Talk:Matthew Sluka

"Matthew sucka" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Matthew sucka has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 28 § Matthew sucka until a consensus is reached. jlwoodwa (talk) 23:30, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

COI vandalism by SPA

— Steak Farmer (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Steak Farmer, you need to familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Mainly, please review:

• Edit warring, which you have committed
• False information, which you have been adding to this article
• Reliable sources, the false information you have been adding includes sources that are not reliable and improperly formatted
• Conflict of interest, you are a single-purpose account with an apparent conflict of interest, your edits have shown a blatant bias towards the subject of this article, in violation Wikipedia's neutrality policies

I will fix your mistake for you. Please stop edit warring, or you will be reported. GrammarDamner how are things? 19:30, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Stop adding the completely negative version of his time at UNLV (and yes, "he demanded more money from his team and ultimately decided to quit in the middle of an undefeated season" is entirely negative). The whole situation was essentially word versus word and at that point its best to have language along the lines of "Sluka claimed" and "UNLV refuted" etc. A neutral version line would characterize it as a "disagreement over NIL compensation" or something similar. Best, GPL93 (talk) 22:26, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

The sources state, "Sluka’s representative made financial demands upon the University and its NIL collective in order to continue playing." GrammarDamner how are things? 15:05, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

That is part of a press release issued by UNLV's PR department quoted as UNLV's reply, which the sources include and you have deliberately left out. GPL93 (talk) 19:05, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

And Sluka never denied it, that is what he did, these are simple facts. GrammarDamner how are things? 19:14, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Nor did he retract his side of the story, so what does that matter? GPL93 (talk) 19:45, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

It matters because he did in fact demand more money, saying it had been promised to him, in order to continue playing. GrammarDamner how are things? 19:51, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

How? Because he didn't directly issue a counter-press release to a specific UNLV release? GPL93 (talk) 19:57, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Mainly because of his actions. GrammarDamner how are things? 20:08, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

POV pushing

@GPL93: this edit is problematic for multiple reasons. Nothing about the information you removed is inaccurate. I don't know what gave you that idea, but please don't make false statements. Furthermore, nothing about that was written negatively. That information simply stated the facts as they occurred. If you want to view Sluka's actions negatively, you're welcome to do so. Please self revert and stop edit warring. Thank you. GrammarDamner how are things? 21:38, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

It certainly is negative and also not even entirely accurate. I would recommend taking up the wording at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football, but as it was written it violates WP:BLP and therefore must be removed. GPL93 (talk) 00:18, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Interesting how you still can't explain how it is inaccurate. It is also absolutely not a BLP violation. Facts are facts. GrammarDamner how are things? 16:11, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Facts are facts: Per the WP:ONUS policy:

The responsibility for achieving consensus for inclusion is on editors seeking to include disputed content.

—Bagumba (talk) 17:04, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

I am aware of this opinion of who the onus is on. It should be noted that that is a direct contradiction to Wikipedia's mission: to put the sum of all human knowledge at everyone's fingertips. Meanwhile, I'm still trying to figure out why reliably sourced content that is the main reason for a subject's notability would ever be disputed. GrammarDamner how are things? 22:42, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

• Full discussion is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football#Lead_of_Matthew_Sluka. Best, GPL93 (talk) 19:06, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
• Comment The outcome was that the dispute doesn't need to be included in the lead. A sentence stating that UNLV denies making any offers outside of a $3,000 relocation payment has been added to the paragraph on the NIL dispute. Best, GPL93 (talk) 13:17, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

  What? That was not at all the outcome of the discussion. GrammarDamner how are things? 15:30, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

  GPL93, you even proposed an addition to the lead. I thought it could use some tweaking, but why can't we add this? GrammarDamner how are things? 15:32, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

  I put it in exactly as you wrote it. I added nothing. Yet you still took it out claiming your outcome. This is getting ridiculous. GrammarDamner how are things? 19:44, 29 June 2026 (UTC)