Headtechie2006

The article WVIK TV has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), 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 indicate the notability of the subject 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 musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. NawlinWiki (talk) 21:42, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

• There's still no real assertion of notability here, so I've tagged it for speedy deletion again. --Finngall ^talk 15:10, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

• Apparently you weren't interested in the information you requested, since you've gone ahead and recreated the article for the third time. Please take the time to read Wikipedia:Why was my article deleted? before proceeding. Accounting4Taste:talk 16:50, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

• In response to your message on my talk page: Since anyone can create an article and not all articles get the attention they deserve, there mere fact that an article exists does not necessarily denote that they have received any sort of approval. In the case of CHSTV, it it at least claimed that they have gotten coverage in Newsweek, but as the article wasn't actually cited, I have tagged the article as needing more references. I wouldn't protest if someone proposed its deletion, but I'm not going to press for it. In the case of Scot Coogan, I have tagged the article as unreferenced but he does appear to be sufficiently notable based on the bands he has been associated with. Speaking more generally, arguments on the order of "You have articles on X and Y, therefore my article on Z should be allowed to stay" don't carry a whole lot of weight around here, and indeed I've initiated deletion procedures on some of those X and Y articles that have been called to my attention as a result of arguments like these. --Finngall ^talk 22:26, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

• Wikipedia was never intended to be a repository of indiscriminate information. A line had to be drawn somewhere, and the guidelines for notability are the community's current consensus on where that line should be. These guidelines are not set in stone and you are certainly free to make your case for changing them on the appropriate talk pages, but I wouldn't expect major changes without strong arguments and a protracted campaign. (And for the record, I'm not an admin, just a busybody with no more powers or privileges than any other general user.) --Finngall ^talk 23:23, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 17:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

West Chester East Academic Team

I've removed West Chester East Academic Team from the speedy deletion queue as it did not qualify for speedy deletion. However, it's now listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/West Chester East Academic Team instead. Full deletion debates last 5 days (often plus a couple extra due to backlog), so you now at least have a bit more time to gather evidence of notability. Have a nice day. --erachima formerly tjstrf 04:20, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I noticed that you were commenting on the talk page of West Chester East Academic Team and arguing for its retention, complete with references. I hope it will help you if I give you two pointers. First and most important, no one will be paying attention to the talk page -- the most important discussion to which you should be contributing is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/West Chester East Academic Team instead. You might want to copy your material over there, because that's the page that an administrator will be looking at when deciding whether or not to delete the page. Second point that may help you -- when you find a reference like the one you've cited on that talk page, you should put it into the article directly, not just leave it on the talk page. For the next couple of days, people will be looking at the article and examining it to see how it measures up against Wikipedia policy; having references would add to how it measures up to reliable sources policy. I hope this helps; if you have any further questions or problems, feel free to contact me. Accounting4Taste:talk 20:40, 30 March 2008 (UTC)