User talk:StocktonKG


 * }

August 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Stockton Grand Rapids 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://www.youtube.com/stockton616#p/a/f/0/Ff1UX-9G6NU. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy and therefore probably should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file. 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) 20:07, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Stockton Grand Rapids
A tag has been placed on Stockton Grand Rapids requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Wuh Wuz  Dat  15:44, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Stockton Grand Rapids
Articles on Wikipedia cannot be written in an A&R/record label "press release" style ("Stockton has quickly made a name for themselves", "Stockton has been pounding the pavement nonstop for nearly three years", "They are an extremely entertaining band who's shows typically resemble a house party", "check out more at...", etc.), but must follow our rules around writing style, neutral point of view, referencing to reliable sources, proper demonstration of notability and the like. And on top of that, according to your own writing the band's name is just "Stockton" — which means that the correct article title would be Stockton (band), not "Stockton Grand Rapids". So you might need to familiarize yourself with our naming conventions as well.

And given your username, I think you probably need to read our conflict of interest rules, too — especially the parts about how and why you probably shouldn't create an article about an organization or entity in which you have a personal involvement. Believe it or not, they're not all bad; some of them are about protecting yourself, because having an article on Wikipedia can sometimes have negative consequences that you didn't expect.

It has nothing to do with me "being a dick". A band isn't automatically entitled to an article on here just because they exist; if the band is notable enough to be in an encyclopedia, then the onus is on you to write an article that (a) actually demonstrates how they meet WP:MUSIC in order to legitimately belong in an encyclopedia, and (b) is written in a properly encyclopedic style. It's not our responsibility to keep an article that doesn't meet our inclusion rules just because somebody might think deleting it wasn't very nice; it's your responsibility to make sure the article meets the inclusion rules in the first place. Bearcat (talk) 23:27, 3 September 2010 (UTC)