User talk:Yashkochar

No one's welcomed you yet?!

Welcome!

Hello, Yashkochar, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- JHunterJ 20:17, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I placed the welcome message because I saw in the recent changes link that you had no Talk page, and I've placed myself on the Wikipedia:Welcoming Committee. Typically someone from the Welcoming Committee will spot you earlier in your Wikipedia editorship, which is why I lead with the incredulous question at the top. :-) The rest of the message is just boilerplate, inserted by me using {{subst:welcome}}, not any indication that you are doing anything counter to those links. -- JHunterJ 20:32, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LoPbN ToCs

_ _ Thanks for your interest in these, but those otherwise pointless ToC directives are in fact needed: They are there so that editors with less skill than you, in doping what the directives are (let alone what they do, as you did) can add enuf names to require the ToC, without having to figure out how to put the directive in.
_ _ The structure is so big that maintenance runs well behind, and many features are there so it will be as self-maintaining as possible. (An extreme case of this is the empty pages, created in advance just in case someone comes up with the first name for a page. Those entries would be mis-located or given up on otherwise.
--Jerzy•t 05:13, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

_ _ Thanks, and for my part, i spoke a little hastily, just assuming you were working on very short pages, rather than decent-sized ones, where the difference matters much less. I still would rather have the format (even this aspect seen only by editors) consistent, rather than see the sparser one applied where it won't do, or for that matter having anyone waste time puzzling over why they are different. (Well, some will do so over the pages i haven't reached yet in converting to the format that is in place in abt the first half of the alphabet & some other places.)

_ _ Myself, i'm the kind of oldtimer who tends to worry over saving a few bytes here and there, having seen the effect of upgrading to 32k words of RAM. But the truth is that avoiding extra thot by a colleague is worth wasting storage.

_ _ Good to have you aboard!
--Jerzy•t 05:54, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

... & descritions

Adding, e.g. "politician" to Radakrishnan's entry was good: someone might think they'd got the wrong R, if that weren't mentioned. But info on his specific offices belongs in his bio instead, bcz it doesn't help find the right one: presidents are politicians, so if you know he was pres, you'll follow the lk to his bio. "Pres" should be used only to distinguish two politicians with similar enuf names that they might get confused with each other. LoPbN's function is navigation, not info provision; extra detail acts only as clutter that slows down navigation. Thanks again!
--Jerzy•t 17:55, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]