User talk:Joe Rodgers

IRC

Thanks to Kevin Basil, I can be found quite often in the #orthodoxy channel on lplug.org. Talk to me there if you would like. I go by the name, WPU.

Don't know about IRC? You could learn if you want.

Talk pages

I don't much mind what you do with your own Talk page, but would you mind not erasing those of other articles? It's helpful to see where we've been and why we've done what we've done.

(Please forgive me if I seem needling and nagging.) —[[User:ASDamick|—Fr. Andrew ^talk contribs (THINK!)]] 17:47, 28 Jun 2005 (EDT)

I will gladly abide by the decision of the sysops. What is everyone else's opinion? I talked with another sysop (I won't mention their name) who seemed to agree that things get a little cluttered, cloudy, or outdated in discussion pages.

My own thoughts are that if articles can be trimmed and made more concise, why can't talk pages? I like having an archive, but if a situation has been addressed then I personally think it makes things cluttered to keep them around. The discussion is archived in the changelog/history. My two cents. --Joe Rodgers 18:54, 28 Jun 2005 (EDT)

Wikipedia's usual approach (not that we have to do everything they do) is to make archival subpages when the given talk page gets too long. Sorting through a history can be extremely difficult and time consuming, especially if one isn't looking for something in particular but rather simply wants to know what the discussion regarding a given article has been.

I don't think this has ever been discussed between the sysops. I'm just one of them and by no means chief among them. We can certainly put it up for discussion, though, which I've done on OrthodoxWiki:Administrators. —[[User:ASDamick|—Fr. Andrew ^talk contribs (THINK!)]] 19:09, 28 Jun 2005 (EDT)

I think one reason to keep a record of resolved issues is that others who think of similar (or the same) issues can see for themselves that it has been resolved, without having to rehash arguments, for instance when a style decision has been made. —magda 20:27, 28 Jun 2005 (EDT)

Good point Magda. However, I think that if the style decision is explicit enough it could detail the reasons why a decision was made over another. --Joe Rodgers 20:59, 28 Jun 2005 (EDT)

Re: Patron Saint

It's a good question, Joe. I'm not sure who that would be. Let me think about this some more. I don't think we should change the name of the site to "St. so-and-so Orthodox Encyclopedia", but I wouldn't be adverse to seeking the intercession of an appropriate patron. Do you or others have any suggestions? Fr. John