User talk:Slatersteven/Archive 14

Expert polling on Biden
Would you be fine with inclusion with the Siena College Research Institute expert poll from 2022 (Biden ranked 19) alongside the Presidential Greatness Project Expert Survey from 2024 (Biden ranked 14)? KiharaNoukan (talk) 01:58, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
 * The place for this to be discussed is the article talk page. Slatersteven (talk) 12:19, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Request for Clarification, Advice regarding YDIH Undo
Aloha @Slatersteven. Regarding your undo of my change to the Younger Dryas impact hypothesis article shown in this diff I created a new topic on the article's Talk page as follows Younger Dryas impact hypothesis a week ago and used @ with your user ID. I explained why I made these changes, which were quotes from secondary sources from a YDIH proponent and an opponent. So far no responses.

I have seen your userID in other topics in the YDIH Talk archives and would appreciate any background, clarifying comments and advice on how best to move forward. Thanks!

Dmcdysan (talk) 19:59, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion about Russo-Ukrainian War
Hello, you have recently participated in a discussion at Talk:Russo-Ukrainian War about the role of Belarus in the Russo-Ukrainian War and how it should be presented in this article. Consequently, I inform you that a new Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion (see here: Dispute resolution noticeboard) was started about the role of Belarus in the Russo-Ukrainian War and how it should be presented in this article. I think that a WP:RFC will be necessary to solve this serious dispute, but I believe that it should be organized by a qualified dispute solver via the Dispute resolution noticeboard. Your opinion is welcome in the new discussion. -- Po  fk  a  (talk) 10:31, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Your recent warning
Hi, in the future, please try not to tell editors that they have been reported, per WP:DENY.

Thanks, 𝑭𝒊𝒍𝒎𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔 (talk) 16:52, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * OK, I did that as I went there to warn them, and had the edit window open...silly really I should have just reported them. Slatersteven (talk) 17:18, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 215, March 2024
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) 22:56, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

A wikiminnow for you
Remember to change the  parameter to yes after responding to an edit request. That's all. Happy editing! GrayStorm(Talk&#124;Contributions) 16:05, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Reverted edit - Southend on sea
Hi. You just reverted my edut in Southend on Sea. The link you removed from Garons, is to Moores Stores who purchased Garons in 1962, and who sold off the bakery in Sutton Road and opened Garons first supermarket at 113 High Street  which can be see in the Echo. I am in the process of updating Wright's Biscuits/Moores Stores to include its many purchases including Garons Post 1962. Davidstewartharvey (talk) 14:58, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
 * The place for this discussion is the article's talk page, but please read wp:not. Slatersteven (talk) 15:03, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Bush's condemnation of Iraq
Hi, I feel like Bush's condemnation of Iraq is very relevant to the 2003 invasion of Iraq article.

It's not a freudian slip. he says 'Iraq too' afterwards. this needs to be in there somewhere. It's highly relevant

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUEr7TayrmU CalfRaiser150 (talk) 13:12, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Take this to the articles talk page, that is the place for this discussion, Slatersteven (talk) 13:14, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
 * okay CalfRaiser150 (talk) 13:15, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
 * you seem to condone the invasion but okay CalfRaiser150 (talk) 13:16, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Read both wp:agf and wp:npa is my answer to this. Slatersteven (talk) 13:18, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Condoning the invasion of Iraq is a normal political stance held by many people so it doesn't classify for a personal attack CalfRaiser150 (talk) 13:19, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi Steven, I have removed your entry from my talk page. I don't appreciate it being on there. I request you to not edit my talk page. CalfRaiser150 (talk) 13:38, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
 * You really should take heed, but your choice. Slatersteven (talk) 19:33, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

CalfRaiser150, Jimfbleak and Steven are trying to help you. Their warnings are not "hateful" or "vandalism". Those descriptions by you are considered personal attacks and can get you blocked from Wikipedia. Is that what you want? You must assume good faith. Please take their comments as good advice intended to make you a better editor who can then enjoy a long and constructive future here. -- Valjean (talk) ( PING me ) 20:55, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I would echo this. Slatersteven is a well respected editor and so is Jimbleak. They are giving you good advice, mischaracterizing those as attacks or hateful really can harm you more then you realize in the long run. Unbroken Chain (talk) 21:36, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I am? I thought i could be safely ignored. Slatersteven (talk) 10:45, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Edelman Family Foundation
Hi @Slatersteven

I am reaching out to you because of your previous participation in one of the discussions regarding the reliability and neutrality of HuffPost/Pink News/ProPublica as sources used on Wikipedia.

Currently, there is an ongoing issue with the Edelman Family Foundation section in the Joseph Edelman Wikipedia article. The section appears to be biased and lacks a balanced representation of the foundation's activities, as it primarily focuses on a single controversial donation while neglecting to mention the organization's numerous other significant contributions to various causes.

I would like to invite you to participate in the discussion on the BLP Noticeboard to address the concerns surrounding the section's neutrality and explore ways to improve its content. Llama Tierna (talk) 18:14, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024
Hello ,

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:
 * You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Pages Patrol Discord.
 * Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

What ARE you doing?
This removed reliable sources, put back a load of cruft, completely de-tagged the article, etc. You are taking ownership of this version and it's set the Project/Article back a long way. Bon courage (talk) 17:13, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * It was the last stable version, the one before the first contested edit. Slatersteven (talk) 17:16, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 216, April 2024
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) 23:08, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

persecution of Hindus in Bangladesh
This page should be created Nydv160 (talk) 13:05, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * What? Slatersteven (talk) 13:07, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Persecution of Hindus in Bangladesh
 * This page should be created Nydv160 (talk) 13:10, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Why? Slatersteven (talk) 13:11, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Because it's a serious issues that why Bangladeshi Hindu population is not incresing.
 * Muslim population grew 5 times from 3.5 crore to 15 crore but hindu population remained around 1 crore. Nydv160 (talk) 13:14, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Is it, source for this being the reason? Slatersteven (talk) 13:19, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Also wp:not and wp:rightgreatwrongs cause me to question your motives (as do your personal attacks). Slatersteven (talk) 13:22, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * You can't do, that's it. now don't message......... Nydv160 (talk) 14:36, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * No, I am asking you to do at least some work, not order us to do it, and then order us not to respond. Yiou need to read wp:civility, as cooperation gets you a lot further than PA's and sanrk. Slatersteven (talk) 14:58, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Ok Bro, thank you so much for teaching me about civility. Have a nice ahead 🙌🇮🇳🇬🇧 Nydv160 (talk) 15:14, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I really have no idea what you think you just said. Slatersteven (talk) 15:24, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Difference between SPA and new editors
I noticed this comment you made on a new editor's talk page. You suggest that the editor, whose account has only made edits in the last 24 hours and was relatively recently created, is a single-purpose account. This strikes me as somewhat biting, as editors often begin their editing careers because they notice something they are particularly interested in. Less than 24 hours of editing and no participation in any votestacking is indicative of a good-faith editor making their first edits in a discussion rather than a SPA engaging in disruption. Please remember that wrongly accusing new editors of disruption increases their likelihood of disengagement with the project and is uncivil. For what it's worth, I disagree with this new editor and find their arguments tedious; I think we can safely disengage from that discussion in the knowledge that the current consensus won't shift. ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:15, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Maybe, but given their vehemence of argument I thought it was a good idea to let them know about it, as I am getting a wp:nothere feel to their arguments. Slatersteven (talk) 16:22, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * As does their user name. Slatersteven (talk) 16:27, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I still feel a better response is to utilize one of the several welcoming templates available or to use the Twinkle options. I can see your reasoning for concern, but potentially problematic editors (rather than obviously disruptive ones) benefit far more from the aforementioned options and may be dissuaded for needlessly escalating a discussion. Additionally, it's generally inappropriate to write off editors for usernames that conform to policy. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:53, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I did not, I just felt it best to warn them before it became a problem. Slatersteven (talk) 17:58, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Undone Revision
Hey I just made edits to the Ed and Lorraine Warren page and saw you removed it. Is there any corrections I could have made?

Tess.studley (talk) 18:38, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
 * THis would be for the talk page. Slatersteven (talk) 10:30, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Havana syndrome
Just letting you know since you mentioned maybe also considered asking for admin help that I made a request for more admin eyes at ANI. I'm not asking for sanctions any specific user and just hoping an admin can help with whatever they decide on individually, so I haven't notified anyone else (also out of time today). KoA (talk) 16:09, 22 April 2024 (UTC)