Talk:SpaceX Starshield
 | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | Material from Starlink was split to SpaceX Starshield on 21 January 2024. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution. The former page's talk page can be accessed at Talk:Starlink. |
Copyright problem removed[edit]
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://spacenews.com/spacex-providing-starlink-services-to-dod-under-unique-terms-and-conditions/ https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2023/09/spacex-starshield-gets-first-us-space-force-contract.html. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 00:40, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Feedback from New Page Review process[edit]
I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!
✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 06:49, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
Explain the revert of changes[edit]
@Starwars54321 you appear to be using your sock puppet account Suprabellum to disguise reverts in order to bypass the multiple revert rule. You've now reverted the changes twice. You are in violation of that rule. Further you labeled them "restore some lost edits". Can you please explain yourself and why you were lying into the edit log? On your talk page you have been previously warned about edit warring on this page. Ergzay (talk) 22:06, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Starwars54321 Pinging as wikipedia didn't highlight the username. Ergzay (talk) 22:08, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Also technically what you are labeling as "edit warring" is not what occurred unless you are indeed agreeing that Suprabellum is also owned by you. The first revert by Suprabellum was made to look like an accidental change, after which I reverted what looked like a mistake. But you think that was a revert, not a mistake, which is curious. Then you did a full revert with this account but you instead called it "restoring lost edits" which is completely false. That was the first revert, but you didn't call it a revert either. So no there has been no "edit warring" other than that conducted by you. So, was it an edit war and you were lying, or was it innocent mistakes and not edit warring? Ergzay (talk) 22:11, 18 May 2024 (UTC)