User talk:Slatersteven/Archives/2017/February

Question

[1] Thank you for improving this article but to be honest given your comments at ANI I'm slightly concerned you've decided to start following me around. I do hope that isn't the case. WCM_email 19:32, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

I would ask you to withdraw that suggestion based upon two pages (one of which I have been fairly active on over the last week) and not on the half half a dozen other pages you have edited and I have not.Slatersteven (talk) 19:38, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

It was a question not a suggestion. Its not a topic you usually edit, one you've never edited and it happens to be one I edited a short time before. Hence, not an entirely unreasonable question. WCM_email 19:48, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Questions end in questions marks and are not made as Statements. I shall now be mentioning this at the ANI.Slatersteven (talk) 19:50, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

	The "order out of chaos" barnstar
	For bringing order and a logical approach to the discussion about the Trump dossier at the BLP noticeboard. Well done. MelanieN (talk) 20:05, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

There was no personal attack in the Ahim talkpage

The quote of Huldra you sent was not a personal attack so either drop it or report her if you are confident enough to be willing to accept the consequences if you are wrong. That pity argument is popping on my watchlist all day and I am sick of it.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 21:41, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

OK, I will report it, as they have obviously sought to make more of this.Slatersteven (talk) 22:00, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

div

You have to close the formatting with </div> in order to stop it from applying to everything below. TimothyJosephWood 14:48, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you!

Thank you. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 11:00, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Well, that was disappointing, but thanks anyway. I know your intentions are good. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 13:33, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Not good no, just thoughtful. You have been called a good editor, yet no one seems to now be taking the time to explain to you where you are going wrong. As I said, drop the subject of your blocks, it will do you nothing but harm. If you have any sense all you will say in reply to this is "OK I get that I am on thin ice and will say no more on the subject", and not "but I was in the right". It is hard to think that this can be solved in any way other then asking for Admins assistance in the hope they have more luck then I do, I do not want to do that.Slatersteven (talk) 13:50, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Please do not post on my talkpage anymore. I was (and am) in the right, but if you do not believe me then we will have to agree to disagree. I am not interested in your attempt to revive old stale drama. Thanks in advance, (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:30, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Fair enough, but it was you who revived it with this edit [2] I merely told you to drop it.Slatersteven (talk) 16:33, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

You have made some very serious allegations of off site shenanigans, I have chose to launch an ANI so you can present your evidence.Slatersteven (talk) 16:54, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

"science writing"

Your own source calls it journalism, not science. I'm going to hang onto that diff. 74.70.146.1 (talk) 00:06, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

You did see what the title of the article was?Slatersteven (talk) 10:53, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXX, February 2017

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 Op-ed: TomStar81 looks at submarine warfare in World War I 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) 04:45, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

You have got mail

Hello, Slatersteven/Archives/2017. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

DrChrissy ^(talk) 19:45, 12 February 2017 (UTC)