User talk:Dtiberio

Cheapbooks.com

A tag has been placed on Cheapbooks.com, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Bmg916 ^{Speak to Me} 18:10, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, you can place a {{hangon}} tag on the page, under the existing speedy deletion tag (please do not remove the speedy deletion tag), and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you.ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 03:04, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

your response is not adequate. I havw read your policies in the 3 minutes you permitted me to read them while you were busy banning my content. my information-only page was removed for "blatant advertising". if you cannot elaborate, then restore my page immediately or I will file complaints (after a second user contacts you) against everyone involved for abuse of power.

I had nothing on my page that promotes my product and services. the entire page except for 3 words talked about the nationally-recognized company. administrators swiftly and irresponsibly abused their power while I was trying to cooperate. you falsely accused me of deleting some form of header thing without sufficient warning (it is not sufficient warning when I can't read your warnings... not everyone knows wiki's swift delete process).

here we go again, same thing. 4 admins/editors ganging up on me, no desire to allow me to correct trivial issues. sounds like an abuse of power. we could be spending time fixing the trivial issues in my page, but you choose to deny its creation without sufficient warning, refuse to list what needs to be changed until after my access has been restricted even though I was here the whole time trying to communicate with you, and hide behind your admin powers. that is an abuse deserving of being reported. Dtiberio (talk) 06:48, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

November 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Cheapbooks do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia.

Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): rule: '\byoutube\.com' (link(s): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhnfDVSyo_4&NR=1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rd_GrPMcDJQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_aAzeGLnnk) . If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. an image or a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy and therefore probably should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, or similar site, then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).

If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! XLinkBot (talk) 03:12, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Cheapbooks. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Since Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by some search engines, including Google. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it.

Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): rule: '\byoutube\.com' (link(s): http://www.youtube.com/user/cheapbooks) . If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. an image or a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy and therefore probably should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, or similar site, then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).

If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! XLinkBot (talk) 03:17, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

your response is not adequate. I havw read your policies in the 3 minutes you permitted me to read them while you were busy banning my content. my information-only page was removed for "blatant advertising". if you cannot elaborate, then restore my page immediately or I will file complaints (after a second user contacts you) against everyone involved for abuse of power.

I had nothing on my page that promotes my product and services. the entire page except for 3 words talked about the nationally-recognized company. administrators swiftly and irresponsibly abused their power while I was trying to cooperate. you falsely accused me of deleting some form of header thing without sufficient warning (it is not sufficient warning when I can't read your warnings... not everyone knows wiki's swift delete process).

here we go again, same thing. 4 admins/editors ganging up on me, no desire to allow me to correct trivial issues. sounds like an abuse of power. we could be spending time fixing the trivial issues in my page, but you choose to deny its creation without sufficient warning, refuse to list what needs to be changed until after my access has been restricted even though I was here the whole time trying to communicate with you, and hide behind your admin powers. that is an abuse deserving of being reported. Dtiberio (talk) 06:48, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

CommentYou know that XLinkBot is a BOT, right? Its a program. It has no discrimination. Also, I only count 2 admins as of recent trying to help you. If you will not abide by wikipedia policy, then don't expect your edits to last. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 06:54, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

you counted wrong, I know what a bot is, and you are not helping me. you are playing games with me. either cite the blatant advertising or you abused your power. its as simple as that. did you walk away from reading my page with a knowledge of the product or service? no. so what was being advertised? Dtiberio (talk) 07:02, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no "power". I am not and admin!!! Do you seriously want to accuse me of abusing powers that I don't have? ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 07:10, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion template

Stop removing the deletion template. As long as the hangon template is present, people will wait and consider your hangon request. RainbowOfLight ^Talk 03:25, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing speedy deletion notices from pages that you have created yourself, as you did with Cheapbooks. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Please leave the tags in until a decision is made. sinneed (talk) 03:25, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you remove a speedy deletion notice from a page, as you did with Cheapbooks, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Really. Leave them in. Pretty please? sinneed (talk) 03:37, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Dtiberio, 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 may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted (if it hasn't already).

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 your user 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! لenna vecia 03:57, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Greek logo.JPG

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Greek logo.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. لenna vecia 03:58, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dtiberio, A few ideas.

create your article somewhere other than production wiki.
before beginning, look at what is required before beginning.
Sign your posts.
if you are deleting content without looking at it, you are going to have a marked lack of success.
...time... You have all the time you need... I do hope you will be ready before you start next time, or you will be equally frustrated then... and I know how unpleasant that can be.
As to the other sites you list, examine their entries, and if after studying the guidelines, you feel they don't belong, you might suggest their removal.
You might also look closely at them, and see how they show that they belong here.

All the best to you, and I am sorry your 1st article creation was not successful. sinneed (talk) 04:00, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

based on what I just observed, I don't feel you are sorry at all. I never got a chance to read all of your comments. I asked you to hang on just a few minutes ago and you madly went and cleared everything before I could review your comments and understand what you are doing, and you threatened to ban me for something I couldnt possibly understand. I spend millions of dollars on advertising, why do you believe I need wikipeadia for advertising purposes? when people ask me about my company, I need to refer them somewhere, and people ask. why can't you even give me 1 hour to write something?

Speedy deletion of Cheapbooks

A tag has been placed on Cheapbooks, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

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. sinneed (talk) 04:06, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

why do you allow bookfinder.com and addall.com, they have far less than I do. addall isn't nationally recognized.

This is not personal...*I* am not allowing or disallowing anything. I have made suggestions, and cannot think of anything else to do to help. sinneed (talk) 04:11, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

it is absurd to think that a listing on wikipedia for my company is "blatant advertising". I do not need wikipedia to advertise. I advertise to millions of people every day on radio & tv. people find my site because they know my company's web address, not by clicking on links from wikipedia or other sites. there are many entries here, in fact probably 99% of the pages on wikipedia are people, places, and entities that I never heard of... are they all blatant advertising too?

"Pages which exclusively promote some entity ". my page does not exclusively promote some entity. I have added references to all entities involved with the company, many of whom are famous in their own right.

Words of advice

Please read WP:V. WP:RS, WP:ADVERT, WP:NOTE, and WP:WEB as to why your article was deleted. Advertisement Amount does not establish notability. Independent Analysis does. I have found and looked over the two other sites you mentioned in the talk. I have added a considerable amount of problem tags to the AddALL page as it is really deserving of deletion, just slightly better than the one deleted. On the other hand, the BookFinder.com one has no major issues, as it is cited and neutral in presentation. You might want to first work on a new version of the page on your User Page, or a User Sandbox where you won't be bothered (except maybe by bots and anonymous vandals). I hope this helps. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 04:40, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More specific advice can be found at WP:SPAMMER under the heading:

'Some people spam Wikipedia without meaning to. That is, they do things which Wikipedians consider to be spamming, without realizing that their actions are not in line with building an encyclopedia. A new editor who owns a business may see that there are articles about other businesses on Wikipedia, and conclude that it would be appropriate to create his own such article. A Web site operator may see many places in Wikipedia where his or her site would be relevant, and quickly add several dozen links to it.

The following guidelines are intended to suggest how not to be a spammer—that is, how to mention a Web site, product, business, or other resource without appearing to the Wikipedia community that you are trying to abuse Wikipedia for self-promotion.' ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 04:45, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

and some editors carelessly delete content while someone has kindly asked for them to hang on. as soon as I added the hang on, it became a constant battle to fix everything. how could 30 seconds be enough time to read your comments and fix something? me against 10 of you? perhaps you should give us some more credit.

User:Dtiberio/Sandbox is a subpage in your user space in which you can create your article. If you would like the deleted contents moved to that page, I can do that. However, you are still not editing within our policies, therefore the page has been deleted and protected from recreation. If you choose to write the article in your user space, once you have it to a standard in line with our policies and guidelines, I or another admin can move it to the article space. If you need assistance, various links have been provided to you and my talk page is open for questions. لenna vecia 05:23, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

please move a copy of the page to my user page. I am editing within your policies. please explain why my information-only page is "blatant advertising". you clearly did not read anything that was written; yo just skimmed it

If you have read the guidelines mentioned earlier, and still have questions on policy, feel free to specify them here, otherwise, you will find that the policies sufficiently cover all of the reasons the article was deleted. I will put this page on my watch, and will answer any concerns, if others have not already done so (and I am inclined to think Jennavencia has, maybe Sinneed). Some unrelated things to the passability of your article:

Please sign your messages in talk. Simply press the four ~~~~ keys. They are located on the top left of your keyboard under Esc. Remember to hold shift. SignBot can't do everything. (Although in this case, it beat me to it in a edit conflict.)

Do not remove Speedy Deletions Tags (db- tags). Instead, place {{hangon}} underneath it.

You may remove Proposal for Deletion Tags. ({{Prod|reason}})

Tags/templates have the {{}} syntax.

Review WP:EDIT for basic formatting help. It is hard to learn, but once you get the basics, will help you greatly.

A cheat sheet is also available for formatting.

Have inline references using <ref> and </ref> tags. Remember to place a References Section in the bottom with:

==Notes(or a equivalent title)==:
<references/>

Hope this helped, and good luck to the completion of a wikipedia appropriate version of your article.

ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 05:48, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 05:44, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cheapbooks

This article was deleted after discussion and community consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cheapbooks. If you have further objections, you may bring my closure of the deletion discussion up for review through the deletion review process. Cirt (talk) 05:52, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to Arthur Yoria, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Cirt (talk) 05:54, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the solution is to add the reliable source, not to delete the page. how is arthur yoria not a reliable source anyway? he is a well known award winning musician!

Dtiberio, if you would take the time to read some of the policies (or even just their summary) and perhaps experiment in your sandbox/look at articles that have Featured status, then I'm sure you won't run into these types of troubles. Also, keep in mind notability. Wikipedia is, after all, and Encyclopedia, no matter how cluttered it is. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 05:59, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the reason why I ran into this trouble is because I was reading the wiki's while you were deleting everything. the existence of one entry (arthur yoria, who I hired to do my music) does not warrant an entire page being deleted. why didnt you just delete that content or say it has no source? this sounds like admins are having a big power trip Dtiberio (talk) 06:01, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

you forbid the reliable source that references yoria. I cite him often on all media sites, but you refuse to allow me to list media sites as a source.

this source cites arthur yoria as the musician: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0QT8bvGuhc do I have to send out a press release just to convince you that this event really happened? I am the ultimate source because I hired him. how can that not be more reliable? should I provide a copy of the cancelled check or a copy of the email from when we worked on the project? is that what wikipeadia requires?

Thank you for signing your posts.

To answer your question on deleting the article: while it was one statement, while your article mentioned multiple advertisements which might have been acceptable in difference circumstances, it did not include any independent citations, meaning that it would fail WP:V. We could have deleted it, but then, it would have been almost empty, and would have failed under Notability and Speedy Deletion: No Content.

On Reliable Source, no, wikipedia does not require such, however, reliable source also has to do with relevancy. In many aspects, such things like who are in the advertisements shouldn't be in the article, at least not at first. Also, youtube is generally considered an unreliable source (but there are exceptions, however, youtube sources don't count towards sources required to establish notability)

Essentially: Focus on establishing a history of the site, what the site does (not in promotional terms, but in detached), and citations embedded proving the notability. You can take a look at the BookFinder.com article actually as a guide.

Please also consider WP:ADVERT on why the page was considered an advertisement.

I really must go to sleep tonight, so I am sorry to say that I won't be able to continue to help you any further today. If you have any other questions, consider consulting the of policies first, asking another member, or putting {{helpme}} on this page with your question and someone will be along to aide you.

ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 06:12, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit:sorry for bad grammar, I'm really sleepy. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 06:14, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but your answer is not acceptible. I was here the whole time, during the whole process, trying to communicate with you to fix everything and your group irrespinsibly deleted everything and banned me because you collectively did not know what you were doing. A discussion now on what needs to be changed is not the same as a discussion then. you just labelled it as advertising when it is not in any such way advertising. If you do not permit me to fix it in a responsible manner, then I have no choice but to file complaints against you. you were not fair to me, and it is my only recourse, and you will have to stand up for your actions as to whether you were justified in firing off on a power trip with someone who couldn't possibly read hundreds of pages of wiki articles to fix something small that you refuse to disclose. my page warrants inclusion in wikipedia. I established a history of the site. I listed notable things. you complain that who is in the ads should not be in the article at first? why didn't you let me re-arrange it? where is the discussion,. prior to deletion, that you suggested that? there was none. you took a fixable problem and you complicated my life and yours because you are on a power trip. how is it that my page is "blatant advertising" when bookfinder.com's page isn't? because I used the word "customer-focused"? sounds like an abuse of admin power. you are just too eager to find something to delete, and you ganged up on me and didn't even let me fix it, and you are preventing me from being a legitimate wiki user. Dtiberio (talk) 06:34, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

this is an untrue statement: "Recreation of this article has been disabled due to repeated recreation of deleted material.". I was actively adding new material to fix suggestions that admins were making. you were wrong to disable my page, and you were wrong to delete it when I requested the "hang on", and you were wrong to believe that I was intentionally deleting whatever that spam tag was and threatening to ban me because I don't understand every facate of wikipedia (such as whatever the spam tag is you were talking about). not everyone is an expert on wikipedia, nor should they be, nor should we be expected to read hundreds of policy pages in under 5 minutes while you are deleting things. does {{hangon}} mean "give me an extra 30 seconds to change this? I doubt it. you are unjust and unfair and I would like to kindly ask that you resolve this. Dtiberio (talk) 06:37, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please read above:

'Note that this request is not binding, and the page may still be deleted if the page unquestionably meets the speedy deletion criteria, or if the promised explanation is not provided very soon.'

Also, I am only a editor, not a admin. I can't delete such things, decisions for it is left to admins. I can't disable editing either. Either read the policies presented to you multiple times, understand them, and follow them while not attacking others trying to help you, or don't expect anything different to occur.

ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 06:43, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have responded to your question at Jennavecia's page here - please come to my talk page if you have any further questions.--VS ^talk 06:45, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems this has gotten itself stuck in a rut. The deleting Admins, both through CSD and AFD were only doing their job and are not at fault in any manner. Perhaps you would like to take your concern to WP:DRV for the community to decide instead of questioning the admins judgment when they were following policy.— Ѕandahl ♥ 18:53, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your username

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!

I hope not to seem unfriendly or make you feel unwelcome, but I noticed your username, and I am concerned that it might not meet Wikipedia's username policy for the following reason: Wikipedia:Username_policy#Real_names: Could imply confusion with the individual David Tiberio, founder of the company CheapBooks. After you look over that policy, could we discuss that concern here?

I'd appreciate learning your own views, for instance your reasons for wanting this particular name, and what alternative username you might accept that avoids raising this concern.

You have several options freely available to you:

If you can relieve my concern through discussing it here, I can stop worrying about it.
If the two of us can't agree here, we can ask for help through Wikipedia's dispute resolution process, such as requesting comments from other Wikipedians. Wikipedia administrators usually abide by agreements reached through this process.
You can keep your contributions history under a new username. Visit Wikipedia:Changing username and follow the guidelines there.

Thank you. Cirt (talk) 07:04, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

why don't we talk about the abusive deleting of my company's page on wikipedia.

Why your article is an advertisement

Your article is almost entirely original research. You seem to have an unfortunate misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is. As pulled from the article Wikipedia:

A topic is deemed encyclopedic if it is "notable" in the Wikipedia jargon; i.e., if it has received significant coverage in secondary reliable sources (i.e., mainstream media or major academic journals) that are independent of the subject of the topic. Second, Wikipedia must expose knowledge that is already established and recognized. In other words, it must not present, for instance, new information or original works. A claim that is likely to be challenged requires a reference to reliable sources. Within the Wikipedia community, this is often phrased as "verifiability, not truth" to express the idea that the readers are left themselves to check the truthfulness of what appears in the articles and to make their own interpretations.

All the points there are relevant, but let me highlight them a bit.

A topic is notable if it has been covered in secondary reliable sources independent of the topic.
Information must have already been established and recognized in aforementioned reliable, independent sources. If it has not already been published in sources, we don't publish it.
Claims likely to be challenged must be backed by a reliable source. Verifiability, not truth. We publish what we can verify in reliable, third party sources.

Some examples of claims that need a source:

"CheapBooks is a well-known book price comparison web site founded in 1997"
"popular among female African American nursing students."
"it has grown into a multi-million dollar price comparison site,with 65% growth per year for 2006 - 2008."
"CheapBooks recently began talks with investment banking firm Merrill Lynch regarding asset valuations, including but not limited to trademarks, patents, intellectual property, and software applications."
"CheapBooks has declined buyout offers as high as $7 million USD."
"According to founder David Tiberio, CheapBooks routinely receives unsolicited offers for purchase of the company for "less than 2 weeks profit"."
"CheapBooks recently acquired the competing web site "cheapbooks.info" from competitor "bookfinder4u.com", after it was discovered that the competing site was secretly diverting CheapBooks customers to its site via search engines."
"David Tiberio previously has experience working for advertising agencies Grey, DoubleClick (now owned by Google), Interactive Imaginations (now owned by 24/7 Real Media), and Agency.com."

Some examples of unnecessary trivia:

"Music used in CheapBooks radio and TV ads is produced by South by Southwest award-winning musician Arthur Yoria."
"In June of 2007, CheapBooks personality Rich Natole, the voice of many CheapBooks ads, made an appearance on America's Got Talent."
"CheapBooks has owned and operated numerous vehicles used in marketing, including a Suzuki Reno (no longer used), a Mazda Miata convertible, and a Honda S2000 convertible, which can be seen driving in NY and TX. Some of the vehicles are used in television advertising." (The bit about the Reno definitely doesn't need to be mentioned. The rest only if these cars are somehow notable.)
"The first major radio advertising campaign for CheapBooks occured in New Orleans, the day before Hurricane Katrina destroyed internet connectivity to the city for the duration of the ad campaign." (This is the only campaign mentioned under the title Notable Advertising Campaigns. How is it notable?)

The above leaves the article as an advertisement. You are publishing your own knowledge, which we don't do. We can publish what has already been published in reliable sources, unrelated to your company. Sentences like "Actors, models, and college students wishing to appear in a CheapBooks TV commercial may apply via Model Mayhem" do not help either. That is completely inappropriate. You cannot honestly claim that line is not advertisement.

External links within the body are not appropriate. They belong in their own section at the bottom of the page. Sources should be cited, and we have templates available to help if you should need them. I recommend reading the links we have provided you, paying particular attention to WP:COI, WP:RS, WP:V, and WP:OR. Every possible resource you need is available on this page. If further assistance is needed, you can place {{helpme}} here on your talk page followed by your question(s) or you may use the help desk. لenna vecia 23:40, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

you should have said this when the isue of deleting my page first came up (then I would have done what you asked and not complained). I was online watching what was happening, you should have disclosed this solution, and allowed me to fix it. you should have not banned the page from re-creation. you did not because you/others abused your powers. I tried to communicate with the admins or whoever did this, and they just sat and ignored me. this creates more work for you both of us because we have to go through hours and days just to find what you were withholding from me. I am sure there will be more surprises from your end.

also I just read amazon.com's page and I find it filled with information that has no source, much of which is similar in language to mine. please delete amazon.com's wiki page or remove the unverified material.

Dtiberio (talk) 03:36, 14 November 2008 (UTC) Comment:[reply]

Faults on one article does not justify faults on another. Also, Amazon.com's page has 70+ citations. There is no rationale for deletion of the entire page. However, deletion of unverified material is done on a regular basis. The reason the entire page isn't deleted is because it has already established notability. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 04:42, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

independent source: yes, people watch my tv commercials and talk about them, as you can see, here someone has seen the commercial, inquired about the music track, and determined who the author is, and posted it publically: goto google and search "cheapbooks permanent tv" (the adtunes forum is closed but you can view it in the cache). I find stuff like this all the time. Dtiberio (talk) 06:01, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:RS again. What you stated fails WP:RS and WP:ADVERT because advertisement does not establish notability. Also, google hits doesn't either (learned hard way before). ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 23:53, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Forums are not reliable sources. "People" talking about your commercials or your company isn't what we're looking for. It's reliable, third-party sources. News outlets, magazines (not ads, but articles), journals, etc. Check out articles on similar companies, and look at the sources they have. لenna vecia 06:44, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why I was really deleted

I subscrbe to google's feature, whereby they show new google listings based on keywords. I search for keywords such as "cheapbooks" to see when google adds pages to its directory.

my competitors also search for when my company is listed on google. my competitors (specificlly addall.com) then go to those pages and attempt to demean my company or have those pages removed or defamed. I see it over and over and over again.

in the past week, I received a notification from google that my wiki page was added to google. immediately, my page was marked for deletion. most liekly, one of my competitors who monitored my wiki listing being added to google, then decided to request that my wiki page be deleted.

I have been aware of this activity for over a year now, and it is not going to harm my company, and I will not stoop to your level, whoever you are, and it certainly won't help your company.

I have no idea what you're talking about. Your page was picked up on new page patrol. This happens to hundreds of articles every day. If you would like, look over the deletion log. لenna vecia 18:09, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]