Something I feel has recently come up as a slight issue is Archiving. While archiving large talk pages is perfectly fine, I feel there's an issue with users using archives to hide warnings from public eye. Two examples of this is DeeMoShow's archive and Dan67's archives, all of which are ridiculously short (DeeMoShow only having 4 messages). As such I feel an addendum is required for COD:DDD to ensure users are using archives for clearing cluttered talk pages and not for simply hiding warnings. There are many ways this could be achieved, such as only allowing sysops to perform archiving, only allowing pages of certain sizes to be archived, or something along those lines, however in short I feel we need to cut on archives made solely for warning hiding.
Also please note I'm open to suggestions on how deal with archives, the two suggestions I posted were simply my ideas, they're not set in stone so don't oppose because you don't like the bridge design when we need to cross a river.
22:50, March 5, 2013 (UTC)
Discussion
General Support to the idea - It seems good, but the main thing is what would be the main size for an archive? Sysops only being able to archive sounds easy as the user in question would only need to leave a message on a sysops talk page for them to do it. 
Argorrath おしゃべり
22:55, March 5, 2013 (UTC)
Support with several ideas - I agree with this. Most of the more experienced (I said more, don't jump at me) users have a "byte" counter on their talk page (in example, Me ). I'm on the idea of proposing a new addendum on COD:DDD by the basic rule of "if you need archiving, please do so when reaching X number of bytes". Also, while we're at it and if the idea comes through, then we should make a byte counter for every active/"more than 3 messages in the talk page" user. Or if the counter idea is way too tedious, we could also make the rule apply to a "X" number of messages in said talk page.-Diegox223 Zed's dead, baby.
22:58, March 5, 2013 (UTC)
- I suppose what one could do is make a byte counter after being asked, use "preview page" and if that byte counter isn't high enough we just say "No, you're page isn't big enough yet". It's not possible to use a bot for this either as there are too many talk pages to list. 23:12, March 5, 2013 (UTC)
Comment — Wasn't this why archives used to be something that needed to be requested from a sysop or bureaucrat, since that way it wouldn't be as easy to use it to hide warnings and other... "undesirable" talk page moments? Raven's wing Talk23:14, March 5, 2013 (UTC)
- Chances are yes, however it seems that rule was never set in stone, and we've just been happy letting people archive as long as they do it correctly. 23:43, March 5, 2013 (UTC)
Support — Unless if there are any extreme circumstances, I see no reason for people to archive talk pages early. As shown, it does seem to be used more frequently as a way to push aside warnings, where most people who archive these go on to do the same thing over again. I do agree on the sysop only at a certain size, but there has to be some safe area built into it. 
Talk page 03:02, March 6, 2013 (UTC)
Idea- I propose a minimum of 30,000 bytes or 50 sections, whichever comes first, as a requirement. PierogiTalk 03:06, March 6, 2013 (UTC)
- Bytes might be easier, after all you could have 50 small segments or 50 large segments, both taking up different amounts of room, but bytes is a bit more specific to size. 03:07, March 6, 2013 (UTC)
Support - I think I would prefer a minimum of 25k-30k bytes to archive. Template:Sig/MLGisNot4Me 07:38, March 6, 2013 (UTC)
Support - I'd like the rule to be something like "Do not archive your talk page for the sole purpose of removing warnings from view. Admins will notice you doing this and undo your archive". 
19:11, March 6, 2013 (UTC)
Huge Support - Why would you even do this anyway? You'll get found out either way. My talk page may be up for renewal actually, what's the ruling if it's dead and almost full like mine? YELLOWLUCARIO TALK 16:36, March 7, 2013 (UTC)
Support/Comment - I am in favour of a more bigger page size requirement to archive, preferably around the current 40k-50k. Also, general question. If this addendum does come into effect, what happens to existing archives, including those like the ones Sam has mentioned? ParagonX7 跟我谈天 http://i.imgur.com/3hrm0HS.png 05:58, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
- We'll leave them as is. There's not much we can do about them besides put them back on the talk page, and Dan's ones are too old now to really have much point being re-added. 13:44, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
Support I like the idea of archiving at 25k-30k Bytes, I normally archive at 80k Bytes. Per all. 
Bats a.k.a Rarity Filly 06:09, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
Support - Going to agree with Callofduty4. I don't really think there needs to be a byte limit. Joe Copp 13:44, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
- Callofduty4 didn't say anything about a byte limit, either for or against. 23:12, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
- Nor did Joe explicitly say Cod4 said that. Template:Sig/MLGisNot4Me 23:25, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
- "Going to agree with Callofduty4" - It infers that the following statement agrees with what Callofduty4 said. 23:31, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
- But reading what Cod4 actually said would solve everything :3 Joe Copp 23:51, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
- I did read it, it said nothing about Byte limits. So I'm just going to assume you're using that as your own idea and not spring-boarding. 22:42, March 11, 2013 (UTC)
- What I believe Mr. Copp intended to say was that he agreeded with CoD4's point while also putting his personal opinion (" I don't really think there needs to be a byte limit.") in said argument.-Diegox223 Zed's dead, baby.
23:24, March 11, 2013 (UTC)
- What I believe Mr. Copp intended to say was that he agreeded with CoD4's point while also putting his personal opinion (" I don't really think there needs to be a byte limit.") in said argument.-Diegox223 Zed's dead, baby.
- I did read it, it said nothing about Byte limits. So I'm just going to assume you're using that as your own idea and not spring-boarding. 22:42, March 11, 2013 (UTC)
- But reading what Cod4 actually said would solve everything :3 Joe Copp 23:51, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
- "Going to agree with Callofduty4" - It infers that the following statement agrees with what Callofduty4 said. 23:31, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
- Nor did Joe explicitly say Cod4 said that. Template:Sig/MLGisNot4Me 23:25, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
SupportPer COD4, I agree completely. There should be a size limit designated for making an archive. And if you archive your talk too soon, a warning sould be givien and the archive undone.
07:46, March 18, 2013 (UTC)