User talk:Igolder

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Dana Spiotta, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Alpha_Quadrant   (talk)  20:30, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
 * You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the Help desk or on the.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Disambiguation link notification for October 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Entertainment Weekly, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Deadline ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Entertainment_Weekly check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Entertainment_Weekly?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:50, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Recent edit reversion
In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. S Philbrick (Talk)  01:15, 24 December 2020 (UTC)