Welcome 14Jenna7Caesura!

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.

Crossroads ^-talk- 06:26, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see you have already received from Crossroads a discretionary alert that applies to J. K. Rowling, as well as a BLP discretionary alert below from Cedar777 about BLPs, which also applies to J. K. Rowling. I have removed your recent addition at Rowling from the lead; please take greater care on BLPs that the text you add is well supported by the sources you use. I will type up momentarily at Talk: J. K. Rowling a fuller explanation of the problems, but first I have to correct the text at Politics of J. K. Rowling, where I moved the content. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:04, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please see this talk page entry at Talk:J. K. Rowling. If you breach discretionary sanctions again by inserting original research into a BLP, you are likely to be blocked. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:26, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. 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.

― Tartan357 ^Talk 04:38, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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 the Arab–Israeli conflict. 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.

Adding the basic DS notices that apply to editing the page for Alan Dershowitz. Cedar777 (talk) 23:39, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that you apparently disagree with the inclusion criteria for this list. However, if there is a specific consensus for inclusion, you need to adhere to it even if you personally disagree with it. You are welcome to argue for a change to these criteria on the article's talk page but until such a change has been agreed on, re-adding entries that are out of scope might be seen as disruptive editing and lead to sanctions under the discretionary sanctions regime in place for gender-related articles (see notice from Crossroads above). Regards SoWhy 18:21, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at the talk page. I saw no consensus. I don't have time for you. You may keep your deletion. --14Jenna7Caesura (talk) 18:24, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the discussion at Talk:List of people killed for being transgender/Archive 1#Requested move 20 March 2020 which led to the current tile with clear consensus to rescope the list accordingly and Talk:List of people killed for being transgender#Requested move 6 June 2020 which resulted in a consensus not to move it back to a title that would include any unlawfully killed trans people. As I mentioned, you are welcome to start a new discussion to change this consensus but deliberately making changes outside the scope, whether in content or in title, are not helpful (this includes the perplexing (and immediately reverted) move to "TDoR deaths"). Regards SoWhy 16:30, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see that there is no clearly defined criteria that is articulated in the page. However, there is a clearly defined list based on TDoR. You reject notable politicians; okay. You reject network news okay; okay. You want to discriminate against t girls; okay. You want to delete the article which you mostly did; okay. You want to troll me; okay. I hope I have done enough to make yourself happy. You win 100% and now you want me to say, "You win 100%". You keep all your edits. You keep all your deletions. --14Jenna7Caesura (talk) 17:53, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mubarak Bala, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Islamic court.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 14Jenna7Caesura. Thank you. Funcrunch (talk) 01:38, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]