User talk:Slatersteven/Archives/2018/May
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Slatersteven. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hi, yes
I can't log in, I'm traveling, and my password is at home. I'll have it back in a couple of weeks. Keep this conversation private, please. Thank you.2A01:110F:4505:DC00:1DAD:B65D:E100:9863 (talk) 13:41, 12 April 2018 (UTC) OK, thanks 2A01:110F:4505:DC00:1DAD:B65D:E100:9863 (talk) 13:48, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks again Slatersteven 2A01:110F:4505:DC00:1DAD:B65D:E100:9863 (talk) 14:36, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
Infowars So just because I'm trying to be impartial means I'm vandalizing a page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Publius Tocqueville (talk • contribs) 16:59, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
- No, randomly removing letters looks like it. Why would you change "right" to "lite" (in a wiki link to boot)?Slatersteven (talk) 17:02, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
Note
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Eastern Europe, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.--NeilN talk to me 18:53, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
Ways to improve David K. Bernard
Hi Slatersteven! Thank you for your input on how to improve David K. Bernard and notifying me about the deletion discussion.
From what I see the sources published by Pentecostal Publishing House are mostly Bernard's books. The actual references cited in the article appear academic. Do you think that removing the books he has written would be helpful? I started citing some of them using the cite tool, but there are many. I was hoping that others get involved. Your input is valued. Mustardseed1 (talk) 01:41, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
- It is not just a case of books he has written, at least one of the other sources was published by an organisation linked to his church. Sources (used to establish notability) need to be in depth and thirds party.Slatersteven (talk) 09:02, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
A Reply to a Misunderstanding
Read my reply and note that it wasn't a threat. Merely a warning. BloodofFox has been attempting to get rid of List of Cryptids for quite some time and has failed each time. Since that hasn't worked he has been using vandalous methods to quietly get rid of the WikiProject and the article by mass removing all Cryptozoology-related categories from articles on cryptids as well as rewording them in a particular way as to have them qualify under Mythology. His continued campaign resulted in a warning from both me and DarkKnight which has since gone unheeded and, unfortunately, either me or DarkKnight are going to have to report him to the admins. It's not like I wanted to do this but he has left me no choice.--Paleface Jack 15:45, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
- It should still not have been made in an edits summery box.09:20, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Point
Don't get sucked into that long strawman tirade. It's just a point violation that fails to make its point because it's a strawman. That's what happens when editors don't AGF. -- BullRangifer (talk) PingMe 18:52, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Bingo!. Don't become a participant in a long point vio. -- BullRangifer (talk) PingMe 18:58, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Talk page
Please keep all comment to article talk pages. Leaving comment about your perceived opinion are not welcomed on my talk page. Thank you. -72bikers (talk) 17:55, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
- That is not how it works please see wp:talk.Slatersteven (talk) 17:58, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue CXLIV, May 2018
|
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) 15:00, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
AR-15
Hi, this language is not what's being discussed on the Talk page: [1]. Would you consider self-reverting while the discussion continues? --K.e.coffman (talk) 16:33, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Danny Lorraine
This is speculative on my part, but I think the assertion is that subject (good) deserves article if Cartman (bad) has one.10:03, 14 May 2018 (UTC)-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 10:03, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
- Maybe, but I thought I would ask to see if there may be a valid reason.Slatersteven (talk) 10:04, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Competence is required
Given your most recent edits (admissions) to the Talk:Colt AR-15 page:
"Fair enough, as obviously I do not know enough about the subject my vote must have been wrong so I will change it.Slatersteven (talk) 18:25, 16 May 2018 (UTC).Slatersteven (talk) 18:25, 16 May 2018 (UTC)"
"Change to Support, as I did not know what I was talking about when I made this vote.Slatersteven"
"I have now changed my vote based upon my previous lack of understanding of the topic.Slatersteven (talk) 18:36, 16 May 2018 (UTC)"
I recommend the you review Wikipedia:Competence is required and recuse yourself from editing this subject matter in the future. As such edits may be "unintentionally and often unknowingly disruptive."--RAF910 (talk) 21:14, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
- I would suggest that you remember that whilst Competence is required is not a policy, the rules about talk pages (see wp:talk are.Slatersteven (talk) 07:51, 17 May 2018 (UTC)