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

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

The Bugle: Issue CXLIV, May 2018

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 coalitions and logistics in World War II, and Nick-D at Australia's frontier wars Timeline: This month in World War I

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)

Disagreeing with mainstream fact coverage is tendentious

Please read WP:TRUTH and WP:TENDENTIOUS. Insisting that maybe the news reports are all wrong is the very essence of trying to push a non-mainstream POV.

Mainstream sources have said only one thing about the "evidence" against Trump: none has been revealed. Factchecker_atyourservice 13:48, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

I did not say they are all wrong, I said there is disagreement about it in mainstream sources. [2][3].Slatersteven (talk) 13:55, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

There's no disagreement. You won't find a source claiming there is evidence of Trump collusion. That BBC source says nothing about Trump collusion evidence that I can see -- please quote source text if I'm wrong.

The News.com.au source -- which is a weaker source than all the ones I posted -- also doesn't say there is evidence of Trump collusion. It's a book review which simply says Mueller is looking at evidence. It doesn't say any of that evidence shows Trump guilt. Moreover it's just a blurb to introduce a book, not actual reporting on the subject. Factchecker_atyourservice 14:14, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Err we are not just talking about Trump, your edit also says "Mr. Trump’s advisers", well the Beeb talk about that.Slatersteven (talk) 14:17, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Again with the gibberish. Could you please speak in English? Factchecker_atyourservice 14:19, 19 May 2018 (UTC)