User talk:2012WorldPeace

Welcome!

Hello, 2012WorldPeace, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Rainbow Veins, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! WWGB (talk) 11:14, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Rainbow Veins[edit]

A tag has been placed on Rainbow Veins requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a musical recording which does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, and where the artist's article has never existed, has been deleted or is eligible for deletion itself. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for music.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), 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. WWGB (talk) 11:14, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please use reliable sources[edit]

Your edits need to be verifiable, meaning that they must be supported by reliable sources, directly. Your own synthesis of ideas based on sources would constitute WP:original research which is not permitted. In the future, please try to make use of the best possible sources, and I hope you continue to contribute. Novangelis (talk) 13:44, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of previously published material to our articles . Please cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. JNW (talk) 14:00, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Consciousness shift[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Consciousness shift, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

This is not an article; it is a definition.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Novangelis (talk) 14:06, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Utopian music[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Utopian music, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

There are no reliable sources for this so-called "genre." It is not used by any reputable critic, historian, or music publication. The term seems to have been made up by the article creator, and the random, repetitive, and mostly unreferenced content is evidence of this belief.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 16:56, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

July 2009[edit]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of previously published material to our articles . Please cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. JNW (talk) 03:44, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Old school rappers[edit]

I have nominated Category:Old school rappers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 03:38, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]