User talk:Ck4829

Your category is up for deletion
I think out of courtesy they were supposed to contact you, they did not. Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_July_3 Signed: Travb (talk) 15:48, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Your category is up for deletion or renaming: Categories for deletion/Log/2006 July 28 Bejnar 22:21, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:John McCain controversies
I have nominated john mccain controversies for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Loonymonkey (talk) 01:05, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Bush Derangement Syndrome
Hi. I've undone your recent edit to Bush Derangement Syndrome, for reasons I tried to explain on the talk page. If you think I'm wrong, please leave a comment there. Cheers, CWC 18:25, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Kristol family
Category:Kristol family, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. 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. Secret account 05:03, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Virginia Tech Project Invite
Go Hokies (talk) 22:40, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Category:Bush Pioneers
Category:Bush Pioneers, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. 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. BDD (talk) 17:34, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

July 2017
Your recent editing history at 2017 National Scout Jamboree shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.--SlackerDelphi (talk) 13:54, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Your category edits
Hello, you've been making problematic category edits for the last eleven years; please knock it off. Smallpox vaccine is a vaccine, not a disease, so it shouldn't be in Category:Eradicated diseases. Sam Clovis is a person, not a controversy]], so his article shouldn't be in Category:Trump administration controversies. Please review the categorisation guideline. If you continue to make problematic category-related edits, you may be blocked. Graham 87 03:29, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Diseases of affluence
I see that you've added Diseases of affluence to Category:"Social problems in medicine". Are you sure about that? Maproom (talk) 16:38, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Category:Perceived judicial activism in the United States has been nominated for discussion
Category:Perceived judicial activism in the United States, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides 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. postdlf (talk) 14:23, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

See alsos and our BLP policy
I've just removed the names of Ivanka Trump from one article and Jared Kushner from two. I can see no reason under MOS:SEEALSO to include those specific names and the addition of Kushner's name to I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration might suggest that he was involved somehow, a clear violation of WP:BLP. Doug Weller talk 14:02, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

addition of Madonna–whore complex to an article on an aspect of sex education
Again, not appropriate. Doug Weller talk 14:03, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Categories redux
User:Graham87, another Admin, warned you about these last December. Richard Sackler is not a social problem in medicine. Again, this is a violation of WP:BLP. Doug Weller talk 14:09, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Category:Militarization of society has been nominated for discussion
Category:Militarization of society, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides 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. Doug Weller talk 14:12, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions alert for articles and content relating to post-1932 American politics and articles and content relating to recently deceased or living persons
Doug Weller talk 14:19, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Your edit to Cargo cult
Please do not add politically-charged links to unrelated articles. ― Susmuffin Talk 21:38, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message
Hello, I'm Bacondrum. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to United Patriots Front have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. At this point your editing history in regards to adding categories is beginning to look like deliberate vandalism, you appear to be adding categories to suit a personal agenda, please stop adding POV categories to pages. Categories are not there to game the system, they are not to be used to present subjects in a unfavorable light. Bacondrum (talk) 21:43, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

March 2019
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. R2 (bleep) 22:18, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I'm GenQuest. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Charleston church shooting, 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. If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 23:31, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31h for disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:.
 * Since you decided not to react in any way even afther the ANI case was opened, but continued to add the category to the articles, which in some cases obviously does not belong there, I blocked your account for 31h. The ANI continues to run its course, and if by the time your block expires it is still running, I strongly recommend you to respond there before making further questionable edits. Failure to do so may result in a block of a longer of indefinite duration.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:31, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, please respond
Hi, my name is Levivich. There is a discussion about your editing happening here: WP:ANI. You may want to respond and join the conversation. While you are blocked, if you post a message here, someone will copy it to the page WP:ANI for you. After your block expires, you can post message yourself to WP:ANI. I hope you join the discussion. Thank you. Leviv&thinsp;ich 17:58, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I'm serving my time as I should, I am appealing nothing, I meant to disrupt and I succeeded, guilty. My edits went too far, maybe? But I sought out include individuals, cheerleaders, ideologues, organizations, symbols, rhetoric, propaganda all as white nationalist terrorism. While it's clearly a very uncomfortable subject, I find it odd that practically nobody corrected my 'overreach' with what appropriate examples are, if someone were to tell people in that discussion something, one could tell them "I put absolutely nothing in that category as a joke or to be ironic and I sought out to populate it as quickly as possible."

I hope that helps, I've been told by a friend I should probably limit my time on Wikipedia for a while, especially going through all those disgusting pages.

Ck4829 (talk) 18:23, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying! I'm not sure if that's going to help :-) but I copied it to the ANI thread. This is just my opinion, but I agree with a lot of the categories you've added, but if you stop at "drive-by tagging" to make a "statement" you may be just wasting your time. It's going to take discussion with other editors, and probably adding sources to many articles, in order to make the tag "stick". FWIW I'd be willing to work on that, so if you feel like it, stop by and say hello on my talk page when your block expires. Leviv&thinsp;ich 18:43, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

March 2019
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. GoldenRing (talk) 10:36, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigation
w umbolo  ^^^  15:53, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

For the record, I've opened a new SPI. I think it's fairly obvioua Ck4829 has been editing logged out after his block for a good while: Sockpuppet investigations/Ck4829 --Pudeo (talk) 15:23, 6 July 2019 (UTC)