User talk:Minddrain

September 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Letters to Liberals has been reverted. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline 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. I removed the following link(s): http://letterstoliberals.blogspot.com/2009/09/911.html, http://letterstoliberals.blogspot.com/2009/09/4457.html (matching the regex rule \bblog(?:cu|fa|harbor|mybrain|post|savy|spot|townhall)?\.com\b). 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. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. 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) 17:35, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Your first article; you might also consider using the Article Wizard. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. De728631 (talk) 19:15, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

The article Letters to Liberals has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article, which appeared to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, 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) 18:20, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Letters to liberals


A tag has been placed on Letters to liberals requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, 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. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's 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 confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia 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. De728631 (talk) 19:13, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Removing Speedy at Letters to liberals
Hi there Minddrain! I saw that you added a hangon tag to a page which you created, Letters to liberals. This is good, but in the process you removed the tag requesting deletion under CSD A7. Even though there is a hangon on the page, the deletion template should remain there. But don't worry, this doesn't mean that the page is going to get deleted. Make sure you edit the talk page of the page nominated for deletion, located at Talk:Letters to liberals, administrators will look at your reason why the page should remain before they decide what to do. Thanks - SDPatrolBot (talk) 19:19, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Your first article; you might also consider using the Article Wizard. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Please read WP:WEB and WP:V. NawlinWiki (talk) 16:58, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Notability
In your e-mail you compare Letters to Liberals with The American Thinker and claim that you "could find nothing in the guidelines that [L2L] violated". Try this: The American Thinker contains six links to unimpeachable sources - how many references did L2L contain? Suggestions: a) get yourself a domain name for the blog - Wikipedians automatically dismiss anything at bolgsopt.com as non-notable and unreliable, b) get the same degree of independent mention as The American Thinker and then, c) raise the matter at deletion review. &mdash; RHaworth  18:57, 6 October 2009 (UTC)