User talk:Temp0000002

Criticism Section

May 2022

Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments. Such edits are disruptive, and may appear to other editors to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Thank you. Qzd (talk) 18:21, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Qzd: I understand some would misunderstand my actions, I merely reconsidered what I wrote. In fact I wrote the "polytheistic mention" using my ips, and now I'm making the discussion more understandable. There's no reason to oppose this change; I think you are mistaking. Temp0000002 (talk) 18:24, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

August 2022

Hello, I'm Iskandar323. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Quranism, 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. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. There is no reliable source stating why that selection of Quranic quotations is relevant to the Quranist position, making its citation original thinking (WP:OR). Iskandar323 (talk) 06:25, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September 2022

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Shiva, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 22:56, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamaguchi先生: Do you know why I don't use talk pages? It's because literally every proposal gets turned down. Temp0000002 (talk) 09:21, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 2022

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at 2022 missile explosion in Poland, you may be blocked from editing. Pure speculation like that is not acceptable. ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 13:31, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense, you have to prove that my editing is destructive which you haven't. Temp0000002 (talk) 13:35, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

an ANI case could easily go against you - take Bell's advice HammerFilmFan (talk) 18:35, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

Please stop edit warring to insert your "hot take" that the sun is actually cold into Flat earth (a "theory" that has little to do with the "theory" that the earth is flat) and take your case to the talkpage to try to get consensus. Bishonen | tålk 15:31, 6 December 2022 (UTC).[reply]

It has everything to do with flat earth because the citation says "It'll be a race between proving that the Earth is flat and that the sun is actually cold". I doubt you are assuming good faith from my side if you'll still call it "edit warring". That said I'm not going to discuss anymore since the unwelcoming I had. Goodbye. Temp0000002 (talk) 15:36, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Did you see how your post came out? Please use colons to start a post on a new line. The fact that a blogger has ruminated about a similarity between the two theories does not make it a real connection. Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia, not a collection of thoughts and ruminations, or random comparisons. All of which has nothing to do with your edit warring, or your nonsense accusation that I don't assume good faith. Another thing: Your new article Cold Sun Theory was far from being ready for article space, with its very weak sourcing. I have moved it to draft, at Draft:Cold Sun Theory, so that you can work on it some more if you wish. (You may want to start with changing the capitalization: "Cold sun theory" would be the proper spelling for a Wikipedia article.) Bishonen | tålk 15:47, 6 December 2022 (UTC).[reply]

I don't think there are enough sources to work with and I hoped others could help expanding the information. I set the foundation but I can't do it all alone because I don't know how to find sources. Temp0000002 (talk) 15:57, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Cold sun theory

Hello, Temp0000002. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Cold sun theory, 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) 21:02, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Cold sun theory

Hello, Temp0000002. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Cold sun theory".

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 deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. 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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:00, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

Your recent editing history at Poland shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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; read about 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 you being blocked from editing—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—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Pls see Talk:Poland#‎Government positions Moxy- 17:50, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]