User talk:Slatersteven

George Floyd

Why was the question about George Floyd deleted? It was not intended as offensive; it was just a question? — Preceding unsigned comment added by VirginiaBoy (talk • contribs) 19:32, 17 July 2025 (UTC) Forgot to sign VirginiaBoy — Preceding undated comment added 19:36, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Read wp:soap, we do not "just ask questions". Slatersteven (talk) 10:23, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Speedy deletion at Battle of Manupur

How is it identical to its former deleted page..? Battle of Manupur in its old page had a myriad of issues including poor sourcing, and copyright.

The new version uses WP:HISTRS and WP:RS sources, see relevant discussion at this page Noorullah (talk) 18:43, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Creation Museum

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Creation Museum. Félix An (talk) 15:02, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 231, July 2025

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 looks at an overview of war history and the biography of a war historian Review essay: Simon Harley critiques a work from Osprey Publishing Timeline: This month in military history

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:48, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Comment removal at Talk:Donald Trump

Regarding this edit, my understanding is that the talk page of articles is an appropriate place to discuss meta issues about our articles. WP:NOTFORUM is of course a thing, but there are templates which allow editors to note, for example, when an article was featured in a news piece as a way of celebrating the work editors put into place. The only significant difference here is it was my image, which was used on the Donald Trump article as his signature for about a year or so, and not the entire article. So it would seem the community has carved out an exception for those types of comments. Am I missing something? —Locke Cole • t • c 14:04, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

But this did not use such a template, and it was still alleging criminal acts, without evidance (OR is not evidance). And no, talk pagers are only for how to improve the article, you admit this cannot be added. Slatersteven (talk) 14:09, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

A couple of things: I did not allege anything or create OR (the show in question is a secondary source, and I am not employed by HBO or the staff at that show). And as to talk pagers are only for how to improve the article, you admit this cannot be added, I again note that the community accepts that we can celebrate when our works are used in other major projects. The type of thing NOTFORUM/NOTSOAPBOX is concerned with is with simply making posts about topics that are unrelated to the maintenance of improvement of our articles. My comment does not fall into that. —Locke Cole • t • c 14:25, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

The show maybe, your interpretation of what it shows is not ("Thought the signature looked familiar). And (as I said) you admit that this cannot be added using this source "Just more informational, doubtful this would be relevant unless an RS picked up on it." you just "anyways, figured others might find it interesting". That means it is (in effect just a forum post, that cannot really be acted on). Previous undated comment added by Slatersteven (talk) at 2025-08-02T14:31:56 UTC

Hmm, maybe I'm dense, but are you saying the signature they used is not the one I selected and vectorized for our articles? See also {{press}}, which is used on thousands of article talk pages with the sole intent of saying "heyyy, this page or content from it was mentioned in XYZ". The very thing you deleted. —Locke Cole • t • c 14:57, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

No I am saying an RS does not say it was, you do. Slatersteven (talk) 15:01, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

So what? —Locke Cole • t • c 15:02, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

I have said all I wish to say, this smacks of an attempt to go "ahh Trump-estine, see se" without actually saying it. Even Trumpy is civfed by wp:blp, and that also applies to talk pages. Others seem to disagree, as such that is an end to it. Slatersteven (talk) 15:06, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

fake news definition

Is making a definition of a concept clearer and more precise bad for Wikipedia and its readers? explain me Potebik55 (talk) 13:11, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

The place for this discussion is the article talk page. However narrowing a definition to make it more precise is not broadening it. Slatersteven (talk) 13:15, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

This current definition of “fake news” is simplistic and banal for an encyclopedia. Readers have the right to an in-depth and scientifically accurate definition of a concept. 79.22.186.141 (talk) 13:22, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

As Im said, take it to the article's talk page. Slatersteven (talk) 13:23, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Formal Arbitration Notification

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Official Claims Not Being Accepted and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, Cdr. Erwin Smith (talk) 13:57, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

There is no request. Slatersteven (talk) 13:59, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Now there is , you are supposed to launch them before linking to them. Slatersteven (talk) 14:19, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

New pages patrol September 2025 Backlog drive

September 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 September 2025, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:32, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 232, August 2025

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 looks at four works spanning ancient to modern times Timeline: This month in military history

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 10:56, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Misplaced welcome

Hi there, it looks like you accidentally did two things recently when you made this edit. First welcomes should be on users talk page, not on the user page itself; and second, the welcome template should always be substitude. Given your edit history on here, it was surprising so I would assume it was simply a mistake. Cheers! TiggerJay (talk) 15:13, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

yes it was. Slatersteven (talk) 15:16, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi

You have opinions. Please join us over at User talk:Mackensen/Yellow Card. Polygnotus (talk) 10:36, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Nomination for WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open!

Nominations for the upcoming Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Restoring editions in articles

Hi! Not sure if you can offer help. I've reverted two posts in the past twenty-four hour period, and there's an edit that's problematic. However, the first of the two reverts I've made was done just under 23 hours ago; and I'm afraid of violating the Wikipedia's three-revert rule. Is there any other way to revert posts without hitting "undo"? I've seen editors use "Ultraviolet" and "Twinkle" and I've checked these pages out but their use sounds very confusing. Thanks in advance! Butterscotch5 (talk) 22:41, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

A revert is a revert is a revert, does not matter how you do it. Also you should not remove other users' posts wothout very good reason (and if the reasons come into it, you are allowed to violate pwp:3rr. |Slatersteven (talk) 09:25, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Voting for WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open!

Voting for the Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open! A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. Voting closes at 23:59 UTC on 29 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:26, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Edit war on Fascism

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. An edit war occurs when two or more users begin repeatedly reverting content on a page in a back-and-forth fashion to restore it back to how they think it should be, despite knowing that other editors disagree with their changes. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or undo the edits made by other editors when your changes are reverted. Instead, please use the talk page to work toward creating a version of the page that represents consensus among the editors involved. The best practice at this time is to stop editing the page and to discuss the disagreements, issues, and concerns at-hand with the other editors involved in the dispute. Wikipedia provides a page that helps to detail how this is accomplished. If discussions reach an impasse, you can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard, or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection while a discussion to resolve the dispute is ongoing.

Continuing to engage in further edit warring behavior can result in being blocked from editing Wikipedia—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, or whether it involves the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also, please 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 demeanor, behavior, or conduct indicate that you intend to continue repeatedly making reverts to the page. Rangooner (talk) 15:18, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

tit for tats never go well. Slatersteven (talk) 15:20, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 233, September 2025

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 and Nick-D look at recent works Timeline: This month in military history

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:53, 26 September 2025 (UTC)