Misplaced Pages

User talk:ViriiK

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ViriiK (talk | contribs) at 06:48, 10 April 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 06:48, 10 April 2006 by ViriiK (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Welcome to the Misplaced Pages

I noticed you were new, and wanted to share some links I thought useful:

For more information click here. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.

Be bold!

User:Sam Spade

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. Category: Northrop Grumman (Can't recall why it's not linking right) 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 Category: Northrop Grumman|*. 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.
By the way, just because I have a limited amount of contributions does not make it "new to the community". I've been around for a long time and do edits wherever I notice it is needed. But this time is a little different. ViriiK 05:59, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

No personal attacks

Given the history on this page of warnings for personal attacks, I have issued a 24 hour disruption block for making personal attacks on other contributors, specifically your uncivil and attacking commentary on User talk:Psy guy. If you continue your inappropriate behavior when your block expires, you will be subject to further blocks and formal dispute resolution procedings. Essjay 06:44, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I was making a personal attack on User talk:Psy guy? I'm sorry but you are inaccurate and I was refering to User talk:Sarah crane. As for "history of personal attacks", people have kept reinserting a false myth on the General Mayhem that the website was shutdown when in fact it wasn't ViriiK 06:48, 10 April 2006 (UTC)