User talk:NathalieAdaoui

1 Welcome
Hello, NathalieAdaoui, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:
 * Be Bold!
 * Meet other new users
 * Learn from others
 * Play nicely with others
 * Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
 * Tell us about you

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Please sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

We're so glad you're here!  Ankithreya!  12:32, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Satanic sluts
A tag has been placed on Satanic sluts 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 web content, 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 assert 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 web content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Mayalld (talk) 12:49, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

December 2007
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. Mayalld (talk) 12:55, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. MCB (talk) 20:47, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Response from user:

The entry for the all girl online collective, the Satanic Sluts, was deleted by Wikipedia within one hour of its up loading seemingly automatically on the grounds that its inclusion on Wikipedia was unwarranted.

I would contest this for the following reasons:

1 The Satanic Sluts are the subject of a recently published book, ‘Blood & Dishonour’ that was released in the UK in December 2007 and which is released in the USA in February 2008. This publication and the attendant press interest alone make the inclusion of the Satanic Sluts on Wikipedia in the public interest.

2 The Satanic Sluts are the subject of two completed DVD films both which are being released in the UK and USA in 2008. Both of these films will attract comment and review as well as being listed on IMDB and as such warrant being listed on Wikipedia.

3 The creator of the Satanic Sluts, Nigel Wingrove, is already the subject of several valid Wikipedia entries having fought the UK government all the way to the European Court over the banning of his short film ‘Visions of Ecstasy’ on the grounds of blasphemy in 1989, with the ruling banning the film being made in Strasbourg, France in 1996. The writers Salman Rushdie and Fay Weldon spoke in Wingrove’s defence. Consequently any future activities of Wingrove such as the Satanic Sluts attract both media and public interest and further demonstrate the validity of this claim.

4 The Satanic Sluts number nearly 300 young women and are rapidly gaining on the Suicide Girls in terms of both public awareness and popularity particularly given the very strong artist and creative manifesto adhered to the Satanic Sluts as a whole. Given this and the fact that the Satanic Sluts are already featured regularly in magazines from Russia, to Germany to the UK and US, this again demonstrates why they warrant an entry.


 * The entry was NOT delete automatically, we don't do that. The entry was deleted after having been reviewed by two editors (one nominated it for deletion, and the other concurred and deleted it). It was deleted on the grounds that it is not notable.
 * To take your points one at a time;
 * This is an apparently self-published book, with a limited production run. Mention in a book that runs to only 666 copies does not amount to notability per WP:ORG
 * The films haven't even been released yet, and per WP:NOTFILM would not in any case confer notability (an IMDB entry doesn't make a film notable)
 * Nigel Wingrove is not the subject of any Wikipedia articles. He is mentioned in several. Notability is not inherited, so the fact that there are films that he was involved in that are notable does not confer notability on him, and even if he is notable (which may well be the case), that does not confer notability on all his works.
 * Again, you must prove notability. There is absolutely no evidence of any reliable 3rd party source discussing the group. Self publicity doesn't count.
 * Mayalld (talk) 11:34, 14 December 2007 (UTC).

Reply from user: Many thanks for clarifying.