User talk:TazminDaytime

January 2017
Please do not attack other editors, as you did at List of EastEnders characters. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. 5 albert square (talk) 02:42, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Fools like you who keep adding incorrect info wreck the page. Not what I did. TazminDaytime (talk) 07:48, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * It's not incorrect. She hasn't made her last appearance yet.  She's still in the credits on the BBC website for the 5th of January 2017.  Whether or not that's a voiceover or a physical appearance in one way or another does not matter.  She's still classed as a current cast member until her final episode has aired.


 * Also, please stop attacking other editors. Please read WP:CIVILITY.  Any questions, just ask.--5 albert square (talk) 20:07, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Your recent editing history 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. anemone projectors  17:13, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of List of unseen Coronation Street Characters for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of unseen Coronation Street Characters 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 Articles for deletion/List of unseen Coronation Street Characters until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. JuneGloom07   Talk  14:50, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Baldwin family (Coronation Street) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Baldwin family (Coronation Street) 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 Articles for deletion/Baldwin family (Coronation Street) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. KAP03Talk &bull;&#32;Contributions 03:25, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

ANI
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Koljanc (talk • contribs) 17:54, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for disruptive and uncollaborative editing. 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 request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 22:49, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Completely sexist decision created by a group of white males with a lot of time on their virgin hands. Nothing more to say other than I am disgusted by the level of disrespect shown here today. TazminDaytime (talk) 01:29, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * You aren't the only one disgusted; hence why you were blocked. I strongly suggest you lay off the attitude and consider whether it's more likely that insulting everyone who disagrees with you is really a good method of resolving disputes. Especially considering that you agreed not to do those things when you created your account. You have been extremely disrespectful of your fellow editors and the admins here, and that is not something that garners any appreciable respect. With a comment like the one above, you are very likely to be indefinitely blocked should an admin notice it. I'm commenting here, instead of bringing it to any admin's attention because I would really like to give you the chance to remove it on your own and begin trying to work with other editors. But it would only take me a few seconds to post a link to this comment on an admin's talk page. Look at it this way: One way or another, you're going to stop attacking your fellow editors. You can do it voluntarily, or you can have your ability to edit permanently taken away. It's really up to you which way you go. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants   Tell me all about it.  13:09, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Stop sending these perverted messages to me scumbag, I'm not reading them. TazminDaytime (talk) 17:40, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

May 2017
Hello, I'm AnemoneProjectors. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Zsa Zsa Carter have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. — anemone projectors — 11:05, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Zsa Zsa Carter. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. — anemone projectors — 14:06, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

How is anything I did vandalism? Don't threaten me just because you want your simple ways to prevail. Why should her extended family not be included in her infobox just because she's never been on screen with them?! That is idiotic. TazminDaytime (talk) 14:29, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

House Frey (A song of Ice and Fire) moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, House Frey (A song of Ice and Fire), does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please follow the prompts on the Articles for Creation template atop the page. —  InsertCleverPhraseHere  00:57, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Relative inclusion
You added Bianca's cousins to the infobox claiming because they are family, they are noted. But just because the characters are family, it doesn't mean automatic inclusion. They are included depending on the significance the character. With her Beale/Fowler relatives, they have pretty much been depicted as separate from Bianca, who associated more with the Brannings. But even with some of the Brannings, she is non notable like with Amy, Ricky etc who are just children who appear on a recurring basis. Grangehilllover (talk) 13:17, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
 * This page should help people to understand the character more, not confuse them! And if you are going to have RIDICULOUS rules like this then you need to ensure that the pathetic rule is practiced on all of the pages - why is Martin Fowler, Bobby Beale, etc listed on Tiffany's page. LUDICROUS. --TazminDaytime (talk) 13:21, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Right, firstly you've took it upon yourself to add the Beale cousins-she has had no storyline with them. Not even when Lucy died. From watching Bianca since her arrival, she has had no significance to them. As characters of the same age, Tiffany and Bobby did interact through bullying and then a crush. And last year when Tiffany returned, she was under Martin's care for that short time.See WikiProject Soap Operas. Grangehilllover (talk) 13:35, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Draft:House Frey (A song of Ice and Fire) concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:House Frey (A song of Ice and Fire), a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. 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 occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:34, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

December 2017
Hello, I'm Oshwah. I noticed that in this edit to List of EastEnders characters (2001), 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. Thanks.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:24, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

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. CHRISSY MAD ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  17:20, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I personally find you revolting and unjustified, do not leave anymore comments on my page. TazminDaytime (talk) 18:16, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:House Frey (A song of Ice and Fire)


Hello, TazminDaytime. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "House Frey".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. 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. HasteurBot (talk) 10:01, 24 January 2018 (UTC)