User talk:Penemy of Pignorance

Speedy deletion nomination of Amerrycountry

Hello Penemy of Pignorance,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Amerrycountry for deletion, because it's too short to identify the subject of the article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. DOCUMENT★ERROR 08:37, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Autorabiography

Hello Penemy of Pignorance,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Autorabiography for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. DOCUMENT★ERROR 08:47, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

• Just to be clear, not containing profanity or insults is not the criterion that determines whether an article about a book can be kept in Wikipedia. Rather, the book should be considered notable as determined under the criteria at Wikipedia:Notability (books). --Metropolitan90 (talk) 09:11, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Amerrycountry for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Amerrycountry is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amerrycountry until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:38, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Amerrycountry

The article contains so many glowing reviews, but search engines have trouble finding anything about it. Can you explain? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:56, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the awards, but I cannot accept them. What I would really like is an answer to the above question. Please tell me if this is a hoax. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:14, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Just a reminder to please respond here. You've been editing the article, so I know you are online. Please tell me if this is a hoax. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:03, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

I'd like to add that if this is a real book and you are indeed its author, then you have a serious conflict of interest. You should not be writing about yourself or your work, for reasons explained at Wikipedia is not about YOU and the plain and simple conflict of interest guide. --Drm310 (talk) 15:35, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:34, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

• Since your only edits have been to create several promotional articles about yourself, I'm blocking you for spam. I also don't see where you've actually responded to anyone that has tried to talk to you about the articles, so I honestly don't see where you're interested in editing about anything other than yourself or your works, or learning the basic guidelines of Wikipedia. This is not a place for you to promote yourself. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:34, 6 January 2015 (UTC)