User talk:Imabookreader

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for helping us build a great free encyclopedia. We have five basic principles, but other than that, we advise that you be bold and edit. If you ever have any questions or need help, feel free to leave a message at the help desk, and other Wikipedia editors will be happy to assist you.
 * Welcome!

Thanks again and congratulations on becoming a Wikipedian!

P.S. New discussion threads for you will appear at the bottom of this page.

Ostrow and Company
Hello ,

It seems to me that an article you worked on, Ostrow and Company, may be copied from http://ostrow-and-company.com/about.html. It's entirely possible that I made a mistake, but I wanted to let you know because Wikipedia is strict about copying from other sites.

It's important that you edit the article and rewrite it in your own words, unless you're absolutely certain nothing in it is copied. If you're not sure how to fix the problem or have any questions, there are people at the help desk who are happy to assist you.

Thank you for helping build a free encyclopedia! MadmanBot (talk) 21:49, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Ostrow and Company
This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Ostrow and Company, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.ostrowandcompany.com/about.php.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 22:21, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

July 2013
This is your only warning; if you create an inappropriate page again, as you did at Ostrow and Company, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Jackmcbarn (talk) 22:24, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Removing Speedy at Ostrow and Company
Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for taking the time to create a page here. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you created yourself. Because Wikipedia policy does not allow the creator of the page to remove deletion tags, an automated program has replaced the deletion tag you removed from Ostrow and Company. Please do not continue to remove the deletion tag, instead, if you disagree with the deletion, you can follow these steps: Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do. For further help about the deletion, you could contact the user who first placed the tag or a highly active user who is willing to help with deletion. This message was left by a bot, so please do not contact the bot about the deletion. Thank you, - SDPatrolBot (talk) 22:36, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Go to the page by clicking this link. Once there, select the button that says [ Click here to contest this speedy deletion].
 * 2) This will take you to the talk page, where you can make your case by explaining why the page does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion.

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Ostrow and Company. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Click here to contest this speedy deletion, which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. - SDPatrolBot (talk) 22:40, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Your use of multiple Wikipedia accounts
Jackmcbarn (talk) 18:46, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Page Ostrow for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Page Ostrow 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 Articles for deletion/Page Ostrow 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.  DGG ( talk ) 21:47, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Alternate account blocked
Dear Imabookreader,

I have blocked your alternate account,, indefinitely. The use of multiple accounts is permitted, but the abuse of multiple accounts is not. When you edit in the same topic area with two accounts, it creates the appearance that you are two people in agreement, when in fact you are one person. This is forbidden by policy, and if you do it again, you will be blocked from editing. You are forgiven this time as I assume you were unaware, and had no ill intent. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:21, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Page Ostrow
Not every web page on the entire Internet constitutes proper referencing. References on Wikipedia have to be to reliable sources, and cannot just be any old random website at all. IMDb is not a reliable reference, for instance — it's permissible for verification of facts in the article, but it does not provide a valid indication of notability because every single person in the industry, all the way down to "third substitute gaffer", gets a page on there regardless of whether they're actually notable enough to be in an encyclopedia or not. And an individual person's blogspot is not a reliable reference either.

Simply put, if you cannot provide any evidence that she has actually garnered coverage in real media (magazine or newspaper coverage about her, books about her, etc.) then her notability has not been properly demonstrated. Bearcat (talk) 21:17, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Just for the record, it's not good enough to just post additional references to an administrator's talk page and say "look at this" — they still don't count if they don't actually find their way into the article. It's important to realize that the deletion discussion isn't a judgement on her as a person — it's about the quality of the article as written. So if you want to try to save the article, actually working on improving the article is much more likely to pay off than just repeatedly asking other editors to change their minds about the content as it exists right now.
 * Given that you keep using "we" instead of "I", I'm also still not convinced that you don't have a personal connection of some kind with Ms. Ostrow. While her job may be a powerful one inside the film industry, it's not one that's really visible to the general public at all — so I can't see any plausible reason why she would even get onto your radar as a topic to write about unless you have a direct professional or personal relationship of some kind with her. And thus I still have to recommend that you familiarize yourself with our conflict of interest policy as well. Bearcat (talk) 22:55, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I just saw your note on my talk--you seem to have entered it on a page intended for archiving past discussions, instead of my current talk page. I'm answering it there--  there are some good possibilities for articles, but    I need to check with some of my own contacts in the subject.See my talk p. for details, & comment there if you need to comment.   DGG ( talk ) 02:18, 10 August 2013 (UTC)