User talk:Joelrgardner

Speedy deletion of Joel Gardner
A tag has been placed on Joel Gardner 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 person or group of people, 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 indicate the subject's importance or significance 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 biographies.

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. --Alinnisawest(talk) 21:41, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Silly
Don't do that again, please. Guy (Help!) 21:48, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't know why a cited source on Wikipedia should be deleted. The sources were from MTV news an obvious cultural source and Washington Post, a respected old relic of print journalism. Now I know lots of people claim to being notable, but independent sources verify my claim or do you think the washington Post publishes un notable things. jeeez