Yakásimba
Welcome edit
|
Important information edit
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. Bishonen | tålk 21:58, 19 March 2022 (UTC).
- Hi Bishonen,
- Is there a way for me to discuss whatever the other side's opinions are without a formal sanctions procedure? I would think that's the purpose of the talk page, and it seems like the person who wholesale deleted my changes would be potentially sanction-able.
- I'm working on this article in good faith, and as I wrote in the talk page, welcome collaboration. I don't know their specific objections. Can you give me a timeline and how long does this process take?
- Thanks. Yakásimba (talk) 22:20, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
- I have replied on the article talk page. Let us be clear, it is YOU that risk sanctions as WP:BRD REQUIRES that you go to talk if your edit(s) are challenged - they have been, by me. The WP:ONUS is on you to persuade others that your edits are an improvement - not on me or others to prove they are not. Pincrete (talk) 23:37, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oh, I didn't know that. I've never had anyone yell at me about sanctions before. And I don't see how I would show improvement without any information about what the objection was (other than "old version was clear," but that doesn't help!). But I hope we can come to agreement about neutrality and clarity if we take it part by part. Yakásimba (talk) 00:43, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
- I hope so too, Yakàsimba, and I've posted at the article's talkpage, precisely to suggest taking your proposed changes part by part. Nobody has any reason to be talking about sanctions at this point. The "alert" that I posted above isn't meant to be alarming; do note that it says it does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date. It's just to say that American politics is a fraught area, where the Arbitration committee has given administrators some extra powers. I thought many of your changes were improvements. Bishonen | tålk 09:27, 20 March 2022 (UTC).
- Oh, I didn't know that. I've never had anyone yell at me about sanctions before. And I don't see how I would show improvement without any information about what the objection was (other than "old version was clear," but that doesn't help!). But I hope we can come to agreement about neutrality and clarity if we take it part by part. Yakásimba (talk) 00:43, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
- I have replied on the article talk page. Let us be clear, it is YOU that risk sanctions as WP:BRD REQUIRES that you go to talk if your edit(s) are challenged - they have been, by me. The WP:ONUS is on you to persuade others that your edits are an improvement - not on me or others to prove they are not. Pincrete (talk) 23:37, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Standard ArbCom discretionary sanctions notice edit
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
Newimpartial (talk) 15:05, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Becket Fund for Religious Liberty edit
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
- It is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. (See section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Wikipedia has standards for the minimum necessary information to be included in short articles; you can see these at Wikipedia:Stub. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. ––FormalDude talk 01:57, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message edit
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:49, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution edit
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization into List of court cases involving Alliance Defending Freedom. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 17:34, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message edit
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:00, 28 November 2023 (UTC)