User talk:Kkjj

July 2015
Hello, I'm Frosty. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Liv and Maddie with this edit, without 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. Thanks. —Frosty ☃ 09:44, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Kkjj, you are invited on a Wikipedia Adventure!
 The Adventure

Liv and Maddie character list
I agree that it's hard to read, but your edit made the list markup incorrect; it created a separate one-item list for each character. The proposed split should take care of it once done, something like List of Mighty Med characters. I'll restore the rest of your changes soon. nyuszika7h (talk) 09:16, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh, you already did, okay then. nyuszika7h (talk) 09:24, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

August 2016
Before adding a category to an article, as you did to Big Time Rush, please make sure that the subject of the article really belongs in the category that you specified according to Wikipedia's categorization guidelines. Categories must also be supported by the article's verifiable content. Categories may be removed if they are deemed incorrect for the subject matter. Also check out WP:Defining Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:37, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits while logged out. Making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of both an account and an IP address by the same person in the same setting. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:36, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Liv and Maddie. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 22:18, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Liv and Maddie. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 06:06, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 03:16, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * The report has been closed with no action, but with some negative comment about your editing of Liv and Maddie. Please see Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. If you revert again about categories, before getting a consensus in your favor at the talk page, you are risking a block. Let me know if you have any questions. User:IJBall has stated, "it was essentially consensus at the Talk page that the categories Kkjj was trying to add were not appropriate due to WP:Defining." Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 03:46, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

August 2016
Please stop making disruptive edits, as you did at Liv and Maddie. If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 15:13, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Sockpuppet investigation
Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 14:27, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

August 2016
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 days for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page:.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  19:52, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

November 2016
Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Charlotte's Web (1973 film). Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Categories must be supported by article content, opinions of what type of film something is absent well-referenced article content is original research. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:20, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Non-diffusing categories
Hi. I noticed you removed, among a few other categories, from film articles. This category is non-diffusing. That means that every American film should be in this category, even if it's also in the sub-categories. I made the same mistake once – it's rather counterintuitive. If you see a category regularly listed in multiple articles, and it seems like it would probably be redundant, I guess it pays to look at the category to see if there's a "this category is non-diffusing" description. You can see some more guidance at WP:FILMCAT. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:54, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

The Sword in the Stone (film)
I have re-removed the "Films about squirrels" category from this article. You claim that the squirrel scene is famous, but this is currently unsupported by the article text. You are welcome to add supporting information to the article and re-add the category, or discuss this further at the article's Talk page if you would like input from other editors. Cheers! DonIago (talk) 18:18, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

June 2017
This is the only warning you will receive about ownership of articles, which you showed at Liv and Maddie. The next time you continue to disruptively edit Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Amaury ( talk &#124; contribs ) 08:15, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.)
 * Liv and Maddie ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Liv_and_Maddie check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Liv_and_Maddie?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added a link pointing to Point of view
 * The Rescuers ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/The_Rescuers check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/The_Rescuers?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added a link pointing to Blowhole

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 18:24, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Category:Television series with multiple main characters has been nominated for discussion
Category:Television series with multiple main characters, 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. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:46, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Category:Television series about friendship has been nominated for discussion
Category:Television series about friendship, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. 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. ... disco spinster   talk  22:18, 16 August 2019 (UTC)