User talk:Victoriadseaman

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Victoriadseaman, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! — Masum Ibn Musa ^Conversation 03:41, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 2015[edit]

This is your only warning; if you use Wikipedia for soapboxing, promotion or advertising again, as you did at Victoria Seaman, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ukexpat (talk) 19:26, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Last chance - please stop editing the article to look like a campaign statement - if you continue, you WILL be blocked. It's also a copyright violation of http://victoriaseaman.com/meet-victoria/ and will continue to be removed if you post it again.--ukexpat (talk) 19:57, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use Wikipedia for soapboxing, promotion or advertising, as you did at Victoria Seaman. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:09, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--ukexpat (talk) 20:19, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Materialscientist (talk) 23:42, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry[edit]

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for a period of indefinite for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Victoriadseaman. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Mike V • Talk 14:15, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

I understand my error and did not realize it was against the rules to create a bio page about myself and ask others to help me edit it. After reading Wikipedia:Plain and simple, I understand my error and acknowledge the correct course of action would have been to suggest edits on the talk page. See proposed suggestions below. Victoriadseaman (talk) 18:08, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You're blocked for sock puppetry. In your next unblock request, you should address this reason. PhilKnight (talk) 18:56, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Seaman was elected to the Nevada Assembly in November 2014. Seaman defeated Democratic candidate Meghan Smith with 56.23% of the votes cast. http://www.nvsos.gov/soselectionpages/results/2014StatewideGeneral/Clark.aspx Seaman also received the endorsement of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. http://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion/editorial-assembly-0 Following the election, Seaman was appointed assistant majority whip (south) http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/las-vegas/las-vegas-assemblyman-hambrick-chosen-speaker-designate Speaker-designate John Hambrick later removed Seaman from her post as Vice Chairwoman of the Taxation committee. Seaman contested the removal “sends a very dangerous message to Nevada women voters”. http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/las-vegas/fiore-loses-leadership-taxation-committee-alleges-war-women The removal was later cited as reasoning to recall Hambrick. http://www.reviewjournal.com/columns-blogs/politics/slash-politics/premature-election In early March 2015, Seaman voted twice for to extend a bond rollover program to fund school construction, an initiative supported and signed into law by Governor Brian Sandoval. Seaman was one of several Assembly Republicans to support both measures. https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/NELIS/REL/78th2015/Bill/1632/Votes https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/NELIS/REL/78th2015/Bill/1407/Votes Victoriadseaman (talk) 18:08, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of the fact that there is evidence you created 5 different accounts yourself (evidence here)? This is a clear block evasion. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:12, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

In regards to sock puppetry, I did say above that I asked other people for help making edits and realize now that was wrong. I was making edits in a large building with a public internet. I asked two others in that building to help, so that would explain the same IP address. I do not know two of the people on the list, but I would guess they are also on the same public network in the building where I am a public official. I understand it is my word against the IP records, but I'm saying I was wrong to ask others in the building for help. I hope you can accept my apology and my commitment to not do this again because I don't know what else to say that will resolve this. Victoriadseaman (talk) 19:52, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

No response to questions. PhilKnight (talk) 17:15, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

So you're admitting to: (1). Actually being Victoria Seaman? (this seems obvious, but anyone can claim a name on Wikipedia)

(2). Deliberately evading a block for promotional purposes?