User talk:Jenny Blaze

Speedy deletion of The Ex Box Boys
A tag has been placed on The Ex Box Boys requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. TubularWorld (talk) 11:45, 26 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I disagree, and have removed that nomination. The article needs massive work, though.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 11:47, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

November 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page The Ex Box Boys has been reverted. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam 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. The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): rule: '\byoutube\.com' (link(s): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6WVQ2iyke0). If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. an image or 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 the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, or similar site, then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).

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. 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) 11:54, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

You are obviously working hard
The Ex Box Boys seem to me to be a borderline notable band under WP's guidelines. The article is in real danger of being proposed for deletion under those guidelines. It may be of use for you to take a pause in order to do oyur best with the article. Reading the following may help, because creating a whole article as your first contribution is a tough task.:

Thoughts that may help a new editor
This is an essay, intended for new editors, to help them to understand things at Wikipedia.

If you are to have an enjoyable time here adding articles and editing articles you need to understand how the place works. It doesn't matter about how it, perhaps, ought to work, nor about how you want it to work. What matters is how it works. Once you understand this then you will be able to add new articles to your heart's content, confident that they will survive.

I'm afraid this means a bit of reading for you. Look at What Wikipedia is not first. Look especially at Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Once you understand this then you have the entire trick to it.

It means that just adding a new article is insufficient. Wikipedia does require some work from its contributors. Creating an article with minimal information, providing no other citations, and doing no other work is doomed to failure.

To create a successful article there really should be:
 * notability of the topic that is the subject matter of the article. This is non-negotiable.  Read Notability.
 * citations to the topic from reliable sources. Check the definition of reliable sources
 * wikilinks to other articles. An article that is a dead end is sometimes reasonable, but usually there are useful places to link to. Check that the destination is the article you expect, do not just create a wikilink and hope for the best.
 * wikilinks to the article you have created from other articles. This means that the article is not "orphaned" and that others will find it.
 * inclusion of the article in the most relevant category (or categories). Read Categorization.
 * If a short article, deploy Stub in the article, or, better, deploy the best possible stub tag. Read Stub.

One very important thing is to "let go" once you have posted the article. The only time it is "yours" is when it's in your head. The moment you place it on Wikipedia it becomes "everyone's" Letting go of your baby is hard. Read Ownership of articles.

Doing these things, even imperfectly, means that others are likely to be kindly disposed to the new article, and, if it is about a notable topic, likely to expand it. Even if they do not expand it the survival of the article is enhanced because it is likely to be suitable for inclusion in the encyclopaedia. This is because it is a useful article since it gives information. It is insufficient for an article simply to exist, it must have value.

Things "ought to have articles here." I hope you understand that every editor here thinks that things ought to have articles here, too, even those who propose articles for deletion. There must, though, be initial article quality. That initial article may be very short, but, even in extreme brevity, must meet the guidelines, and must have the building blocks from which it may be expanded alongside genuine and verifiable notability. Read Verifiability.

If those building blocks are not present and the article is not about a notable thing, and has no verifiability from reliable sources then the article has no value to anyone, however well-written it is. Read No original research.

I truly hope this helps you understand how to start to create good articles and enjoy being here. You may have had a baptism of fire and learnt that it is not a gentle place. Working within the rules can be rewarding. Trying to push the envelope always fails.

These are my thoughts. You may disagree, so may others. That's fine, that is part of what Wikipedia creates - we work together. If you disagree, please let me know by using User talk:Timtrent/A good article and we can discuss it. --Fiddle Faddle (talk) 18:24, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added 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 for advertising or promotion. Since 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 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 unwanted links and spam 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. The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): rule: '\bmyspace\.com' (link(s): http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=40669761). If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, or similar site, then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).

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. 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) 15:21, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

I cannot establish notability for The Ex Box Boys
I'm going to wait a short while to allow you to do so, but, unless you can, I am going to hold the article up for a consensus to be formed about it. In the intervening period other editors may do this anyway.

The more I look at the article the more certain I am that, unless you establish the notability fast, it will be deleted.

What I suggest most strongly is that you look for reliable sources in print or online media and use a template such as cite web to and the structure to insert these references in the article at the points where facts need to be cited. I'm going to tag a few such points to show you were, in my opinion, citations are required. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 08:08, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of The Ex Box Boys
I have nominated The Ex Box Boys, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/The Ex Box Boys. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 00:07, 29 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry, Jenny, but sufficient time has elapsed in my view. This process may actually save the article in a paradoxical way, but it will be changed radically by other editors if it does.  Fiddle Faddle (talk) 00:13, 29 November 2008 (UTC)