User talk:Slatersteven

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be auto-archived by if there are more than 5.

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

Hi

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

on evil matters regarding that one thread in larry sanger's essay's talk page

it's this one to be exact, i'm just taking it here so it doesn't pop up there, and procedurally pinging @TestUser345

...that was a joke, i thought it'd be easy enough for anyone to get~ consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 10:51, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Given some of the comments there that seem to be real, I will not assume anything is a joke. Slatersteven (talk) 10:57, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Read this

Read this, Steven: https://manhattan.institute/article/the-myth-of-systemic-police-racism

Don't be deceived by the establishment. "White privilege" is not true! 69.118.244.151 (talk) 14:35, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"The police fatally shot nine unarmed blacks and 19 unarmed whites in 2019," So only half as often as whites, despite making up only 19% of the population. That isn what I meant, as A white man I do no have to fear interaction with the police, even if I am committing a crime. Slatersteven (talk) 09:46, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. You can find it at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Repetitive Ad Hominem Attacks. The purpose is not to punish but to ensure we are all on the same page. Wikieditor662 (talk) 02:00, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IAR

Hi there. Just wanted to leave a message to let you know I changed the heading of Wikipedia_talk:Ignore_all_rules#Should_IAR_be_overturned?. The previous one seemed ambiguous for what's actually being asked. Also, if it's a serious question, we probably shouldn't have a heading that seems dismissive of the impetus for the question. FWIW. That said, I see now that in retitling, the context for your first sentence is missing. I didn't want to get into editing your statement or tacking a new one below it, and wonder if you could tweak it (if you're ok with the heading rename). WP:CENT may make sense, too. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 01:01, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Revert on FGM article

Greetings,

I noticed that you reverted my edit to Female genital mutilation here, labeling it as original research. The removed statement was

"FGM is commonly performed without any form of anesthesia or analgesia and with non-medical equipment such as razor blades."

This is not original research. This is commonly discussed in news reports and documentaries about FGM.

Many FGM survivors describe being mutilated without anesthetic. This is well documented: https://youtube.com/aiYR1wTMaS4?si=BwhuVvRdOXuOaEKg https://youtube.com/UKT1MX-RnmU?si=xar569B-BQy5AnGJ

In addition, there exist academic and reliable sources which I have added to the article. These can be found with a simple Google search of " source that female genital mutilation is performed with razor blades"

https://www.unfpa.org/resources/female-genital-mutilation-fgm-frequently-asked-questions https://womenshealth.gov/a-z-topics/female-genital-cutting https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/female-genital-mutilation-fgm/

The NHS article could not State this more clearly:

"Anaesthetics and antiseptics are not generally used, and FGM is often carried out using knives, scissors, scalpels, pieces of glass or razor blades."

When reviewing recent edits for original research, please attempt to validate the claim beforehand. Templates such as citation needed and failed verification may be more appropriate in some instances. Please familiarize yourself with the subject of an article and it's its associated commonly known facts before reverting something. It is widely known that FGM is seldom performed in a medical setting with anesthetic. FGM is believed to originate in Ancient Egypt circa 500 BC, predating all modern medicine. In addition, the subject matter of this article is particularly important and is a vital source of education for people who have suffered FGM and may not be aware of it. Care must be taken when removing content from these articles.

Thank you for being a reviewer, I hope this feedback is valuable. Please let me know if you have any questions. InvisibleUser909 (talk) 15:22, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was unsourced. Also it may not be needed in the lede. Slatersteven (talk) 15:24, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue 234, October 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: Three Wikipedia editors review five books
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) 03:59, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November article improvement drive

Starting on 1 November, the month-long 2025 Article Improvement Drive will target a number of content improvement areas and backlogs. Participating editors will be in line for barnstars and other awards; articles from all aspects of the project will be eligible so there will be something for everybody. Interested editors are encouraged to sign up now! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:18, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]