Talk:Yukon Green Party/Archive 1
Latest comment: 12 years ago by Dl2000 in topic Archiving
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Yukon Green Party. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Archiving
I added MizaBot on this talk page because I have a feeling we'll be using this talk page a lot. I changed the time from 30 days to 90 days, and one thread will always be left on this talk page. Me-123567-Me (talk) 16:34, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
- Well, now we're up to two sections. I just didn't think this was that notable of a topic. I know of hundreds of other articles that are longer than this one, and have talk from years past. Is it that you want the above section to go away? Just like how you wanted Kristina Calhoun deleted because the AfD didn't go your way? 117Avenue (talk) 02:07, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- Wow, who's not assuming good faith now? No, that's not the reason and I really wish you'd use discussions more. I created this part so we could discuss it. Reasonably. But if you can't assume good faith, maybe we need an RFC about you? Hmmm? WP:OTHERSTUFF. Me-123567-Me (talk) 03:57, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- WP:AATP, WP:BRD. 117Avenue (talk) 04:33, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- I'm failing to see your point. Me-123567-Me (talk) 05:11, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, maybe I should be more clear. Please point me to the section on AATP that says a talk page with one discussion shall be archived after three months. Because all I see is "Bulky talk pages may be hard to navigate, contain obsolete discussion, or become a burden for users with slow Internet connections or computers. There may be circumstances where it would benefit discussions to keep older sections visible on the talk pages, namely to obviate rehashing issues." and "The talk page guidelines suggest archiving when the talk page exceeds 50 KB or has more than 10 main topics." Also, BRD, don't be offended when you get reverted, and have to explain your changes. Thanks, 117Avenue (talk) 05:58, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- If you'd like to remove the archiving, be my guest. As for the BRD thing... you could also take the initiative to discuss things before reverting. I can't read your mind, neither can other editors. Me-123567-Me (talk) 03:13, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
- When you don't use edit summary, others can't read your mind. 117Avenue (talk) 04:16, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
- "Unexplained addition" isn't really appropriate, since I did explain it. False edit summaries are worse than no edit summary. Me-123567-Me (talk) 12:56, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
- Let's give it a few months and see if the talk page activity slows down. If so, a WP:BOT is probably not needed when very infrequent manual archiving will suffice. Dl2000 (talk) 03:58, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
- "Unexplained addition" isn't really appropriate, since I did explain it. False edit summaries are worse than no edit summary. Me-123567-Me (talk) 12:56, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
- When you don't use edit summary, others can't read your mind. 117Avenue (talk) 04:16, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
- If you'd like to remove the archiving, be my guest. As for the BRD thing... you could also take the initiative to discuss things before reverting. I can't read your mind, neither can other editors. Me-123567-Me (talk) 03:13, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, maybe I should be more clear. Please point me to the section on AATP that says a talk page with one discussion shall be archived after three months. Because all I see is "Bulky talk pages may be hard to navigate, contain obsolete discussion, or become a burden for users with slow Internet connections or computers. There may be circumstances where it would benefit discussions to keep older sections visible on the talk pages, namely to obviate rehashing issues." and "The talk page guidelines suggest archiving when the talk page exceeds 50 KB or has more than 10 main topics." Also, BRD, don't be offended when you get reverted, and have to explain your changes. Thanks, 117Avenue (talk) 05:58, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- I'm failing to see your point. Me-123567-Me (talk) 05:11, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- WP:AATP, WP:BRD. 117Avenue (talk) 04:33, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
- Wow, who's not assuming good faith now? No, that's not the reason and I really wish you'd use discussions more. I created this part so we could discuss it. Reasonably. But if you can't assume good faith, maybe we need an RFC about you? Hmmm? WP:OTHERSTUFF. Me-123567-Me (talk) 03:57, 12 December 2011 (UTC)