User talk:Jeffnailen

Welcome

Hello, Jeffnailen! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:14, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
The five pillars of Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions New contributors' help page Where to: ask questions • make requests Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Simplified Manual of Style • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Linking

While I understand that you can use external links in article spaces, the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking frowns on it in prose.

And tildes go after the prose. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:25, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, you must be a Wikipedia Nazi. ;-)

Thanks for starting my user page.

In the future it may be more constructive to edit a contribution if the form doesn't fit your style preferences rather than deleting all of the substance/content. This back and forth wasted a lot of time and may discourage people from contributing content. Jeffnailen (talk) 23:19, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Jeffnailen. You have new messages at Walter Görlitz's talk page.
Message added 00:15, 26 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:15, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Jeffnailen. You have new messages at Walter Görlitz's talk page.
Message added 00:43, 26 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:43, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted from Walter Görlitz's talk page.

Editing rather than deleting someone's contribution

"While I understand that you can use external links in article spaces, the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking frowns on it in prose. And tildes go after the prose. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:25, 25 February 2013 (UTC)"

That's fine, but in the future it may be more constructive to edit a contribution if the form doesn't fit your style preferences rather than deleting all of the substance/content. This back and forth wasted a lot of time and may discourage people from contributing content. Jeffnailen (talk) 23:18, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that there's no way to save the material as we don't include items that don't have articles on that article so I can't remove the link and leave bare text. It makes no sense. What would be more constructive is reading the edit history to determine why the material keeps disappearing rather than editing it back time and time again. It will save you time and won't discourage you since that's the easy way of communicating. I suppose after you reinstated it, I should have discussed with you on your talk page at that point. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:11, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unless you meant in your early edits where you were turning Green Hopper into a compound word in camel case, in that case, I didn't catch that subtle change, which is why I made the changes manually afterward. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:20, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The name of their product is: GreenHopper, one word. It makes a difference when a reader searches for the term: if their search term is 'GreenHopper' they'll likely find the product page. I also took the time to add a link to it to save a shopper time which you deleted and misspelled the name of the product using two words. If a searcher searches for: Green Hopper, they're likely to find pages of info. on grasshoppers, not very useful.

Edit, don't delete. Editing is constructive. Deleting other peoples' content is destructive.Jeff Nailen 00:35, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

No it doesn't make a difference because if I google for "green hopper", the first thing that is returned is a link to GreenHopper. I didn't delete what you wrote. It's still there in the archive. I reverted your edits because they weren't constructive. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:43, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, so it should be reverted back to the misspelled version, yeah that's constructive. Form over substance? Formal rules can always be cited to rationalize anything when ego is at stake. Let's not lose sight of the bigger picture.Jeff Nailen 23:05, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

“Thanks. By the way, what is Wikipedia policy regarding content not in alignment with the style manual? When encountering content, like a new contribution, that does not conform to the style manual what is Wikipedia policy for how to deal with it? Should all of the new content be deleted or should it be edited to conform to the style manual? Thanks. Jeff Nailen 00:55, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

In that case it should be rewritten to conform the Manual of Style. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:10, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Rewritten rather than deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffnailen (talk • contribs) 01:16, 27 February 2013

Yes. Armbrust The Homunculus 01:19, 27 February 2013 (UTC)...

Thanks. Yes, I know he was right about the link, my question is not about who's right or wrong. My question is about Wikipedia policy regarding best practices when someone encounters a contribution with such a mistake. Should the entire contribution from the writer be repeatedly deleted without explanation or should that mistake be edited/corrected to preserve the content? Which is a more constructive response, deleting or editing?... Jeff Nailen | Talk 17:03, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, that's why I said partly. He should have corrected it, and not wholesale remove it. Armbrust The Homunculus 17:06, 27 February 2013 (UTC)” Jeff Nailen (Talk 19:57, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Your signature

Please modify your signature. Per WP:SIGLINK: "Signatures must include at least one internal link to your user page, user talk page, or contributions page". For how to do this see WP:SIGHELP. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 01:44, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Jeffnailen. You have new messages at Armbrust's talk page.
Message added 17:06, 27 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 17:06, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Jeffnailen. You have new messages at Armbrust's talk page.
Message added 17:23, 27 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 17:23, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

February 2013

Hello, I'm Walter Görlitz. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Talk:Scrum (development) that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. The attack was here. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:41, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Talk:Scrum (development) with this edit. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you, Nick—^Contact/_Contribs 00:56, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OMG this is too funny. I gotta preserve this before someone deletes it!

Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Called me a liar here. Asked to strike the comment after it was explained that I had no way of knowing the anon and this editor were the same here Refused here and instead "warned me" again writing "Get your facts straight before misrepresenting what I did and didn't do". Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:40, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at Talk:Scrum (development), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Scrum_(development)&diff=541363060&oldid=541359517 Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:08, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]