Board Thread:Consensus Track/@comment-1732320-20160627020859/@comment-732150-20160627033250

Occasionally, I make punctual edits in others' talk pages and archives. Sometimes when I'm cleaning up old links and redirects, I'll go wherever Special:WhatLinksHere points me to, so I can either erase potential red links due to upcoming deletions, or just update links in case of file/article move. The "the talk page isn't yours" is, as far as I'm aware, the way we convey that a talk page's content can't simply be deleted (except for obvious vandalism and harassment), as general discussions should be available for posterior consultation, hence the archiving option. This topic is rather fortuitous, as some of Sajuuk's recent archiving practices in regular article talk pages puzzles me, so I intended to ask him about his archiving rationale. I've seen him archiving all sorts of talk pages, including small and recent. My approach to archiving talk pages is that there should be enough archiveable content in talk page to make an archive. If a page has just a handful topics from ten years ago, even if the content is super old, I won't archive it if the removal of said content doesn't come near a -32,000 change to the page. The reason for this number is from a warning that I recall appearing both in wikis and wikipedia when editing a page, it said something like "this page is over 32,000 (whatever) long, some browsers maybe have issues (parsing/rendering/loading/don't recall) it". Also for that reason, if the to-be-archived portion of the page is big enough, I'll also create more than one archive, instead of a single, gigantic one. I will also refrain from archiving a topic if the most recent comment of a topic is less than a month old, and if by making the archive, the talk page is left completely blank, which just looks terrible, is very uninviting for new discussions, except for the one sort of discussions that I feel should be discouraged, which is asking things that were already answered and discussed. So, some of the stuff he does comes across as counter-productive to me, like making Tsukuyomi's already huge archive even bigger instead of making a new one, leaving Talk:A (Third Raikage) and Talk:Unsealing Technique blank by creating an archive (both with a near 32K size), Konan's despite the fact it really not sizeable enough to warrant an archive, as was the Talk:Sound Four's, and more, which can be seen going through his contributions.