User talk:Jjsma3

Nomination of Wavetick for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wavetick 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/Wavetick until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 17:04, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Wavetick
Hello Jjsma3,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Wavetick for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 08:44, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

February 2024
 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or self-promoting in violation of the conflict of interest and notability guidelines. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. Seraphimblade Talk to me 09:07, 8 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi
 * I just logged in after a period away and saw I have been blocked indefinitely.
 * I'm unsure why this block is in place? I submitted an article about Wavetick with references from numerous and current sources. I would firmly argue the article wasn't promotional or advertorial - it stated Wavetick's functionality, adhering only to (and in verbatim in some cases) the text in the reference sources, almost all of which were mainstream media publications with a worldwide, independently audited readership.
 * Please can you reconsider my block status.
 * Thanks
 * JJ Jjsma3 (talk) 15:43, 22 April 2024 (UTC)