User talk:Demonstrative2627

A tag has been placed on D. Mikels, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems 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 Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add  on the top of the page (below the existing db tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the 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. CobaltBlueTony 17:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

The article on Mr. Mikels cites no sources to show his notability. The books are all self-published and have Amazon rankings in the 1 millions. You aren't even posting his first name, for heaven's sake. The 2004 local award is not enough to establish his notability. Also, given that you're helping promote his books through website design, see Conflict of interest. NawlinWiki 22:14, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to create inappropriate pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. NawlinWiki 22:46, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Yikes, instead of using such an uncivil tone, Demonstrative2627, you could actually post the sources you're referring to. Leebo 86 23:12, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * About the comparable articles you found: Inclusion is not an indicator of notability, quality, or validity. Just because an article like yours exists doesn't lend any credibility to yours (or relieve you of the duty of providing sources). Leebo 86 16:05, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I removed your reference to Wikipedia in the blurb about D. Mikels as a notable resident of Woodward, Oklahoma‎. You can't make references to the encyclopedia within the articles. Anyway, are you going to share your sources to establish notability, or even share the articles of the friends of D. Mikels? Leebo 86 16:11, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The sources I'm referring to are for establishing notability according to WP:BIO. Amazon.com reviews don't establish notability. I was under the assumption, based on your argumentative tone with NawlinWiki, that these sources to establish notability did in fact exist. Please link me to the reviews or commentary on D. Mikels that have been published by reliable sources in a non-trivial manner (blurbs are not enough). Thanks. Leebo 86 17:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Your edit to User_talk:NawlinWiki/Archive_8
You might not have noticed, but you posted your reply to an archived talk page belonging to NawlinWiki. It's recommended that archived talk pages, user talk pages, etc., stay as they are. If you have an issue to bring up that is on the archived page, please go ahead and start a new topic on the current talk page, referencing the archived page if need be. I understand that you might not have realized that this was the page you posted on, or that this standard existed here, so I'm letting you know now as as courtesy. In the future, though, continuing to edit archive pages can be seen as vandalism; at the very least it makes current discussions confusing. Thanks for understanding, and happy editing! - CobaltBlueTony 18:26, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Huh?
My gosh. Archived pages. Talk pages. I totally don't understand, and all the "rules" and "requirements" here are thoroughly and totally confusing. Sorry, but you lost me.

Demonstrative2627 19:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * It takes a while to catch on, and even longer to catch up, if you're looking to be a frequent and prolific contributor. Don't worry, there's plenty of stuff I still don't understand.  I'm going to replace my own welcome message above with one that has a good template of starter reading for you.  Just read up on stuff you want to know about first; don't be concerned that you have to know all of it before doing anything else.  Trial and error is the best teacher here.  Happy editing! - CobaltBlueTony 20:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)