- do you know how to find that? Anyway, I put on the speedy-delete tag, but it was someone else (an administrator) who actually deleted the page, and I guess I was hoping they would maybe do some checking too. Many pages are deleted very quickly. Many others go through an articles-for-deletion (AfD) process that takes about 5 days to decide whether to delete them. I didn't invent the whole system. When I first joined Wikipedia I created one or two pages that were deleted without me being warned at all. Anyway, for future reference, it's a good idea when you create a page to right away include something that shows why the topic is notable. I won't put any delete tags on that page again (though I don't know whether anybody else will). Good luck -- it looks like a nice book. --Coppertwig (talk) 00:24, 24 November 2007 (UTC) See also Wikipedia:Notability (books) -- according to which maybe it shouldn't have been speedy-deleted. Sorry again. I'm relatively new at the speedy-tagging thing. Anyway, on that page you can find criteria to try to satisfy demonstrate, to keep the page from being deleted. --Coppertwig (talk) 00:29, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Don't worry about it. It's a learning process for both of us. --Coppertwig (talk) 00:39, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Peggy Kamuf

Somebody nominated Peggy Kamuf for speedy deletion. I have changed that to proposed deletion to provide a few extra days. If more details can be added to the article soon, that may help prevent it from being deleted. - Jehochman ^Talk 03:31, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Peggy Kamuf

A tag has been placed on Peggy Kamuf requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears 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.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Evb-wiki (talk) 03:35, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Peggy Kamuf

Peggy Kamuf, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Peggy Kamuf satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peggy Kamuf and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Peggy Kamuf during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Jmlk 1 7 04:14, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Marion Frances Chevalier

Marion Frances Chevalier, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Marion Frances Chevalier satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marion Frances Chevalier and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Marion Frances Chevalier during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Jmlk 1 7 04:17, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, we must insist that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Jmlk 1 7 04:21, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm

[1] You know, just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them wrong. Please stop adding useless comments to the AFD. Jmlk 1 7 05:12, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The entire AfD is utterly idiotic - Kamuf is one of the most self-evidently notable article topics I can think of. To declare otherwise shows an utter lack of either effort or ability at researching academic topics. The Audient Void (talk) 05:13, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TAV - I realize it's frustrating to create articles on academics & scientists and have people slap them with delete & non-notability tags immediately. I've had the experience myself and it made me get pretty snippy too! The problem is that there is, in fact, a lot of junk added to WP all the time, so some editors get in the habit of patrolling all new articles with a very jaundiced eye. This includes sometimes very unsophisticated and young (but trying to be helpful) "recent-edit-patrollers" who are oftentimes college students or even younger, who are really, earnestly, trying to do right by the encyclopedia but just simply don't have the ability to evaluate yet. For these, I try to spell out very clearly at the top "X is notable for ...", and I frequently create an "Awards" section and bullet various awards below. In general, I also write a fairly lengthy "stub" on preview or on my own computer before saving it. I realize you did several of those things for at least one of the articles that hit AFD recently, but the more you can flesh it out before you submit it, the better you are able to avoid these incredibly annoying and over-hasty delete nominations.
I hope you'll keep contributing. In my opinion, WP is particularly weak in the area of continental philosophy and the humanities more broadly -- it's a systemic bias towards science & engineering topics, I believe, that stems from the broad make-up of the contributor base. And of course, as you pointed out, there are biases against any information that is from the pre-Internet era. Luckily academic-oriented contributors have become better organized lately to help counterbalance these systemic biases.

I also noticed that you had done an article for the book Hope for the Flowers; older notable books, too, are highly under-represented, so please keep at it! If you have any problems with over-hasty deletions, please try to be as charitable as possible and feel free to hit me up for help.

Cheers, Lquilter (talk) 15:24, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Avatar (video games)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Avatar (video games), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Avatar (video games). Thank you. Arx Fortis (talk) 05:51, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:King Graham.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:King Graham.gif. 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. BJBot (talk) 01:36, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:King Graham

Hello, The Audient Void. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:King Graham, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 08:45, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:King Graham

Hello, The Audient Void. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "King Graham".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. 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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:36, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]