User talk:DominosThermometer

Celebs Go Dating

The content is relevant since it is a fact about the show. It doesn't matter if it's also on another page. ... discospinster _talk 20:33, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It’s WP:COI because User:JPA24 is Ryan-Mark Parsons himself and has created and continued to add information about himself to other pages.DominosThermometer (talk) 20:40, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would walk back that allegation very quickly. Editors have been blocked for less per the WP:OUTING guidelines. —C.Fred (talk) 20:52, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Erm it’s not an allegation sweetheart it’s a fact. That Ryan-Mark Parsons page has been nominated for deletion before and other editors have noted a clear Conflict of Interest, and the tone of the page clearly shows that the editor is Parson himself. So don’t tell me what I can and cannot say. Regards DominosThermometer (talk) 22:06, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 2022

Hi DominosThermometer! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Celebs Go Dating several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Celebs Go Dating, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 20:57, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Judi Love, you may be blocked from editing. See WP:BLPPRIMARY, which notes that court records and the like are to be avoided as sources. —C.Fred (talk) 04:27, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah it’s not disruptive at all. It’s inputting correct information with available and reliable sources, try again.DominosThermometer (talk) 11:23, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If it's using reliable sources, it's one thing. If it's pulling data from corporate registrations and extrapolating, that's another. —C.Fred (talk) 13:24, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, DominosThermometer, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page List of EastEnders characters did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Introduction tutorial
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Help pages
Simplified Manual of Style
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need personal help ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. – DarkGlow • 22:10, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 2022

A page you created has been nominated for deletion as an attack page, according to section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

Do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject or any other entity. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing. — csc^-1 22:38, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi sorry this was an accident DominosThermometer (talk) 22:39, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're not getting off to a very good start here, DominosThermometer. If you don't stop your glib and dismissive attitude towards other editors and editing on Wikipedia, your time here will be short. You're getting awfully close to a WP:NOTHERE block. Right now, you appear to be a new editor who will need a lot of attention and admins have little patience for that. There is too much else here to do besides monitoring troubled editors. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:17, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t like busybodies Liz, I am trying my best here. But I will not be spoken to rudely, I don’t know what the hell glib is. DominosThermometer (talk) 01:30, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also I think when I know more than users and administrators about deprecated sources it shows a lot about me as a character DominosThermometer (talk) 01:32, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I was very polite in pointing out that you were behaving rudely. "Glib" is calling people "sweetheart" that you don't know. It's treating other people as if they are children and if you are a two day old account and you think you know more than editors and admins who have been here for years, well, that attitude will mean you don't last long here. The only reason you'd have that superior attitude is if you are an editor who has been previously blocked and, if that is the case, then your time here really will be short. You are drawing so much attention to your account (two days and you've clashed with 3 admins already?), you won't be able to go under the radar for much longer. Goodbye. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:34, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me. I saw your edit on Linda Carter. I was not talking shite about anything or anyone. Don’t be so rude. This isn’t the place for that kind of attitude. I’m surprised you haven’t been banned yet considering what your talk page includes, clashing with admins? Not a smart thing to do. Please don’t accuse people of being something they are not.WikiFlame50 (talk) 10:33, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:WikiFlame50 You can't just THROW aliases around like confetti. It’s not the first time you’ve done bollocks like this and it certainly won’t be the last. RegardsDominosThermometer (talk) 15:36, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus Christ calm down, there is no need to get so hostile! You cannot tell me what I can or can’t do. Aliases are not a big deal and it’s information about a soap character, Eg well known nicknames, marriage maiden names etc, which is valid to add, even full names too if there’s a reliable source contained. Enough with your hostile attitude, I have not done anything wrong whatsoever.WikiFlame50 (talk) 15:44, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You really should listen to the admins if I where you, you definitely won’t be around for much longer if you act like this. End of conversation. WikiFlame50 (talk) 15:47, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You can flamin talk! As soon as an experienced editor reverts your lacklustre contributions to List of *insert soap here* characters, the caps lock is on and you bash your keyboard angrily resulting in edit summary SCREAMING in the face of at whoever's reading it. Mind your tone. You've been warned multiple times about your erratic, alias adding, I suggest you take note. Regards.DominosThermometer (talk) 15:48, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Again. You are being very hostile towards me, i was never given any warnings regards to aliases, that is a flat out lie. You need to calm down, you have received more warnings than I have, so please can you just stop. WikiFlame50 (talk) 15:58, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're a very aggressive user aren’t you dearDominosThermometer (talk) 16:11, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not wasting anymore time arguing with you, you are clearly just trying to get a reaction out of me to satisfy your own needs. WikiFlame50 (talk) 16:17, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No I’m trying to get you to stop adding aliases to professional Wikipedia character articles. Maybe you should move over to Wiki Fandom, they are a lot more on your level. RegardsDominosThermometer (talk) 16:19, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Time to create yet another sock, I guess

Next time knock it off with the "dear", "sweetheart", "darling", etc. crap. You'll last somewhat longer. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:29, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice babe but I’m the socking CEO, I’ll be back better than ever and don’t you forget it sweetheart. MWAH xoxo

March 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for being obnoxious, while also fairly obviously being a sock of someone.

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: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Floquenbeam (talk) 16:29, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:ZestyLemonz per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ZestyLemonz. 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.

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: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:31, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]