User talk:Johnthunder

The article Rewpart gap has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it did 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 indicate the notability of the subject may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. NawlinWiki (talk) 18:06, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Rewpart gap
A tag has been placed on Rewpart gap, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (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. ninety:one 18:48, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Rewpart, continued
Keith,

Thanks for your note. The problem is that Wikipedia's guidelines require that articles be supported by reliable independent sources showing that the topic in question has been acknowledged as notable by someone other than Wikipedia. So, even though your Kindle novel sounds innovative, it would be impermissible bootstrapping for you to invent a concept, mention it in your e-book with a Wikipedia link, and then have a Wikipedia article on the concept for the purpose of linking to it from your book. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 19:33, 23 March 2008 (UTC)