User talk:Tepidpond
Hello, Tepidpond, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- If you haven't already, drop by the New user log and tell others a bit about yourself.
- Always sign your posts on talk pages! That way, others will know who left which comments.
- The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
- Simplified Ruleset
- How to edit a page
- Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
- Picture tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Naming conventions
- Manual of Style
- Wikipedia Glossary
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Though we all make goofy mistakes, here is what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. The Community Portal can also be very useful.
Happy editing!
Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉) 02:10, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Userboxes[edit]
I did some general cleanup on the userboxes on your userpage. I updated the location of two userboxes and put three userboxes in their own group so they don't stick out like a sore thumb (while the other userboxes are in groups). If you don't like it, feel free to revert it back. — Nathan (talk) / 02:52, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Comment on Talk page of Orkut[edit]
(How are you even supposed to get in touch with a Wikipedia user anyway? Lord knows I don't understand Wikiquette.)
You reverted an edit of mine on a talk page for Orkut, telling me that I should have responded to a comment instead of removing it. I don't think so. That comment was from 2004, and no-one since then has ever felt that it was worth an answer. The comment was alleging that there is a conspiracy theory that the CIA runs Orkut. People will believe any old crap, but that doesn't make it relevant enough to include an article, which is why that comment has received zero attention in the last two years.
What's more, the link to my site is to a page which does not in any way whatsoever claim that the CIA is running Orkut, or subpoenaing its database, or anything. I mention it as a theoretical possibility, but whoever linked to my site obviously didn't actually read it. As a result, I'm getting traffic to my page from people who are just searching for "Orkut". But my page is completely irrelevant to the point of the original comment, which is in turn completely irrelevant to the wiki page under discussion. Adding discussion to that comment would just be a waste of time. No-one cares, no-one's interested, and the original user has probably moved on since then anyway. There is no discussion here.
I'm not trying to erase history; it still exists in the history of the discussion. But obviously discussion pages shouldn't include everything that was ever said about the page ever, no matter how tangential, or else they'll all become infinitely long. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 134.106.50.226 (talk • contribs) .
- Help:Talk_pages and Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines are both two good sources for how-to use a talk page. About half-way down the second of those pages, it lists "Behavior that is unacceptable", and includes "Do not edit other's comments". When talk pages get long enough, they are archived into sub-pages, so there is really no need to remove comments...unless obviously vandal-written.
- Your second paragraph would be a perfect response to go on Talk:Orkut, however.
- (Posted here as you have at least two different IP addresses, and are not logged in) tepid 15:53, 9 November 2006 (UTC)