TeleComNasSprVen

Defining style

When adding definitions, please use a complete sentence style rather than fragments such as to gather together. The explanation should, if possible, use the word in a natural way, for example If people congregate, a number of them come together. —This unsigned comment was added by Brett (talk • contribs) .

flooding

your everywhere on recent changes cool down --Soredoc63 (talk) 15:47, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

QDs

Stop requesting deletions en masse. That surely isn't helpful here. Noone really cares about things that are here for years. Just looking at our logo you proposed for deletion. It is our logo and is an exemption to any rule. QDs to other's user pages are a no-go as well. I'm going to simply revert all this requests, as I don't have the time to review all. There are too many false positives. -Barras (talk) 07:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

I didn't request outright deletion of your logo; I wanted to delete this, which is a hardcoded unnecessary copy of that original logo and the one that's already on commons. I have had the time to review which pages needed deletion, and that's why I tagged them all. So far, I haven't seen evidence that the files I tagged were falsepositives, or any other ones. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 07:34, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Look, I can have the time to rereview and look over which ones are certain to have no value whatsoever and delete them on sight. That will greatly reduce the number of pages in the category. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 07:37, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

I now reverted most things. It is a bad practice to change things that are here for years this way. Some of them have reasons why they are there. Pages you proposed for deletion which were originally wirtten by Angela are linked from MediaWiki pages. It's not only about deleting. There is always more work to do. It is useless to do such kind of changes. If you want to help here, help us in main space with new entries, or with fixing them. Mass doing things that are useless can be seen as disruption and may end in a block. -Barras (talk) 11:01, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

In line with what Barras said, I think that what we need most is to focus on creating new entries. Only once we have built a much more sizable dictionary, with a larger user base, will it be very worthwhile to make adjustments to background pages. Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 11:12, 8 October 2010 (UTC)