User talk:C++ Template

All talk goes here.

Ada suxxors

British vs American English[edit]

Hi, would you please take a look at WP:ENGVAR? It's really uncalled for to change British English into American English with the edit summaries you used (referring to 'dumb persons'). Beside that, welcome to Wikipedia! Oliphaunt 22:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Changing back and forth between alternate spellings isn't very productive, but I appreciate that you weren't the first to change it. My major point was your edit summary, in which you called perfectly acceptable alternatives 'typo's, and what's more, called the author 'dumb'. Please try to remain civil. Oliphaunt 15:03, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies. :) C++ Template 12:50, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Accepted, of course. And in response to your remark of "apparently it's 'pick on the new guy' day" I saw you leave on another talk page, I hope you're not discouraged into not contributing anymore. I can imagine perfectly well that when you first discover the possibilities a wiki offers, you take the opportunity to change things for the better, as you perceive it. Unfortunately this sometimes means you'll tread on other people's toes, especially if you're not familiar with the conventions.

Have fun in your time here; learning these things may be a little unpleasant now but will probably improve your satisfaction in contributing in the long run! Oliphaunt 16:37, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)[edit]

Hello, C++ Template, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Please sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We're so glad you're here!

Discussion[edit]

There's various forums for discussions, but Wikipedia isn't one of them. Wikipedia is for encyclopedia articles, and the talk pages are for that end only.--Prosfilaes 15:15, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ada[edit]

You left the following note on my talk page:

You did the following: "Removed rant ("This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject."))" Ok. So, what is the proper venue for discussion? Respond back at my talk page, thanks.

I am not sure I understand what you are asking for. The text that I removed from Talk:Ada (programming language) was this:

Ada sucks. Ada is dead. Why do people still use it? Especially some Dod companies? You can do EVERYTHING in C++. Any Ada programmer who claims you can't doesn't know ish about C++. Even call by naming can be done in C++. Explicit type safety can be done. The best is when someone says that they like Ada over C++. They should really just quit and program Ada at home, then. Anyone who thinks such just shouldn't have a job. I hate Ada.

Talk pages for articles are forums for discussion of ways to improve the respective articles, they are not forums for general discussion about the subjects of the respective articles. If you want to discuss the advantages or disadvantages of C++ over Ada you would have to go to a forum like comp.lang.ada or comp.lang.c++. —Tobias Bergemann 15:51, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: If you would like to respond to what I wrote above, please do so on this page instead of my talk page, so that our exchange won't be split to two different pages. Thanks in advance. — Tobias Bergemann 15:55, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying that it's against Wikipedia policy to have a conversation? Isn't that what we're doing right now? C++ Template 00:10, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The very first sentences of the Wikipedia talk page guidelines read:

The purpose of a Wikipedia talk page is to provide space for editors to discuss changes to its associated article or project page. Article talk pages should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views.

It is not against Wikipedia policy to have a conversation if the conversation is on-topic: talk about ways to improve an article on the article's talk page, talk about ways to improve the work of a user on that user's talk page. Wikipedia is a wiki (or rather a family of wikis), but it is not a free-for-all. — Tobias Bergemann 08:25, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: removing warnings from one's own talk page is often frowned upon. — Tobias Bergemann 08:32, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was discussed and the person who gave the warning was in error. C++ Template 12:48, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually you never answered my reply to you on my talk page. I do not believe my warning to you was in error. Have a good day, and don't forget to log in next time! :-) —Elipongo (Talk|contribs) 12:52, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I responded now. Seems like I'm autologged out after a while, don't know why. C++ Template 13:08, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently the wikipedia servers occasionally hiccup, thereby invalidating the session cookies. This happens to me too. — Tobias Bergemann 13:34, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ajax[edit]

Once upon a time, long time ago, I tried to improve Ajax article. Since them I haven't looked at it at all - maybe it is better. But I noticed a change that you wanted to make and a comment. Let me tell you - unfortulatelly, you are wrong. AJAX does, in fact, stand for "Async JavaScript and XML" simply by virtue of a guy who coined it. Since then we have started to accept it for its deeper meaning and not its face value but it is what it is :( Aleksandar Šušnjar 03:05, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are incorrect (not to mention presumptuous). Why don't you do some research first? It's a disservice to the community to give out misinformation because you haven't researched enough. I have read in multiple books that Ajax is not an acronym and it being an acronym is a common misconception. One I remember is in Head Rush Ajax. I'll see if I can find some others later. C++ Template 13:37, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]