User talk:Alicefurnier

June 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Dr. Gangrene has been reverted. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://www.youtube.com/user/drgangrene. 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 and therefore probably should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file. 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) 13:31, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Dr. Gangrene do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://www.myspace.com/spookhand. 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) 13:48, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Sourcing for the awards
Hey, just sort of throwing my two cents in here. Establishing notability for awards is really difficult and sometimes it can be near impossible, if the awards are fairly niche. In any case, here's what can usually be used to establish notability for an award:


 * RS that report on the awards. AICN is an example of this.
 * RS that extensively mention the awards.
 * RS that list award results.

These typically cannot be used:


 * Articles that are about the award winners rather than the awards. These are ones where the award is only briefly mentioned in relation to the award winner. The tricky part is that sometimes you'll get articles that are written specifically because the person/film won an award, however these are almost never seen as usable. I think that part of that centers on the fact that these articles usually tend to be local pieces.
 * Press releases. Award result pages like this are usable, but things like this are not.
 * Primary sources can't be used. This means that if the source is written by someone involved with the awards, a publication that has received an award or employs someone that has won an award, or anything that would fall under WP:PRIMARY, it cannot show notability. The Rue Morgue article would fall under this category.
 * Self-published and blog-type sources cannot be used to establish notability except in very specific circumstances. Zombo's Closet and Church of Halloween would likely be considered SPS.

Unfortunately there tend to be more "can't use" than "can be used" in this scenario. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  04:53, 21 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the help! I'm still trying to figure out Wikipedia, and appreciate the help! Alicefurnier (talk) 18:42, 22 June 2016 (UTC)