User talk:KlayCax

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. 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.

Points to note:

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.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and 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. You continue to edit war on the Genocide Joe article/redirect. This behavior related to a contentious topic and BLP is unwise -- to say the least. O3000, Ret. (talk) 00:40, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a misunderstanding. See Genocide Joe's talk page. KlayCax (talk) 00:57, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No misunderstanding. O3000, Ret. (talk) 11:50, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, KlayCax. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 16:54, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am wondering where you got the source that Thomas Crooks was alleged to be center-left or a centrist by classmates. Almost all said he was conservative, some said he didn't talk about it with them. None said anything like that. Not in the sources provided, either. Personisinsterest (talk) 03:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here, here, and here, among other sources. Multiple individuals have claimed that he expressed a dislike of Trump, was COVID-19 conscious and admired Fauci, among other claims.

It would be best if we left it out of the article altogether, @Personisinsterest:. KlayCax (talk) 21:27, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fox News isn't a reliable source, but luckily I found a Spectrum News article [1]. Being conscious of COVID doesn't suggest political leaning. The The Guardian article you cited does say the recollections vary, but never said that they were contradictory. It only cited sources that said he was conservative or didn't talk about politics with them. No more than one source said he didn't like Trump. To the contrary, at least two sources said he did support Trump. No one ever said he admired Fauci. No one explicitly said he was a liberal, centrist, or was center-left.

One classmate said he was slightly right leaning. Many said he was conservative, some said that he liked Trump. Some said he didn't talk about politics with them. One said he didn't like Trump.

We should mention it, no matter how seemingly contradictory. His political views are very important to consider in the context of him shooting a major politician. They are widely reported by the media because they see this connection. We can't just write it all off because you see the claims as contradictory. Personisinsterest (talk) 21:42, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's obviously contradictory that some have stated that he was COVID-19 conscious, admired Fauci, and disliked Trump, others have described him as a centrist, and others as conservative.

WP: HEARSAY, WP: BLP, and other policies obviously apply here, and it's frequent for political assassinations to take actions without any consideration of politics.

None of this belongs in the article. KlayCax (talk) 21:50, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No one said he was a centrist, including your supposed sources. And saying being COVID-conscious represents political leaning is original research unless a source connects the dots. But I guess it is contradictory with people saying he liked or didn't like Trump. But he's obviously a conservative, and no one has disputed that. Some conservatives don't like Trump, it doesn't cancel out. If allowed in Wikipedia policy, it is worth talking about for the reasons above. Personisinsterest (talk) 12:20, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't read Fox as it is not RS. I saw nothing in your other two cites or any other RS that indicated he was anything but conservative. As for disliking Trump, I think all of the VP possibilities said bad things about Trump, as well as many Republican senators. Really bad things. That doesn't mean they are on the left. And only extremists were not Covid-19 conscious. O3000, Ret. (talk) 21:53, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The classmate described him as left of center. That's what he claimed. We don't know his ideology. President Biden has stated it, the FBI has stated it, his peers can't agree on his ideology. No, we should not put it in Wikivoice. @Objective3000:. It should be absurdly obvious by now that the reports of peers are heavily contradictory. This needs to go to RFC. But it would be a clear violation of Wikipedia policy to reinstate it, in my view.

This is all hearsay and speculation. KlayCax (talk) 21:56, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just looked through the sources again and don't see left or center. O3000, Ret. (talk) 22:05, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's in the Fox News interview. At the very least, he shouldn't be identified as conservative. KlayCax (talk) 22:06, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All of this could of course be added if it's confirmed. For now, it's absolute speculation, and it's widely irresponsible that people want to include unverified claims that he's left or right-wing into the article.

Many times: these type of things aren't even about policies. (Reagan's shooter being obsessed with Jodie Foster. Just to give one example.) It's obvious we should wait. KlayCax (talk) 22:07, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised you would even mention Fox. I wouldn't be surprised if Fox said he was a Communist, transexual, illegitimate son of Biden. They have suggested Biden is a demon from Hell and Trump was appointed by God. Personally if I had to guess, I'd guess he was just looking for a famous suicide and Trump was a convenient, nearby target. As far as waiting, I don't think the article should even exist for a few months. But if folks here insist that it exists, and we are going to talk about social media crap, perhaps we need to also talk about what RS have found thus far. O3000, Ret. (talk) 00:15, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Partisan sources, whether from Fox News, Jacobin, American Conservative, MSNBC, or anywhere else are fine, @Objective3000:. As long as we're citing sources. The gist of the matter is that eyewitnesses have given dramatically different accounts and it's all hearsay for the time being. And I agree with you that it's likely that he was just looking for a famous suicide. But this is once again speculation. As for waiting? Yes, we can't override the RFC on that.

But most of the article should be rightfully empty for the time being. KlayCax (talk) 12:09, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Haha. I watched that video too. It never explicitly said he was anything close to left of center. Personisinsterest (talk) 00:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're confusing your definition of left of center with what's actually in the sources themselves. You cannot say he is left of center because one classmate said he didn't like Trump and use that as evidence the reports are contradictory. This is a big problem and what got me so riled up. Don't impose things on sources to pretend he was alleged to have a bunch of different political ideologies. Personisinsterest (talk) 12:23, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm opposed to adding anything regarding his political views outside of his registration and donations into the article. When did I ever add anything into the article saying that he was center-left? I didn't. Fox News stated he was described as center-left by a classmate, that's where I'm getting it from, @Personisinsterest:. I'm definitely opposed to adding that statement into Crook's Wikipedia article. (To state again.) And it's not original research to state that classmates have described his political views in radically contradicting ways and we don't know his beliefs. It's directly stated here and multiple other sources. He certainly has been alleged to have a "bunch of different political ideologies". Once described him as a hardcore conservative, another a right-leaning centrist, and another a "center-leftist" according to Fox News. (Citing his concern over COVID-19, masking, and supporting Fauci's cautionary approach to the pandemic.)

I absolutely do not agree that any of this should be added into the article for now. KlayCax (talk) 12:35, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Guardian article didn't say they were contradictory. It said they varied. And they only cited people who said he was conservative or didn't talk to them about politics.

I said that you used the assumption he was center-left to help your argument.

Again, I listened to the entire video and read the Fox article and NOWHERE does it say center-left. I don't know where you got that from. Personisinsterest (talk) 13:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, conservative and right leaning, which are the two explicit descriptors without the things you said, are not contradictory. It is contradictory between whether or not he supports Trump. Even the source that said he didn't like Trump didn't say he wasn't conservative. Personisinsterest (talk) 13:32, 18 July 2024 (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 KlayCax. Thank you. Prcc27 (talk) 00:04, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Prcc27 May I request the link to the decision? Buildershed (talk) 21:25, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can see the discussion here, @Buildershed:.

@XavierGreen: was also wondering where to find this. I can't comment on the matter per guidelines. Hope that answers your question. KlayCax (talk) 05:51, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following topic ban now applies to you:

topic-banned from post-1992 politics of the United States, broadly construed.

You have been sanctioned for the reasons provided in response to this arbitration enforcement request.

This topic ban is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics 2#Final decision and, if applicable, the contentious topics procedure. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. Please read WP:TBAN to understand what a topic ban is. If you do not comply with the topic ban, you may be blocked for an extended period to enforce the ban.

If you wish to appeal the ban, please read the appeals process. You are free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. Vanamonde93 (talk) 15:41, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello KlayCax. I also wanted to add, that you have been warned about your editing on infoboxes as well. Prcc27 (talk) 17:58, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, KlayCax. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Gary Clayton Anderson, 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) 09:06, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, KlayCax. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Jeffrey Ostler, 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) 12:05, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ava Kris Tyson 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/Ava Kris Tyson 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.

Hemiauchenia (talk) 03:19, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, KlayCax. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Ethnic Cleansing and the Indian, 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) 17:08, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]