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

Good luck

豊かな十年へようこそ/WELCOME TO THE D20s

Miraclepine wishes you a Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and a prosperous decade of change and fortune.
このミラPはSlaterstevenたちのメリークリスマスも新年も変革と幸運の豊かな十年をおめでとうございます！
フレフレ、みんなの未来！/GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR FUTURE!
ミラP 03:19, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Bahhh Humbug!Slatersteven (talk) 10:58, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

One thing

Please elaborate more (the proposal) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Inappropriate_claims I tend not to agree with the proposal, because I do not work in RL and on Wiki with my hands tied. There is no pleasure in that, and this is not work, but a hobby. Furthemore, just because I did a bit of edit warring with one rather stubborn and uncooperative editor, which was also confirmed by another editor @Nicoljaus:, you think that it is okay to put us on the same level? It may sound arrogant (that is not my intention), but it's offensive in my book. I am here for more than 10 years and I do not plan to stay dragged on a level of people who are using facsists for sources and do not know what the project, or teamwork for that matter, are all about. I got x2 24h blocks because I reverted disruptive editors who denied the existence of a nation (!), in one way or another. I am not that sorry about those blocks, but I do understand that my actions were not per Wiki policy. Maybe this is a boomerang effect, and maybe the things went out of the proportion. If I understood well, If I wanted to edit, say Serbs or Bosniaks, I would need to ask for a permission on the TP first, like some child? Thank you, Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 15:18, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

No I do not think it pouts you in the same level, I am just not sure who really was at fault over this. You both acted badly.Slatersteven (talk) 15:24, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

That is correct, but I thing that the proposal was too quick and not per all the content presented. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 15:27, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

The pair of you have been wasting ANI's time over this spat for 7 days, this is not sudden.Slatersteven (talk) 15:32, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

When one wants to get rid of something, be it on ANI or in RL, the quick fix/solution is rarely a good one. cheers Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 15:57, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Sanctions are preventative, they are there to stop disruption...not top get rid of anything.Slatersteven (talk) 16:33, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Well, I was mentioned, so I will speak out. It seems to me that the decision to “punish both” is not optimal. Offering equal punishment, you implicitly assume the same guilt. Is this really so, from your point of view? Otherwise, the meaning of the action eludes me. Why can’t you just stop a user with disruptive behavior? Why is it necessary at the same time to punish those who have encountered and tried to somehow stop this disruptive behavior?--Nicoljaus (talk) 19:26, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

As I said its not about punishment, its about prevention. I saw both users being disruptive, both at the article and at ANI. I am not sure that if one goes away the other may not still have issues.Slatersteven (talk) 19:31, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

And what will it prevent? Mikola22 signed up recently, he just continues to do the same anonymously (and I can tell you how "willingly" check-users sort out such cases). Six months later, he will make a new account and check-users will say that "Mikola22, who should have been named as the alleged master, is Stale. CU declined." Now I see that one of the users is outraged by your offer, and the other feels encouraged to continue his Holy War ([1]).--Nicoljaus (talk) 07:05, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Then we do nothing?Slatersteven (talk) 10:12, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Firstly, I would not leave him with the feeling that he is doing everything right and his Holy War is moving forward successfully (and now it seems to me there is such a feeling).--Nicoljaus (talk) 11:21, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

I do not think his reaction indicates that at all.Slatersteven (talk) 12:07, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Why?--Nicoljaus (talk) 12:12, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

The fact he disagrees with this sanction implies he would not see it as some kind of exoneration.Slatersteven (talk) 12:15, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

There seems to be some kind of misunderstanding. I see that Mikola22 is not against going down to the grave taking an "enemy" with him. But he’s not going to change anything in her behavior, continues POV-pushing, tells story "Now you all see with which editors I must struggle" and so on.--Nicoljaus (talk) 13:31, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

If he is not going to listen to a no consensus no edit sanction (which will stop him, or he loses the ability to edit any article of any kind) nothing is going to. But we have to give them a chance. A no consensus no edit sanction means they will have to get consensus, thus they get a chance to show they can edit cooperatively. If they ignore (and breach) it then it will escalate to the TBAN if first sugersted.Slatersteven (talk) 13:37, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Once again you claim that "you saw me being disruptive", which is half-true. I do not care to add a bunch of diffs which would "cover me", I do not want to talk a lot about the fact that I acctualy do have the arguments, that I have been dragged into this under a pretense (I did not label anybody), that I even reached out to M22 on his TP, that I did not touch the article in question after the report and so on. I am able to see when somebody has a strong opinion over something. The current proposal is not good one, nor do I think that it is fair. The better solution, in my opinion, would be that we come up with a mutual agreement not to edit the article in question, for a month or two, and that any further big or bold edits on the article and other articles about Vlachs would NEED consensus. Plus to promise to stay out of each other's way with the realisation that this is in fact a yellow card. Not being able to edit all related articles is far too severe and such a decision would also cripple several articles related to the Balkans. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 14:35, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

We can all behave ourselves when we are being looked at.Slatersteven (talk) 14:36, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Assume good faith? Yes, so can my cat, that was not the point. I still do not see any epic evidence of my misconduct, only severe and unconstructive idea/s based on general impressions. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 15:59, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Look at this talk page, that is what I am talking about.Slatersteven (talk) 16:02, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

I do not see it the same way and your answer is rather vague. I shall not continue with this ping-pong. Sadkσ (talk is cheap) 18:10, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

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". [2] 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.