User talk:ScottSeamon

Hope Presbyterian Church (Austin, Texas) moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Hope Presbyterian Church (Austin, Texas), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:33, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hope Presbyterian Church (Austin, Texas) (August 23)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DoubleGrazing was:

Infobox and one source isn't an article. Please provide information and context, and demonstrate that this is notable per WP:GNG. Thank you, --

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Hope Presbyterian Church (Austin, Texas) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:52, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ScottSeamon! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:52, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hope Presbyterian Church (Austin, Texas) (September 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dan arndt was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Fails WP:NBUILDING, requires significant coverage in multiple independent secondary sources. Hopeaustin.org is a primary source and therefore not independent.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Hope Presbyterian Church (Austin, Texas) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Dan arndt (talk) 04:13, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to the submission and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

ScottSeamon (talk) 22:15, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Your account has been blocked indefinitely because it is suspected that it has been compromised. If your account is locked, please contact ca

wikimedia.org. Otherwise, if you are able to confirm that you are the user who created this account, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section), then add this below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Yamla (talk) 18:41, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

ScottSeamon (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

My account isn't compromised. I'm willing to prove my identity however I can to get the ban lifted. ScottSeamon (talk) 19:06, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=My account isn't compromised. I'm willing to prove my identity however I can to get the ban lifted. [[User:ScottSeamon|ScottSeamon]] ([[User talk:ScottSeamon#top|talk]]) 19:06, 21 September 2022 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=My account isn't compromised. I'm willing to prove my identity however I can to get the ban lifted. [[User:ScottSeamon|ScottSeamon]] ([[User talk:ScottSeamon#top|talk]]) 19:06, 21 September 2022 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=My account isn't compromised. I'm willing to prove my identity however I can to get the ban lifted. [[User:ScottSeamon|ScottSeamon]] ([[User talk:ScottSeamon#top|talk]]) 19:06, 21 September 2022 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

.