User talk:Avoiceinthesea

The article David R. Mains has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group or service and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. NawlinWiki (talk) 21:09, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of David R. Mains
A tag has been placed on David R. Mains requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  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 page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Tad Lincoln (talk) 21:15, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
Your nomination at Articles for Creation was declined, and Wikipedia& was not created. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer, and please feel free to request article creation again once the issues have been addressed. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia!  Chzz  ►  19:26, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/DBMan concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/DBMan, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 12:56, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Your article submission DBMan


Hello Avoiceinthesea. It has now been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled DBMan.

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the  or  code. Please note, however, that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code:, paste it in the edit box at this link , click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. -- t  numbermaniac c 03:08, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Original research and reliable sources
Sources first: a blog by an individual with a big sign Jesus Saves! on it does not meet our criteria at WP:RS. Religious texts cannot be used to tell us where a word or concept is mostly found. The rest of the edits you've made today are original research and against the spirit and policy of Wikipedia. Please read upon the two links I've just given you and WP:VERIFY. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 17:21, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

February 2020
Please stop adding unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did on Immanuel Baptist Church. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Doug Weller talk 13:24, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

What is your connection to the Immanuel Baptist Church?
Please read WP:COI and let me know if any of this applies to you. If you are only a member/parishoner, it doesn't. Doug Weller  talk 13:26, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

February 2020
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Immanuel Baptist Church. Doug Weller talk 16:45, 24 February 2020 (UTC)