User talk:Slatersteven

Archives (Index)

s/2016/December s/2017/January s/2017/February s/2017/March s/2017/April s/2017/May s/2017/June s/2017/July s/2017/August s/2017/September s/2017/October s/2017/November s/2017/December s/2018/January s/2018/February s/2018/March s/2018/April s/2018/May s/2018/June s/2018/July s/2018/August s/2018/September s/2018/October s/2018/November s/2018/December s/2019/January 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 s/ 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

The Bugle: Issue CLXV, January 2020

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 on Jim Mattis

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) 12:56, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Satyric user page opener?

Hey, I've been meaning to ask you for a while, but who is MR SLATER IS RETIRED AND ON A WIKI BREAK, HE WILL KEEP EDITING, BUT HE IS RETIRED, ITS TRUE SO IT IS, it says so in black and white!!!! in reference to? I assumed at one point that it was me, but then I looked at your page's history and it seems you added it sometime before it would have made any sense to refer to me, so now I'm really just curious. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 06:02, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

And I have said before no it is not, it satirises to any number of editors who have had wiki break banners and still edit (in fact I cannot think of any one edd who inspired it).Slatersteven (talk) 09:41, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

New message from Redalert2fan

Hello, Slatersteven. You have new messages at Talk:K9 Thunder.
Message added 16:16, 11 February 2020 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Redalert2fan (talk) 16:16, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer newsletter February 2020

Hello Slatersteven,

Source Guide Discussion

The first NPP source guide discussion is now underway. It covers a wide range of sources in Ghana with the goal of providing more guidance to reviewers about sources they might see when reviewing pages. Hopefully, new page reviewers will join others interested in reliable sources and those with expertise in these sources to make the discussion a success.

Redirects

New to NPP? Looking to try something a little different? Consider patrolling some redirects. Redirects are relatively easy to review, can be found easily through the New Pages Feed. You can find more information about how to patrol redirects at WP:RPATROL.

Discussions and Resources

• There is an ongoing discussion around changing notifications for new editors who attempt to write articles.
• A recent discussion of whether Michelin starred restraunts are notable was archived without closure.
• A resource page with links pertinent for reviewers was created this month.
• A proposal to increase the scope of G5 was withdrawn.

Refresher

Geographic regions, areas and places generally do not need general notability guideline type sourcing. When evaluating whether an article meets this notability guideline please also consider whether it might actually be a form of WP:SPAM for a development project (e.g. PR for a large luxury residential development) and not actually covered by the guideline.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7095 Low – 4991 High – 7095

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

16:08, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: IssueICLXVI, February 2020

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: Nick-D looks at a failed German counterattack in the Battle of Normandy

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) 13:04, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

March Madness 2020

G'day all, March Madness 2020 is about to get underway, and there is bling aplenty for those who want to get stuck into the backlog by way of tagging, assessing, updating, adding or improving resources and creating articles. If you haven't already signed up to participate, why not? The more the merrier! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC) for the coord team

Planet Nine - in danger of getting into an edit war

Your recent editing history 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

Referring to your recent edits on Planet Nine, I do understand that you try to remove content that you deem unencyclopedic, and I agree with your attempt to bring it to the talk page. Unfortunately, this does not seem to have worked. I suggest to avoid a third revert, and rather move this issue to the article talk page. I am posting a similar note on the other editors page. Renerpho (talk) 07:32, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

This has already been done.Slatersteven (talk) 09:41, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Reported

After being warned on my talkpage, I have reported you. Please stop harrasing me, stop stalking me and stop your false accusations and personal attacks. 31.161.148.196 (talk) 16:34, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

I have in fact only edited half the the pages you have edited, that is hardly stalking.Slatersteven (talk) 16:36, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

I did warn you (more than once) that your behaviour would lead to a block. Now you have told me you do not wish me to post on your talk page I cannot advise you now how to avoid the longer block I can see coming very shortly.Slatersteven (talk) 17:10, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

I give it half an hour tops.Slatersteven (talk) 17:10, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

time travel

Can you tell me the reason why you have deleted my contribution to the voice Time travel claims and urban legends?Bibarte (talk) 07:19, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

It was unsourced.Slatersteven (talk) 12:15, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

In wikipedia not all the info providen must be sourced, or at least you will add the tag "not sourced" instead of deleting. It also was unsourced because mine was the first source, and also because the picture was a proof itself, strong enough for a voice about "urban legends and calims". For this reason I think your deletion was not correct. (Bibarte (talk) 19:10, 6 March 2020 (UTC))

err yes all information must be sourced. A user may (if he wishes) tag an unsourced claim or remove it. Also the picture is not proof (read wp:or) of anything other then what you think you see. This is why we need sources to have seen it, not just you.Slatersteven (talk) 19:11, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Persecution of Christians

Can you tell me why you undid my contribution to the article Persecution of Christians? Article was well referenced from reputed newspaper article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siddsg (talk • contribs) 10:29, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Because neither says it is persecution (see wp:v).Slatersteven (talk) 10:38, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

I also suggest you read wp:brd once you have been reverted you need to make a case at the talk page of the article.Slatersteven (talk) 10:51, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Assange/ANI

Hi, that ANI thread is stalled because it's too diffuse. I think that if we try to take up your new sanctions proposal before that ANI thread is resolved, we're going to get more crosstalk and confusion there. I wonder whether you'd consider striking that and raising your proposal separately. This could be done either after this ANI is resolved, or it could be done at ARCA as a DS amendment. FYI my view is that the crux of the problem on the Assange/Russia articles is a very small number of POV editors with behavioral deficits and that further DS/GS complicates things with no net benefit. The Admins who have become aware of Thucydides411's behavior have (with one or two exceptions) seen it for what it is. This could easily have been resolved through DS enforcement or AE. Unfortunately ANI is rather erratic. Regards. SPECIFICO talk 12:58, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

ARCA?Slatersteven (talk) 17:46, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

as an amendment or enhancement of the case remedies for AP2. The problem with ANI is it can get just as confused and overwrought as the article talk pages. SPECIFICO talk 18:14, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Cheers.Slatersteven (talk) 18:20, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Cheers and horrors. Thanks! SPECIFICO talk 18:23, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Seeking clarification

Hello Slatersteven. In the recently closed thread on “Use of racial slur” at AN/I you say this:

As this may not be "all that common" a warning for now, but I also think withing a month we will be back here (or at the least his "fuck you Admins" message on his talk page will lead to the usual chorus of "don't be like that"s until his reactions escalate to a full block).

I wonder could you possibly provide me with a diff for that message, as I can’t recall ever posting one. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:19, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

I did not say you did, I said you will. I think you misunderstand the tense as being present when it is meant to be speculative.Slatersteven (talk) 12:33, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

I see. It's all just my misunderstanding? Yes, I understand that "will" is a modal auxiliary verb, that denotes the future tense. But it’s not conditional future, is it. That would be "may" or "might", for example. You are telling everyone that this particular event will happen, yes? That doesn't sound very speculative. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:05, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

As I am not the Doctor (not even an as yet unknown incarnation) anything I can or would say about the future is speculation. Yes (figuratively not actually) I think you have said "eff off I do not care what you lot think").Slatersteven (talk) 19:09, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

You don't think that your comment at AN/I was ever so slightly pre-judging the case and giving a very firm prediction of what was going to happen? And when exactly did I say "eff off I do not care what you lot think", or anything remotely like that? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:23, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

He stated a possibility. Do no overreact. SPECIFICO talk 19:46, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Oh, hello SPECIFICO. He said something will happen. Perhaps he could tell us when, so we can all prepare properly? "Do no overreact" sounds a bit like an order. You didn't participate in that topic at AN/I, so it's hard to know what your views are. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:57, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, should have said "don't overreact" -- a bit softer. I don't think anyone took his statement as a prediction or a curse, just rumination, speculation, whatnot. SPECIFICO talk 20:12, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining. I think I can now understand what he intended. Yes, it did sound a bit like a curse. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:31, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes of course I was pre-judging (as were all those who say "it will never happen again"), but I also said "A waning for now". And as I have also said I think your reaction does contain elements of "fuck you all", just worded more politely. To a degree it was also a warning, for you, it was saying "we have been down this road before and there is a fork ahead, don't pick the wrong one", and as I have said it look like you are turning in that direction. It always ends up badly when we have the final "do you know who I am" style meltdowns when they were not treated with the respect (read indulgence) they "deserved" (it is (for those who have asked more then once) partly what my "retirement" notice takes the piss out of).Slatersteven (talk) 09:02, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Indeed I note that not only were you told to drop it, you have had to be told it twice.Slatersteven (talk) 14:56, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Human Rights Barnstar
		I Fowler&fowler«Talk» award Slatersteven this barnstar for bringing to bear his accustomed neutrality and laconic eloquence at Talk:2020 Delhi riots Fowler&fowler«Talk» 01:16, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorry about that I'll get a mop.Slatersteven (talk) 08:54, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

:) That's not what I meant. This is genuine appreciation for what you did. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:32, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Displaying warning templates

Simply write out {{subst:uw-3rr}}, for example (without the nowiki tags), and the template will automatically display. El_C 16:32, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

I was just trying to find a way to add it to my front page.Slatersteven (talk) 16:33, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not sure that I'm following you. El_C 16:35, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

I was about to paste that link onto my front page, and was looking up how to rem it out when you posted the very thing I was looking for.Slatersteven (talk) 16:36, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Oh your user page — cool. El_C 16:41, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

With a new editor, I tend to use {{subst:uw-ewsoft}}. Although the stronger version was certainly appropriate in this case given the rapidity of the reverts and nasty attitude. O3000 (talk) 16:38, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, Objective3000 — that warning template is new to me. El_C 16:41, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXVII, March 2020

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: Recent external reviews

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) 01:52, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

One Nation

I don’t disagree with the removal of the material at the NRA article, but can I point out to you that in Australia One Nation are not a “minor” (insignificant) party. More’s the pity. - Chris.sherlock (talk) 06:32, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

So what percentage of the national vote does it have?Slatersteven (talk) 18:21, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Hats off to you

I just wanted to tip my hat to you. You have received a lot of undue grief from a new editor and it's nearly dripping with irony that they would accuse you of somehow being an NRA POV warrior. Anyway, we disagree quite a bit on content but your principled stance here just reaffirms my appreciation for your POV even when they don't align with my own. Hats off, Springee (talk) 15:56, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Cheers.Slatersteven (talk) 17:38, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Doxing

Thank you for the information about this topic. Appreciate your kind response. Vishal Telangre (talk) 09:47, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

RE: HD 182681

Please do not move this again without consensus.Slatersteven (talk) 13:41, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

I am the one that created the page. It was moved without my consensus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reskin (talk • contribs) 15:15, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Irrelevant, it is not "your page". We do not use fictional names for real things.Slatersteven (talk) 15:21, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Selfstudier (talk) 14:51, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

UK Space Command

Okay, maybe I got that wrong, but the reference did talk about a UK Space Command, even though it also said "British Space Command". [1] UK v British? Please do CREATE (or rename to) the appropriate page. - Peter Ellis - Talk 11:37, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

When we have more than one source saying this exists we can revisit.Slatersteven (talk) 11:47, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

HD 182681

RE: Please do not move this again without consensus.Slatersteven (talk) 13:41, 21 March 2020 (UTC) This is now a warning, do not try to make this about a fictional star again, if you do I will report you.Slatersteven (talk) 13:54, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

This is a real star. I wrote the article and did all the research. We have been using the name Yonmara for this star for almost 2 decades. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reskin (talk • contribs) 14:20, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

discovered in 2218?.Slatersteven (talk) 14:36, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Really. REALLY, Yonmara. Drmies (talk) 14:51, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

[[2]] "Discovery date: February 16, 2218", stop adding fictional., BS.Slatersteven (talk) 14:53, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Slatersteven, please beware of OUTING. Thx. Drmies (talk) 14:57, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Err they used it as a cite [[3]]. They are (literally) using fiction as a cite.Slatersteven (talk) 14:59, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Err beware of OUTING. OK? Drmies (talk) 15:16, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Chester and Wrexham Turnpike Trust

If you looked before you tagged, you would see the page has an

tag on it because it was only created about one hour ago. It's really annoying that all some people seem to do is put tags while others are constructing articles!

WPCW (talk) 09:57, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

And I was telling you want needed to be done. I note that rather than address the issues you removed the tags.Slatersteven (talk) 10:16, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, because it is under construction or in use as per the template, and you have added a tag within minutes of it being created- It is very discouraging when you are disruptive editing / tag bombing. We can all tag all day long, but that will not expand Wikipedia or encourage people to contribute. I question if you are a suitable person to be a new page patroller--WPCW (talk) 15:54, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

I suggest you AGF, I was telling you want needed to be done, and I would argue its still not been done.Slatersteven (talk) 16:06, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Now as it stands I am still not sure there is enough to pass AFD (read wp:n), and I suggest you listen.Slatersteven (talk) 16:09, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

'I suggest you listen' - Is that acceptable? As for AFD, there are similar articles on Wiki.--WPCW (talk) 16:20, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes it is, as I offered you advice about what you should have done (off and note the article move), I pointed out on the talk page exactly that issue. And please read wp:indent.Slatersteven (talk) 16:24, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXVIII, April 2020

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 the logistics behind the Crusades and the USAF's early Cold War nuclear deterrant

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) 05:21, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Responses

I didn't want to drag out the conversation at WP:RSN, but please, for the love of god, read people's comments before replying to them. In nearly every single post in that discussion, you've claimed that I've said things I very obviously didn't say (or have in no uncertain terms said the opposite), clearly not out of any bad faith but because you just haven't bothered to read the individual posts you're specifically replying to. This is not a recipe for any kind of helpful contribution to discussion if every reply to you has to involve pointing out what you didn't read the first time. The Drover's Wife (talk) 13:16, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Maybe you should try the same [[4]]. We all make mistakes.Slatersteven (talk) 13:38, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Please note

The Wikipedia community has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions on any editor who is active on any page about social groups, explicitly including caste associations and political parties, related to India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. If you engage in inappropriate behavior in this area, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or a topic ban. The discussion leading to the imposition of these sanctions can be read here. Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:General sanctions/South Asian social groups.

- Sitush (talk) 12:50, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

And that extends to making a case not refusing to, I suggest you take your own advise.Slatersteven (talk) 12:51, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

So stop with the dismissive and insulting attitude, and obey policy.Slatersteven (talk) 12:56, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Note about 2020 Delhi riots

Regarding this message you left at another user's page: please note that the particular DS you mentioned expired on April 15. However the article remains under the 1RR sanction as described at the top of the article talkpage (which the editor breached despite your pointing them to the discretionary sanctions).
In any case, I appreciate your effort in informing the editor of the applicable rules. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 19:39, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Slatersteven#A_personal_statement_Corona_Virus

Well said. A thoughtful analysis of Wikipedia's role during these unprecedented times. Best, El_C 12:54, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Well even a brocken clock is right twice a day (unless its a 24 hour clock, of course).Slatersteven (talk) 12:59, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Don't sell yourself short! Anyway, your statement really hit home for me. Definitely a worthwhile read. El_C 13:01, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Well thanks for the complement, maybe we are not all as dumb as we think we are.Slatersteven (talk) 13:08, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Partial block vs Topic ban

Regarding your question here [5], the user in question was given a partial block. This forcibly blocks the user from editing the specified page, but *only* the specified page, and not the accompanying talk page. This differs from a topic ban, which is more along the lines of a verbal prohibition from editing content in the topic area. El_C gave the user a partial block, not a TBAN. In my opinion it's a bit of an oversight to partial block a page but not its talk. Stickee (talk) 12:28, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

shall ask for clarification. As (in effect) it means the disruption will (and is) continue.Slatersteven (talk) 12:33, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

I Sexually Identify as an Attack Helicopter

Does it seem like there has been an uptick in POV-pushy edits to I Sexually Identify as an Attack Helicopter lately? XOR'easter (talk) 04:11, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

No, given the degree of reparation I think its trolling.Slatersteven (talk) 09:05, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

I wonder if the article got linked on a forum somewhere, sending people our way. XOR'easter (talk) 14:01, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

No idea.Slatersteven (talk) 14:07, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

I asked over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies for people to watchlist it, since my guess is that it will continue to attract disruptive attention. XOR'easter (talk) 14:15, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Gentle reminder

Since additional discussion is now available, you may want to rewrite your vote at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Survey_(The_Indian_Express). Regards,— Vaibhavafro ^💬 12:25, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Regarding your comment

Hello Sir,

This is regarding your comment on the Regents Park admin's talk page. Continuing my discussion here instead of cluttering his page.

Your comment: "Its you I should have moaned at. Like I said over at the SPI, there are too many POV pushers who get the wrong end of the stick about me. I almost think it was more the stupid AXZENT that pissed me off, I do not want to work to read bollocks."

I just stated the facts to counter the claims by other. People are taking the advantage of WP:NPOV and writing anything here. People should write the truth here and then use the WP:NPOV on these articles. The book(filled with Raj Era names in bibliography section that I mentioned in the Chitraguptavanshi Kayastha talk page)in the following link is still being used despite the facts that I stated against it in the Chitraguptavanshi Kayastha talk page.

https://www.amazon.in/Formation-Colonial-State-India-1760-1860/dp/0415704472

Review from the above link. "This book makes it obvious that the author needs to do more research. The books shows that the writer (Bellenoit from US Naval Academy) does not have a good understanding of the hindu caste system. For example, there were several groups - some of these groups were warriors(Maharashtra) but Dr.Bellenoit , sitting half-way across the world, seems to be completely ignorant. Secondly, some of these groups were formally classified as Kshatriyas by the religious hindu leaders as early as the 16th century but Bellenoit seems to have not studied that. Other than in north India, these groups held very high positions but again Bellenoit does not know that. He also references books by some British Ethnographers like Steele (who were completely ignorant of Hinduism and have been considered unreliable) instead of British Historians like Grand Duff or Indian historians. Bellenoit also lacks sensitivity and empathy when writing about people. It shows that Bellenoit probably never read much about Vivekananda, Aurobindo, Jagdish Chandra Bose, Shanti Swaroop Bhatnagar, Satyendra Nath Bose etc.."

I highlight the facts so that the next time people read those paragraphs,they simply read the main points without having to do any detailed reading. Based on the above book,people are writing wrong things about my caste. Why? I haven't deleted anything. I'm an editor! I have been warned several times of being blocked here. So,I was not sure whether I'll be blocked or not after stating the truth over there. So,I stated the facts. I wanted to write a few more points but the articles in the Kayastha & Chitraguptavanshi Kayastha started getting deleted suddenly,so,I thought that I should write so that my voice reaches the old admins/editors. Please don't use abusive words like 'bollocks'! I read your profile! It says that you're dyslexic! That can also be a reason why you're finding it difficult to read and interpret those. The Raj Era source has a loophole. Raj Era or not,trusted historians should be used for writing wikipedia articles. I don't think that all Raj Era Ethnographers might have been incompetent. Competent or incompetent writers are born in every Era. It has got nothing to do with Raj Era. This is what I feel! I hope that I will not be blocked for saying the truth here. :) Dinopce (talk) 05:48, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

We have polices such as wp:npa, wp:sock and wp:consensus. Nor is it a question of incompetence, but of cultural bias. Also wp:coi might be worth a read.Slatersteven (talk) 08:55, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Ok Sir. I'll read it. Thanks Dinopce (talk) 15:28, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

May 2020

Hi, I am سب سے بڑی گڑبڑ, I noticed that you reverted my edit on 2019 Jammu and Kashmir Airstrikes claiming that other sources also confirmed that fact, if other sources also claim that fact then cite them, if you want to talk then you can do so on my talk page (talk)

That took all of 30 seconds, you could have looked yourself.Slatersteven (talk) 14:23, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

CSD tagging

Hi there, I see you tagging articles for improvement and deletion. This is a very important task and I would like to thank you for your contributions! Just a quick note though, I saw you tagged Longball (game) for deletion for duplicating an article on an existing topic. When tagging an article for A10, it is important that you specify in the CSD tag which existing article it duplicates upon. Please indicate which article you think Longball (game) duplicates upon, as I can't find an article on the EXACT same topic on a quick search.

Also, when tagging an article where the author (who happens to be the sole contributor) has blanked his page with no meaningful input by other editors, like Shevchenko Theatre Chernihiv, it is often better to do so with WP:G7 instead of the WP:A3 you used. The latter category is more suitable for articles with no content whatsoever in its history of existence (except from links and the like). Thanks! --Dps04 (talk) 16:07, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Oh and since you are a new page reviewer, you may want to make a page as patrolled after you tagged it for deletion, so other reviewers do not have to check the same page again. Cheers --Dps04 (talk) 16:10, 3 May 2020 (UTC)