User talk:Golgahtroll

Welcome!

Hello, Golgahtroll, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! JohnCD (talk) 20:05, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

Spiral Architect
Welcome, again. Your username caused alarm to a "bot" (automatic system) because in Wikipedia jargon a "troll" is someone whose aim is to cause trouble and disruption, and some of them boast of that in their usernames. However I have noted on the bot's report that you are Norwegian and that in Norway trolls have a less malign significance, so that should not be a problem.

That led me to see your note to NuclearWarfare, and as he is on a break at present I am answering for him.

As the Spiral Architect article was deleted under the WP:Proposed deletion process, it is automatically restored on request. However, I will notify user, who PRODded it, in case he wishes to nominate it under the WP:Articles for deletion process, which would start a debate lasting seven days, to which you would be welcome to contribute. The concern quoted in the PROD nomination was: "No demonstration of notability (see WP:MUSIC). If references exist that can prove notability please add them. They do not have to be in English but they do have to meet the reliable sources criteria. Without independent references this article is also unverifiable for accuracy." The only reference in the article at present is the group's own website: to satisfy Wikipedia's notability requirement, it needs to show "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject."

Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:05, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * To let everybody know where I stand on this: I don't propose to send the article into the Articles For Deletion process right away. If somebody cares enough to get this undeleted then it seems only fair to give them a bit of time to try to bring the article up to standard. If the article still remains unreferenced in a few weeks time then I would be more inclined to nominate it for deletion then. I strongly recommend to add a couple of decent reliable references demonstrating notability for the band and corroborating the details in the article. References do not have to be in English, although English is preferable if it is available. Allmusic has a very basic entry for the band and the album. That is not sufficient to prove notability but it provides some verifiability. Notability is the tough one. As a band with only one album on what seems to be an indie label, this might not be achievable. I notice that the band has apparently been going for 17 years. If they are notable, there must be some professional reviews or media coverage of the band. I would hate to think that a band could keep going for 17 years without almost anybody noticing. --DanielRigal (talk) 21:26, 27 April 2010 (UTC)