Talk:Cygnus Orb-1
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Cygnus Orb-1 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
Untitled
editThis article needs to be retitled "Orbital CRS-1"--Reinoffire01 (talk) 19:06, 11 December 2012 (UTC)Reinoffire01
Tense:
editThe article relates to a mission that took place and ended in 2014 (i.e. 2 years ago in the past), yet it is written in a mixture of future and present tense. Considering the fact that the article has not been touched by anyone in quite sometime, I would like to correct the tense(s) to reflect the actual position if no one else does this or there is no objection from anyone. Thanks. Abul Bakhtiar (talk) 10:14, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Abul Bakhtiar, I think I've taken care of this, but in the future please don't think you have to ask for permission to make such changes yourself! — Huntster (t @ c) 20:33, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, I will. The reason I asked for permission is that I deleted a comment I had previously made on a talk page as it was no longer relevant/outdated/taken over by subsequent events and someone else saw fit to restore it, though with an apologia. It seems there are a lot of grammatical mistakes in most articles and in some cases there have been quite unnecessarily heated exchanges on talk pages. Previously, I never used to pay attention to the talk pages, but since opening an account a few months ago I make it a point to go through these discussions which are often quite educational as well as a learning experience. Abul Bakhtiar (talk) 05:15, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Abul Bakhtiar, talk pages are a special situation. Unless the entire section is being archived (that is, moved to a sub-page containing other archived discussions), talk page comments should never be modified by anyone except the original writer (and even that is sometimes frowned upon). Usually, an automated bot will moved old discussions. If you ever have questions about site procedures, don't hesitate to leave a message on my talk page, and I'll help you however I can. — Huntster (t @ c) 07:31, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- One other exception to editing talk page content I forgot to mention is reverting obvious vandalism or obviously non-constructive comments. But even this must be done with care, and is generally left to administrators. — Huntster (t @ c) 07:34, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, I will. The reason I asked for permission is that I deleted a comment I had previously made on a talk page as it was no longer relevant/outdated/taken over by subsequent events and someone else saw fit to restore it, though with an apologia. It seems there are a lot of grammatical mistakes in most articles and in some cases there have been quite unnecessarily heated exchanges on talk pages. Previously, I never used to pay attention to the talk pages, but since opening an account a few months ago I make it a point to go through these discussions which are often quite educational as well as a learning experience. Abul Bakhtiar (talk) 05:15, 21 February 2016 (UTC)