User talk:Rctheaet

Riese the Series

 * With reference to the "hangon" tag you applied to the above-captioned article, I've examined the sources you've provided. Unfortunately, what you term "news sources" are not what Wikipedia calls reliable sources.  As a general rule, sources to bolster the notability of a topic are required to be demonstrably expert, in the sense that they have to be subject to some sort of editorial oversight or be themselves notable.  Blogs and forums, for the most part, usually don't qualify, and I don't see anything here that does qualify.  (By the way, supporting material on the talk page isn't usually considered when assessing articles; it has to be part of the article.)
 * Also as a general rule, Wikipedia articles are about topics that are already notable because of their existence, not because of things that haven't happened yet. I gather from the article that this series has not actually been viewed by the public yet; that would make it nearly impossible for there to be sufficient notability for this to be the subject of an article.  Wikipedia is not a crystal ball; we have no way of knowing if something is going to be notable or not until it actually happens.  Until the series actually is available to the public, the material here is pretty much just advertising, and that's not permitted under Wikipedia policies.
 * I suggest that you hold off on this article until the programme actually achieves enough in the way of reliable sources to be the subject of a Wikipedia article; there is no barrier to your remaking the article at that point. For some general background information about what qualifies as reliable sources, you can follow the link earlier in this paragraph, or you can look at WP:Your first article and WP:Why was my article deleted?  You can also leave me a note if those sources don't provide information that you require.  Accounting4Taste: talk 17:55, 23 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, obviously I failed to be clear. I never doubted the existence of the subject; what is in question is its notability.  The mere existence of a subject is not sufficient in and of itself for it to be the topic of a Wikipedia article; the subject has to be notable -- unusual, special, different, better than its peers, widely discussed -- and that notability has to be verifiable by reference to a number of arm's-length, third-party, expert sources writing in reputable publications.   These are concepts that are basic and required for every Wikipedia article; you can learn more about them, as I noted for you elsewhere, by looking at WP:Your first article and other introductory material. Accounting4Taste: talk 20:37, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Since I am in some doubt as to whether the article in question has made a credible claim of notability, I've decided to submit it to a process called articles for deletion that will allow a wider range of opinions to be canvassed from the broader Wikipedian community. Instructions as to how to participate in that discussion will be available from a link on the article itself.  And if you have any further questions, don't hesitate to leave me a note on my talk page (you can do that by clicking on the word "talk" after my signature).  Accounting4Taste: talk 20:45, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

AfD Nomination: Riese the Series
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but all Wikipedia articles must meet our criteria for inclusion (see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Since it does not seem that Riese the Series meets these criteria, an editor has started a discussion about whether this article should be kept or deleted.

Your opinion on whether this article meets the inclusion criteria is welcome. Please contribute to the discussion by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Riese the Series. Don't forget to add four tildes ( ~ ) at the end of each of your comments to sign them.

Discussions such as these usually last seven days. In the meantime, you are free to edit the content of the article. Please do not remove the "articles for deletion" template (the box at the top). When the discussion has concluded, a neutral third party will consider all comments and decide whether or not to delete the article. Accounting4Taste: talk 20:56, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

September 2009
Your recent addition has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Otterathome (talk) 18:18, 29 September 2009 (UTC)