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.

Please also note WP:BLPNAME - we will not add the suspect's name to anywhere on Wikipedia the day of the event, and you should gain consensus for its addition before attempting to add it again. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez ( User/ say hi!) 23:34, 2 April 2021 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lili Hayes 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lili Hayes 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.

Bbarmadillo ( talk) 08:05, 4 April 2021 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm CommanderWaterford. I noticed that in this edit to Lili Hayes, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. CommanderWaterford ( talk) 15:27, 4 April 2021 (UTC) reply

Yes, it was a mistake. My apologies.-- Juliantrevor ( talk) 15:42, 4 April 2021 (UTC) reply

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Gbawden was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Needs more sources. Will definitely be notable once confirmed

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:David Chipman and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:David Chipman, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{ Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Gbawden ( talk) 11:53, 9 April 2021 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

Hello, it seems as though I was blocked from editing because of a block against my brother User:JG4236. I am a different person but I understand if there was some confusion because we are both on a computer with the same IP address. I was hoping to be unblocked since I did not abuse my editing privileges like him.-- Jgtrevor ( talk) 18:59, 11 April 2021 (UTC) reply

Decline reason:

WP:BROTHER might be of some interest. Technical evidence indicates this account and JG4236 are operated by the same person. --jpgordon ^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 19:45, 11 April 2021 (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.

Not super sure what you mean with the WP:BROTHER link because it doesn't apply to my situation. Technical evidence also shows that I have not vandalized anything unlike my brother.-- Jgtrevor ( talk) 22:49, 11 April 2021 (UTC) reply

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Z1720 was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

In order to be accepted, there must be three reliable sources from independent, secondary publications. Linked in cannot be used as a source. The other two are not independent.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Marie Claire Kaberamanzi and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Marie Claire Kaberamanzi, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{ Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Z1720 ( talk) 17:51, 29 July 2021 (UTC) reply

Hello, Jgtrevor! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Z1720 ( talk) 17:51, 29 July 2021 (UTC) reply

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Damian Williams (attorney). First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Damian Williams (lawyer). Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Damian Williams (lawyer). If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, 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. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Snickers2686 ( talk) 19:17, 13 August 2021 (UTC) reply

Understood. Thanks for letting me know.-- Jgtrevor ( talk) 19:56, 13 August 2021 (UTC) reply

I've restored Damian Williams (attorney) to draft space ( here) as the article already exists at Damian Williams (lawyer). Please merge any of the sourced content from your draft to the extant article if you'd like to do so.-- Jezebel's Ponyo ^{bons mots} 19:57, 13 August 2021 (UTC) reply

Please do not add or change content, as you did at 2022 New York gubernatorial election, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. BlueboyLINY ( talk) 03:11, 14 August 2021 (UTC) reply

Hello, Jgtrevor. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:David Chipman, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occurred, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 12:02, 9 September 2021 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm Larry Hockett. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, David Ortiz, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Larry Hockett ( Talk) 00:02, 12 October 2021 (UTC) reply

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 01:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC) reply

Hello, Jgtrevor. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Marie Claire Kaberamanzi, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 18:03, 29 December 2021 (UTC) reply

Hello, Jgtrevor. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Marie Claire Kaberamanzi".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:17, 29 January 2022 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Jan Terri requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jan Terri. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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. PCN02WPS ( talk | contribs) 03:40, 4 February 2022 (UTC) reply

The substantive issue at the 2015 deletion discussion was whether the subject of the article met Wikipedia's Wikipedia:Notability policies. A key guideline to those policies is the general notability guideline. In the seven years since that discussion, things may well have changed: the subject of the article may have later gained significant coverage in reliable sources, sufficient enough to overturn the 2015 outcome. In this case, that has not happened. This is only a short summary of the "WP:G4" deletion rationale. Please feel free to ask me for more details. Pete AU aka -- Shirt58 ( talk) 09:52, 4 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Seersucker Thursday into Traditions of the United States Senate. 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) 22:26, 20 February 2022 (UTC) reply

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. Thank you. Carter00000 ( talk) 08:49, 29 October 2022 (UTC) reply

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

The filing is Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Alsoriano97. Please provide any information on background or specific incidents if you would like to. Carter00000 ( talk) 13:29, 6 November 2022 (UTC) reply

I am having a hard time finding the specific discussion about me.-- Jgtrevor ( talk) 15:10, 6 November 2022 (UTC) reply

You were notified of the filing in relation to the following revert of your entry. You may also review this discussion related to the reverts. Carter00000 ( talk) 06:00, 7 November 2022 (UTC) reply

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) 01:50, 29 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Hey! I just wanted to give you a heads up that, regrettably, I had to revert your addition of the E. Jean Carroll lawsuit to the Trump page. There was a huge discussion of how to present that lawsuit quite recently. One thing that quickly emerged from that discussion was an agreement that it should not be included until there's consensus as to how it should be included. ... And by "one thing" I mean "the only thing" because oh boy did it go nowhere. We'll probably do an RFC on it after the current RFC is over (Best not to overload the talk page with two RFCs at the same time)-- Jerome Frank Disciple 01:28, 9 June 2023 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page 2023 Wimbledon Championships – Men's singles final, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A " bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) ( talk) 16:22, 18 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Donald Trump, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages New York, Obstruction and Georgia. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 06:06, 22 August 2023 (UTC) reply

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) 00:55, 28 November 2023 (UTC) reply