User talk:Rickemiller
A tag has been placed on REMMP, 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 {{hangon}} 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. -WarthogDemon 18:53, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from articles, as you did with REMMP. If you do not believe the article deserves to be deleted, then please do the following:
- Place {{hangon}} on the page. Please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag(s).
- Make your case on the article's talk page.
Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. also, blanking your talk page doesn't remove it from the page's history: http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rickemiller&action=history -WarthogDemon 18:56, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi- fansites are not generally considered appropriate external links, per our external link guidelines. Put simply, they are not usually particularly important from an encyclopedic standpoint, add little to the article and, especially when unofficial, can be viewed as being endorsed when they are linked, which is not what we should be doing. Thanks, feel free to contact me on my talk page if I can be of any help. J Milburn (talk) 18:54, 23 February 2009 (UTC)