User talk:Smith lucas
Username
[edit]Note that you can't "move" a user page, because your user name is still "Smith lucas" (if I post anything at User talk:Smith Lucas, you won't get a "new message" notification). Usually, you would contact Wikipedia:Changing username to request changing your user to Smith Lucas, however since your account has relatively few contributions, it is better if you create a new account, Smith Lucas (with the proper case), and login and edit with it instead of "Smith lucas". Feel free to move this talk to User talk:Smith Lucas after you have created that account, and to restore the redirect here. -- ReyBrujo 01:27, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Re: Book
[edit]Regarding your book, the main problem is that you should put references to prove the notability of the book, in other words, why the book should have a Wikipedia page. Try to find notable third party references talking about the book, in example, BBC, CNN, eWeek, New York Times, Washington Post, Financial Times, The Times, etc, etc, etc. The reference you added is not enough to keep the article here. You must understand that there must be a way for casual readers to verify the information here (they should be able to confirm the information). An article can read "The book is one of the most important ever written in history.", but the casual user (and other readers) may say "Who determined the book is so important? The editor?" However, another sentence "According to the BBC (www.bbc.co.uk/book/important.html), the book is one of the most important ever written in history" is different, because the user can check the link and confirm if the BBC indeed said the book was so important. It is not necessary to have a link to a URL, you can cite a newspaper, a TV program or another book. Of course, you can't use the same book as reference ("The book is one of the most important ever written in history (same book, page 10, paragraph 3.") because it is not objective. So, try to find professional reviews (not customer reviews in Amazon or Buy.com) and add that information to the article.
As for the category, I am not really good at categorizing. I will put it into the books category, but someone else will come later and better categorize it. -- ReyBrujo 01:27, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Redirect of Murder By Tejuana & Treachery By Bush And The Supreme Court: a document in the form of a novel. Volume 1 of 4.
[edit]
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Murder By Tejuana & Treachery By Bush And The Supreme Court: a document in the form of a novel. Volume 1 of 4., by CultureDrone (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Murder By Tejuana & Treachery By Bush And The Supreme Court: a document in the form of a novel. Volume 1 of 4. is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Murder By Tejuana & Treachery By Bush And The Supreme Court: a document in the form of a novel. Volume 1 of 4., please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it did not nominate Murder By Tejuana & Treachery By Bush And The Supreme Court: a document in the form of a novel. Volume 1 of 4. itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 11:28, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Murder By Tejuana & Treachery By Bush And The Supreme Court
[edit]Hiya :-)
You had me worried there with your first comment - I'm new to WP myself, so thought I'd messed something up. Nice to know I haven't made any enemies just yet :-) Happy editing !
By the way - for future reference, if you want to leave messages, you should use the User talk page (like this one) - and not edit users home pages - easy mistake to make :-) CultureDrone 12:17, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Murder By Tejuana & Treachery By Bush and the Supreme Court
[edit]
I have nominated Murder By Tejuana & Treachery By Bush and the Supreme Court, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murder By Tejuana & Treachery By Bush and the Supreme Court. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Tombomp (talk/contribs) 20:16, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Murder By Tejuana & Treachery By Bush and the Supreme Court
[edit]Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages such as Murder By Tejuana & Treachery By Bush and the Supreme Court, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.
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 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 17:03, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Murder By Tejuana & Treachery By Bush and the Supreme Court requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, because it appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion. If you can indicate how it is different from the previously posted material, place the template {{hangon}} underneath the other template on the article and put a note on the page's discussion page saying why this article should stay. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please use deletion review instead of continuing to recreate the page. Thank you. RayAYang (talk) 03:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC)