| Revision as of 03:20, 10 April 2006 editPsy guy (talk | contribs)4,524 edits Northrop Grumman← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:57, 10 April 2006 edit undoViriiK (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,246 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
| To comment on the tension at Northrop Grumman: it is most appropriate to go with the most specific category. Redundancy (as you mentioned with other articles) may exist, but it should not be encouraged where it come be avoided. Secondly, while I realize that you are new yourself, please do not ] newcomers. Thirdly, you both have violated 3RR. I am not going to block either one of you, but I was going to make you aware of that. I suggest a brief cooling off period from Northrop Grumman. Step back, take a breath, let's not let this develop into an edit war. If you have any questions or concerns, please let me know. -- ] <sup>]</sup> 03:20, 10 April 2006 (UTC) | To comment on the tension at Northrop Grumman: it is most appropriate to go with the most specific category. Redundancy (as you mentioned with other articles) may exist, but it should not be encouraged where it come be avoided. Secondly, while I realize that you are new yourself, please do not ] newcomers. Thirdly, you both have violated 3RR. I am not going to block either one of you, but I was going to make you aware of that. I suggest a brief cooling off period from Northrop Grumman. Step back, take a breath, let's not let this develop into an edit war. If you have any questions or concerns, please let me know. -- ] <sup>]</sup> 03:20, 10 April 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :Sorry, but no. It only limits readers to that specific category. Yes, there will be redundacy in the entire community but the problem is "Anyone can edit", so when something new gets put in, it can create redundacy. It happens. But in this case, it was not needed. ] helps expand the readers view of the entire company and their subsidaries as well especially related sectors if they want to research it more. However you do a google search with "Northrop Grumman +wiki", the first result of that page will be obviously ], not ]. Why? They're expecting the main page of Northrop Grumman. If the first page yields no result, then they're going to hit the back button and go find another site out there that'll help them. ] 05:57, 10 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 05:57, 10 April 2006
Welcome to the Misplaced Pages
I noticed you were new, and wanted to share some links I thought useful:
- M:Foundation issues
- Misplaced Pages:Tutorial
- Misplaced Pages:Cleanup resources
- Misplaced Pages:Help desk
- Misplaced Pages:Five pillars
For more information click here. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.
Assume good faith
You behaviour at Northrop Grumman may be in violation of a core Misplaced Pages principle: Assume good faith. Try to keep in mind that some of our contributors are young and enthusiastic - please encourage rather that discourage. Also remember that an intial edit doesn't need to be brilliantly sourced - sources can develop over time, with encouragement etc. Have a nice day :-) --Commander Keane 13:49, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Take a break from Northrop Grumman?
(before I start, let me say that I have repeated this message for User:Izuko)
Hi ViriiK! There has been a heap of conflict over Northrop Grumman recently. I am thinking that it might help if you take a 1 week break from Northrop Grumman. Nothing terrible will happen, and it will let other editors get on with the article. When you come back your refreshed view will enhance the article. What do you think?--Commander Keane 15:26, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
- It seems dissenting opinions are no longer wanted on the NGC site. Izuko 17:59, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
3rr warning regarding Northrop Grumman
You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule on Northrop Grumman. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from further editing. Henrik 16:15, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Genay Article
In the future, instead of reverting articles and issuing personal attacks, please discuss the issue in question on the talk page. Thanks. --Alphachimp 18:47, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Signing your talk edits
You can use ~~~~ to sign your name at the end of your talk edits. It will automatically fill in your name as well as the current time.
Hope this helps, 217.160.134.33 12:04, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Northrop Grumman
To comment on the tension at Northrop Grumman: it is most appropriate to go with the most specific category. Redundancy (as you mentioned with other articles) may exist, but it should not be encouraged where it come be avoided. Secondly, while I realize that you are new yourself, please do not bite newcomers. Thirdly, you both have violated 3RR. I am not going to block either one of you, but I was going to make you aware of that. I suggest a brief cooling off period from Northrop Grumman. Step back, take a breath, let's not let this develop into an edit war. If you have any questions or concerns, please let me know. -- Psy guy 03:20, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, but no. It only limits readers to that specific category. Yes, there will be redundacy in the entire community but the problem is "Anyone can edit", so when something new gets put in, it can create redundacy. It happens. But in this case, it was not needed. helps expand the readers view of the entire company and their subsidaries as well especially related sectors if they want to research it more. However you do a google search with "Northrop Grumman +wiki", the first result of that page will be obviously Northrop Grumman, not . Why? They're expecting the main page of Northrop Grumman. If the first page yields no result, then they're going to hit the back button and go find another site out there that'll help them. ViriiK 05:57, 10 April 2006 (UTC)