Hi Amanda A. Brant! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.
Happy editing! Grimes2 ( talk) 15:14, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar |
Thanks for the ce of the Nobel-prize laureates articles. Grimes2 ( talk) 09:34, 7 October 2021 (UTC) |
On 8 October 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Benjamin List, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Indefensible ( talk) 21:55, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
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.
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.
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 articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. 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.
Crossroads -talk- 21:02, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement regarding a possible violation of an Arbitration Committee decision. The thread is Amanda A. Brant. Thank you. Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 10:55, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Hey Amanda, my advice next time another editor makes an accusation like that is to not rise to their bait. Point out the personal attack and refer them back to policy. If they continue, then you can raise it through one of the noticeboards via WP:RUCD. I do agree with everything you've said on the talk page. Sideswipe9th ( talk) 16:45, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Please use an edit summary with every edit. Each edit should have the goal of improving an article in some way, however large or small. The edit summary field is there, to help you communicate with your fellow editors, and explain the rationale for your edit, or in other words, how your change improves the article. Here's some standard verbiage about this, with some links with more information; please read it and follow the links:
Hello. Thank you for
your contributions to
Wikipedia.
When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled " Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:
Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)
You are strongly encouraged (but not required) to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.
Edit summary content is visible in:
Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. With a
Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting
Preferences →
Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary.
Thanks!
Mathglot (
talk) 09:22, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
I see that you have inappropriately added the category ‘Organizations that oppose LGBT rights in the United Kingdom’ to the articles on various UK organisations. I have reverted this on LGB Alliance. I suggest you self-revert all of the other additions of this category which you have made today. Sweet6970 ( talk) 18:05, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Copied from my Talkpage:
Category:Organizations that oppose LGBT rights in the United Kingdom has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Crossroads -talk- 05:51, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
An article you recently created,
Trans Safety Network, 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.
DGG (
talk ) 10:48, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Declaration on women's sex-based rights and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 3#Declaration on women's sex-based rights until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Qwerfjkl
talk 12:33, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Declaration on Women's Sex-Based Rights and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 3#Declaration on Women's Sex-Based Rights until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Qwerfjkl
talk 12:55, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Hey Amanda,
The recent featured article review of J. K. Rowling was recently concluded, with a result of keep. Accordingly WP:FAOWN now applies to it, so you may wish to raise any such contentious edits on the talk page first, as every part of the article's content was subject to a rather rigorous review and discussion only a couple of weeks ago. Sideswipe9th ( talk) 04:34, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Amanda on 6th May you added a citation to the Women's Declaration International page which shows that it was retrieved on 11 December 2021. Please can you explain how the dates do not align. Additionally the site is behind a paywall so it is not possible to verify the citation.
Bartleyo (
talk) 14:40, 7 May 2022 (UTC)--
Amanda A. Brant (
talk) 13:54, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on
edit warring. The thread is
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Amanda_A._Brant reported by User:Crossroads (Result: ). Thank you.
Crossroads
-talk- 23:08, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
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) 01:51, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
See WP:TALK You should not change your comments after someone has replied to them. I am reverting your changes – make your comments properly, with a new post. Sweet6970 ( talk) 13:55, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
So long as no one has yet responded to your comment, it's accepted and common practice that you may continue to edit your remarks for a short while to correct mistakes, add links or otherwise improve them. If you've accidentally posted to the wrong page or section or if you've simply changed your mind, it's been only a short while and no one has yet responded, you may remove your comment entirely.
But if anyone has already replied to or quoted your original comment, changing your comment may deprive any replies of their original context, and this should be avoided. Once others have replied, or even if no one's replied but it's been more than a short while, if you wish to change or delete your comment, it is commonly best practice to indicate your changes. An exception to this rule may be permitted if there is only one reply and it invokes WP:MUTUALSweet6970 ( talk) 23:21, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trans Safety Network 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.
Suitskvarts ( talk) 17:03, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Women's Declaration International, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Women's Declaration International until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot ( talk) 01:02, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
The redirect
Sex-based rights has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 8 § Sex-based rights until a consensus is reached.
Mathglot (
talk) 17:00, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
Are you capable of listening to others? Just stop and try it and I think you would be amazed. Willbb234 21:46, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
You have recently made edits related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them. This is a standard message to inform you that gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. Contentious topics are the successor to the former discretionary sanctions system, which you may be aware of. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see
Wikipedia:Contentious topics. For a summary of difference between the former and new system, see
WP:CTVSDS.
Sweet6970 (
talk) 22:01, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
You have twice
here and
here personally attacked
Holly Lawford-Smith and said that citing her book was "like using a book by a well-known supporter of the KKK when writing about white supremacy in the US." Each time linking to news stories about activists protesting about this university professor in a clear attempt to discredit this person to other editors at that article. You might want to re-read our policy
Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, which applies to article talk pages. And our article on
Ku Klux Klan may remind you that these were people who had more than viewpoints you find hateful, but went about murdering people. So, unless you have reliable sources that Lawford-Smith is actually
lynching trans people, please strike both those associations and seriously tone down your rhetoric.
Wikipedia:Activist says "Editors operating in good faith, not seeking to promote specific views, will usually try to find some way to cooperate, collaborate, and compromise with almost all other editors"
. Wikipedia is not here to settle an ongoing
culture war and editors who only support text and sources from their side of the debate are likely to find themselves topic banned. --
Colin°
Talk 12:06, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
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) 00:56, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Hey,
Just wanted to give you a reminder after this comment, article talk pages not the venue for discussing editor conduct issues. Article talk pages are for content focussed discussions. If you feel as though there's an issue with the conduct of another editor, WP:ANI and WP:AE are the correct venues. As Mridul Wadhwa is subject to two CTOPs ( gender and sexuality, and biographies of living or recently deceased people) I would strong suggest AE over ANI when reporting conduct issues.
I'd also suggest you remove, strike, or amend your comment on the article talk page because of this. Sideswipe9th ( talk) 21:30, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Amanda A. Brant,
Thank you for creating Louise Westmarland.
I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:
Hi Amanda, nice work on your new article. In my opinion, it would benefit from inclusion in appropriate Wikiprojects, and additional WP:RS secondary sources would be a plus. Good job!
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Bastun}}
. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. For broader editing help, please visit the
Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 20:27, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
The article Ruth Pearce (sociologist) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
subject does not meet notability standards of Wikipedia
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 10:00, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Amanda A. Brant. Thank you for your work on Henry F. Fradella. North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
good start
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
North8000 ( talk) 02:51, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Henry F. Fradella, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henry F. Fradella until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot ( talk) 01:01, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
Hey,
Please be careful when citing stuff to Yahoo News or Yahoo Finance. Like MSN they often rehost/republish articles by other sources, and you can typically identify this by the logo and/or name of the originator being published above the headline. The Yahoo News source that you just added to J. K. Rowling and Political views of J. K. Rowling was simply a republishing of the Daily Beast article you also used for that content.
Also, please be very careful when adding content like that to WP:BLPs. Per WP:DAILYBEAST that source should only be used with caution for supporting content about a living person, if at all and rarely for statements that are controversial in nature. Sideswipe9th ( talk) 03:19, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
I have requested this be speedily deleted as G10, an attack page. Unlike most attack pages which just serve to annoy or harass their targets, we have specific evidence that the SPLC's hate group designation has been used by at least one individual, Floyd Corkins, to target a designated group for attempted mass murder, as seen in Family Research Council#2012 shooting. Further, SPLC's designation is not defining for any of these organizations initially included. I'll further note that clearly violent hate groups, such as Aryan Nations, where such characteristic might well be defining ( SPLC) were left out in favor of groups that appear to have common appearance in the gender and sexuality contentious topic. Jclemens ( talk) 21:02, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Hi Amanda A. Brant! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.
Happy editing! Grimes2 ( talk) 15:14, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar |
Thanks for the ce of the Nobel-prize laureates articles. Grimes2 ( talk) 09:34, 7 October 2021 (UTC) |
On 8 October 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Benjamin List, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Indefensible ( talk) 21:55, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
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.
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.
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 articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. 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.
Crossroads -talk- 21:02, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement regarding a possible violation of an Arbitration Committee decision. The thread is Amanda A. Brant. Thank you. Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 10:55, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Hey Amanda, my advice next time another editor makes an accusation like that is to not rise to their bait. Point out the personal attack and refer them back to policy. If they continue, then you can raise it through one of the noticeboards via WP:RUCD. I do agree with everything you've said on the talk page. Sideswipe9th ( talk) 16:45, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Please use an edit summary with every edit. Each edit should have the goal of improving an article in some way, however large or small. The edit summary field is there, to help you communicate with your fellow editors, and explain the rationale for your edit, or in other words, how your change improves the article. Here's some standard verbiage about this, with some links with more information; please read it and follow the links:
Hello. Thank you for
your contributions to
Wikipedia.
When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled " Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:
Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)
You are strongly encouraged (but not required) to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.
Edit summary content is visible in:
Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. With a
Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting
Preferences →
Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary.
Thanks!
Mathglot (
talk) 09:22, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
I see that you have inappropriately added the category ‘Organizations that oppose LGBT rights in the United Kingdom’ to the articles on various UK organisations. I have reverted this on LGB Alliance. I suggest you self-revert all of the other additions of this category which you have made today. Sweet6970 ( talk) 18:05, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Copied from my Talkpage:
Category:Organizations that oppose LGBT rights in the United Kingdom has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Crossroads -talk- 05:51, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
An article you recently created,
Trans Safety Network, 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.
DGG (
talk ) 10:48, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Declaration on women's sex-based rights and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 3#Declaration on women's sex-based rights until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Qwerfjkl
talk 12:33, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Declaration on Women's Sex-Based Rights and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 3#Declaration on Women's Sex-Based Rights until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Qwerfjkl
talk 12:55, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Hey Amanda,
The recent featured article review of J. K. Rowling was recently concluded, with a result of keep. Accordingly WP:FAOWN now applies to it, so you may wish to raise any such contentious edits on the talk page first, as every part of the article's content was subject to a rather rigorous review and discussion only a couple of weeks ago. Sideswipe9th ( talk) 04:34, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Amanda on 6th May you added a citation to the Women's Declaration International page which shows that it was retrieved on 11 December 2021. Please can you explain how the dates do not align. Additionally the site is behind a paywall so it is not possible to verify the citation.
Bartleyo (
talk) 14:40, 7 May 2022 (UTC)--
Amanda A. Brant (
talk) 13:54, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on
edit warring. The thread is
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Amanda_A._Brant reported by User:Crossroads (Result: ). Thank you.
Crossroads
-talk- 23:08, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
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) 01:51, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
See WP:TALK You should not change your comments after someone has replied to them. I am reverting your changes – make your comments properly, with a new post. Sweet6970 ( talk) 13:55, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
So long as no one has yet responded to your comment, it's accepted and common practice that you may continue to edit your remarks for a short while to correct mistakes, add links or otherwise improve them. If you've accidentally posted to the wrong page or section or if you've simply changed your mind, it's been only a short while and no one has yet responded, you may remove your comment entirely.
But if anyone has already replied to or quoted your original comment, changing your comment may deprive any replies of their original context, and this should be avoided. Once others have replied, or even if no one's replied but it's been more than a short while, if you wish to change or delete your comment, it is commonly best practice to indicate your changes. An exception to this rule may be permitted if there is only one reply and it invokes WP:MUTUALSweet6970 ( talk) 23:21, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trans Safety Network 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.
Suitskvarts ( talk) 17:03, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Women's Declaration International, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Women's Declaration International until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot ( talk) 01:02, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
The redirect
Sex-based rights has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 8 § Sex-based rights until a consensus is reached.
Mathglot (
talk) 17:00, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
Are you capable of listening to others? Just stop and try it and I think you would be amazed. Willbb234 21:46, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
You have recently made edits related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them. This is a standard message to inform you that gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. Contentious topics are the successor to the former discretionary sanctions system, which you may be aware of. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see
Wikipedia:Contentious topics. For a summary of difference between the former and new system, see
WP:CTVSDS.
Sweet6970 (
talk) 22:01, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
You have twice
here and
here personally attacked
Holly Lawford-Smith and said that citing her book was "like using a book by a well-known supporter of the KKK when writing about white supremacy in the US." Each time linking to news stories about activists protesting about this university professor in a clear attempt to discredit this person to other editors at that article. You might want to re-read our policy
Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, which applies to article talk pages. And our article on
Ku Klux Klan may remind you that these were people who had more than viewpoints you find hateful, but went about murdering people. So, unless you have reliable sources that Lawford-Smith is actually
lynching trans people, please strike both those associations and seriously tone down your rhetoric.
Wikipedia:Activist says "Editors operating in good faith, not seeking to promote specific views, will usually try to find some way to cooperate, collaborate, and compromise with almost all other editors"
. Wikipedia is not here to settle an ongoing
culture war and editors who only support text and sources from their side of the debate are likely to find themselves topic banned. --
Colin°
Talk 12:06, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
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) 00:56, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Hey,
Just wanted to give you a reminder after this comment, article talk pages not the venue for discussing editor conduct issues. Article talk pages are for content focussed discussions. If you feel as though there's an issue with the conduct of another editor, WP:ANI and WP:AE are the correct venues. As Mridul Wadhwa is subject to two CTOPs ( gender and sexuality, and biographies of living or recently deceased people) I would strong suggest AE over ANI when reporting conduct issues.
I'd also suggest you remove, strike, or amend your comment on the article talk page because of this. Sideswipe9th ( talk) 21:30, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Amanda A. Brant,
Thank you for creating Louise Westmarland.
I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:
Hi Amanda, nice work on your new article. In my opinion, it would benefit from inclusion in appropriate Wikiprojects, and additional WP:RS secondary sources would be a plus. Good job!
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Bastun}}
. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. For broader editing help, please visit the
Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 20:27, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
The article Ruth Pearce (sociologist) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
subject does not meet notability standards of Wikipedia
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 10:00, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Amanda A. Brant. Thank you for your work on Henry F. Fradella. North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
good start
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
North8000 ( talk) 02:51, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Henry F. Fradella, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henry F. Fradella until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot ( talk) 01:01, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
Hey,
Please be careful when citing stuff to Yahoo News or Yahoo Finance. Like MSN they often rehost/republish articles by other sources, and you can typically identify this by the logo and/or name of the originator being published above the headline. The Yahoo News source that you just added to J. K. Rowling and Political views of J. K. Rowling was simply a republishing of the Daily Beast article you also used for that content.
Also, please be very careful when adding content like that to WP:BLPs. Per WP:DAILYBEAST that source should only be used with caution for supporting content about a living person, if at all and rarely for statements that are controversial in nature. Sideswipe9th ( talk) 03:19, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
I have requested this be speedily deleted as G10, an attack page. Unlike most attack pages which just serve to annoy or harass their targets, we have specific evidence that the SPLC's hate group designation has been used by at least one individual, Floyd Corkins, to target a designated group for attempted mass murder, as seen in Family Research Council#2012 shooting. Further, SPLC's designation is not defining for any of these organizations initially included. I'll further note that clearly violent hate groups, such as Aryan Nations, where such characteristic might well be defining ( SPLC) were left out in favor of groups that appear to have common appearance in the gender and sexuality contentious topic. Jclemens ( talk) 21:02, 8 June 2024 (UTC)