User talk:Nbirnbach

I'm a Wikipedia newbie, and would like to understand the guidelines. I tried to show how Couplets.com was notable, based on media coverage on Couplets.com that appeared in the Guardian and on NBC's "The Today Show." Yet the entry got deleted. I would think articles in major national and international media would be enough to be notable. Why isn't that enough? As for Zana, that entry was deleted seconds seconds after I hit saved, so I honestly thought I had just made a mistake, and didn't save it correctly. I didn't realize someone had deleted the entry within seconds of having saved it. In fact, the Zana entry was deleted before I was able to contest the tagging; the Couplets.com entry was deleted after I tried contesting its deletion, but no reason (that I could see; if there was a note, please let me know) was given why the entry was deleted despite my trying to support the entry.

Bottom-line: I looked at other entries, and tried to model mine on those, so I don't understand why both of my entries were deleted. The information was neutral and factual, and for Couplets.com, included competitors. Thanks in advance for your help. Nbirnbach 20:39, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Couples.com was put up for deletion by a bot. If you proveide good enough reasoning to keep it, you will be able to keep it. Tiddly Tom 20:40, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I would like to point out that the article was not put up for deletion by a bot. As far as I know, there are no bots (at least not ones I've seen active) that tag articles for speedy deletion. The article was tagged by a user and the bot was merely making notification. --Nick—Contact/Contribs 22:21, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Did you place the 'hangon' tab on the page before it was deleted? Tiddly Tom 20:45, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, and I added information about the Guardian article and the "Today Show" story, but it got deleted anyway. It's no longer on the site. I could provide external links to the Guardian and "Today Show" stories, but didn't because of concern about including external links.Nbirnbach 20:47, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


 * They deffinaly should have been used, as they provided Verifiability for the artical. I can also suggest you contact the people that deleted your artical to ask they why and to get further assisatance. Tiddly Tom 20:49, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

How do I contact the person who tagged my entries for deletion? By the way, the "What to do" page says not to contact the tagger on their talk page. Again, the article was deleted despite citing articles from The Guardian and the "Today Show."

Apparently, someone deleted the article because "(and the only contributor was 'Nbirnba)." Well, of course I was the only contributor; the article was deleted moments after I posted it. No one else had time to add to it.
 * You can do this by looking in the page history. Ds.mt 17:28, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Again, the article was deleted so quickly, I thought I had made a mistake. How do I get the 3R removed from my talk page? [User:Nbirnbach|Nbirnbach]] 01:24, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * If you have questions about the deletion, it would do you better to get in contact with the administrator who actually deleted the article, not the user who tagged the article for deletion. In the deletion log it will specify which administrator performed the deletion. I can't seem to find the deletion log entry where you say the only reason is "and the only contributor was Nbirnba". I doubt that was the only deletion reason provided. The software automatically adds that to the end of the administrator's deletion reason if only one person has made edits to the article being deleted. What's important is the part of the reason before that. If you could provide me with a link to the deletion log I should be able to provide more assistance. Again, for specific information on why the article was deleted, contact the administrator listed in the deletion log. Even if they don't remember deleting the article, they have the ability to review the deleted content to refresh their memory.
 * As for the 3RR warning, it is considered controversial to remove legitimate warnings from your talk page. You should review the three-revert rule and make sure that you do not engage in edit wars in the future. --Nick—Contact/Contribs 06:29, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

The article was deleted by Carlossuarez46. You should ask him, why the article was deleted and how you can avoid this.--Thw1309 06:39, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

How can I find out who keeps tagging for deletion the entry for Kim France?Nbirnbach 17:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Is it okay for me to clean up this page by deleting old threads? Nbirnbach 16:00, 14 August 2007 (UTC)


 * You can check article history to see who is adding maintenance tags to articles. For your talk page, it's generally preferred to archive old discussions rather than get rid of them completely. Hope this helps! Hers fold  (t/a/c) 16:02, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on ZANA Network, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add  on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. -- Finngall  talk  18:19, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

The article ZANA Network has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, 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 assert notability 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 bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. NawlinWiki 18:43, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policy for further explanations. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. -- Finngall  talk  18:50, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

3RR
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. --ElKevbo 18:53, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you insert a spam link, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted as well, preventing anyone from linking to them from any site that uses the MediaWiki spam blacklist, which includes all of Wikimedia and Wikipedia. -- Finngall  talk  19:19, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Notability of Couplets.com
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Couplets.com, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Couplets.com is an article about a certain website, blog, forum, or other web content that does not assert the importance or significance of that web location. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 7 under Articles, as well as notability guidelines for websites. Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Couplets.com, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 19:46, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Kim France, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or 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.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, 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 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. Mickthefish 12:57, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Adam Moss, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or 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.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, 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 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. 69.123.113.89 16:58, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Edits to Truthiness
Your grammatical edits to Truthiness were incorrect per our Manual of Style. Please don't use the American style quotation grammar - punctuation goes outside of quotation marks on Wikipedia. violet/riga (t) 07:35, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

COI
Hello, Nbirnbach. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:


 * avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the request edit template);
 * disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
 * avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
 * do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Bueller 007 (talk) 20:53, 31 August 2018 (UTC)