User talk:Djsasso/Archive 4

Latest comment: 12 years ago by Djsasso in topic Mission complete


Hi, I'm a user from the English Wikipedia. I wish to point out to you that Yabasic was created again. Mind checking it and seeing if its recreation of deleted content? (Feel free to delete it if needed) LikeLakers2 (talk) 22:05, 8 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Also, just so you know, if you are going to reply on my talk page, probably better to use my enwiki talk page than it is to use the one here. If you reply here on your own talk page, of course, then you can here. LikeLakers2 (talk) 22:08, 8 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for cleaning up after

Especially, thanks for removing their nonsense form my Talk page. I wasn't sure whether to leave it there as a trail of their misbehavior or not. I guess it is OK to just remove noise from ones own talk page, though. Is that right? Gotanda (talk) 15:05, 12 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yeah I was going to block him the otherday but decided to wait a day to see if he kept it up....Barras beat me to it. As for your own talk page you are allowed to remove anything you want. It is considered acknowledgement that it has been read. -DJSasso (talk) 15:07, 12 September 2011 (UTC)Reply


Sorry I didn't put the right IP address in my vandalism report, but I see you got it from the diffs I included. --Auntof6 (talk) 14:59, 22 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

No worries. I knew what you meant. :) -DJSasso 17:44, 22 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Ice hockey leagues

Hi DJ. Are top level European ice hockey leagues below the big five considered notable on Simple English Wikipedia? If they are, I will get to creating some of them within the next few days. Thanks. --Hockeyben 22:36, 23 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

I probably wouldn't create them here. Atleast not until some of the more notable things are created. We don't really even have anything about the big five. Heck we barely have anything about the NHL. And just incase you weren't aware. You can't just copy articles over to here from You have to rewrite them as simple english. Don't just throw up stats like you did on That doesn't really fly here, you will have them deleted and they might even case you off the wiki like they did to someone who did that with soccer articles. If you write something here it does have to contain more prose. -DJSasso 23:06, 23 September 2011 (UTC)Reply
Okay then. I'll work on expanding the big five and NHL articles for now. I am aware not to copy text from en.wp, the recent articles I created contained only the first sentence from en.wp article, as a base for the simple article to build upon. As for the standings, I won't create anything below the NHL level. --Hockeyben 23:40, 23 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

NHL seasons

Hi. I'm planning to copy over the remaining NHL seasons from the English Wikipedia. Seeing as you have the importer right, would you mind importing the revisions over after I've copied the pages to comply with copyright? Thanks --Hockeyben (talk) 17:14, 27 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Don't just copy them. Don't worry about moving them over. They are being taken care of slowly, as mentioned previously we don't just want replications of the en version. So doing the articles has to be done slowly so prose can be written. I think this is the big issue you ran into on en. You created a few hundred articles without taking the time to make sure they were done correctly and as such contain a lot of errors and issues. Don't want to see the same happen here where we have a lot less editors to clean up the mess. -DJSasso (talk) 17:23, 27 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

A little extreme

I see that you just deleted my entire article on wolf spiders because I quoted a few words from a book. I that your action is a little extreme because (1) quoting a few words of a book in a review is regarded as legitimate use, and (2) those few words could easily have been paraphrased if there is indeed a copyright problem. Patrick0Moran (talk) 20:55, 30 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

The entire thing appeared to be copied from the book not just a few words or I wouldn't have deleted it. However, I have restored it for not until I can check further. -DJSasso (talk) 16:50, 1 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
I've been editing Wikipedia articles for years. I am well enough acquainted with wolf spiders not to need to do anything but find citations for what I have written. The article has not been restored, either. The Crompton book is now just called Spider and you can buy a copy on-line. Patrick0Moran (talk) 01:10, 2 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
It actually has been restored but it appears there is a bug so its currently stuck in an edit conflict for some reason so it can't be seen. Going to look into it. -DJSasso (talk) 17:04, 2 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Years in ice hockey

While doing some category work, I came across a group of ice hockey categories that mostly contain only one or two articles. I'm talking about the subcategories of Category:Years in ice hockey. One of the categories is Category:1961 in ice hockey‎; it contains only two pages: 1960–61 NHL season and 1961-62 NHL season. I'm asking you about this because it looks like you created a lot of these categories.

It seems a little overkill to have these duplicate categories, so I'm thinking it might simplify things if the "yyyy-yy NHL seasons" categories were removed. The NHL season articles in them are easy enough to find in Category:National Hockey League seasons. In cases where the categories come from templates, we might want to change the template(s); the "yyyy in ice hockey" categories could be created and populated if they become needed.

Your thoughts? --Auntof6 (talk) 06:20, 3 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

They will be growing as I add other leagues seasons. Personally year categories are the one area that I don't get too concerned about having smaller categories to complete the chronology. Just like birth year categories I would never merge those into fewer categories as they lose their purpose once they are no longer individual years. The idea being that you can compare specific events in a single year against one another. If you have to go to varied directories to find the articles then it becomes an issue. Not all categories need to be shrunk when there is a purpose to them existing. Most of the time as you know I do agree with merging categories that have one article in them up to their parent article. But I don't believe that works for categories based on time and dates. -DJSasso (talk) 12:39, 3 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
I could I suppose upmerge them to the "19xx in sports" categories to preserve the use for now on the ones that only have 1 or 2 in them. But that seems like a lot of wasteful deleting and eventual recreating. -DJSasso (talk) 16:24, 3 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
OK, thanks. You make a good point about completing the chronology. I think I'll keep that in mind when I find births, deaths, etc. that are the only one for a year. --Auntof6 (talk) 21:27, 3 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
Changing back a bunch of ones you changed already? If you have already changed them all you can probably just let it go. But I know how it is to want to organized. Have to keep going until you think its perfect. ;) -DJSasso (talk) 22:18, 3 October 2011 (UTC)Reply


We probably set a bad precedent by giving to anyone really; I've only used it myself a handful of times. I've been thinking about this and we should probably set criteria re: number of people taking part in the election etcetera and I also think we should only give out "temp" importer; using something like WP:RFP/Approved Temporary on meta. fr33kman 22:49, 3 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

If we are going to give it to anyone then yeah I think we need something. Temp importer is a possibility. Personally I would move to stop giving it out at all, since there is only one person with it right now and they aren't active it wouldn't cause much damage to stop offering it. -DJSasso (talk) 23:26, 3 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
Let's just do that then. If anyone shows up after looking for it they can run for temp. fr33kman 00:24, 4 October 2011 (UTC)Reply


Why Do we use only commons images i haven't found any policy Forbidding it. --Rancalred (talk) 22:53, 3 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

You haven't looked very hard then. fr33kman 22:55, 3 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

New Debate

There a Debate that we should allow fair use images just go to the policy talk page Rancalred (talk) 23:33, 3 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Ice hockey player categories

I noticed that you populated Category:French ice hockey players instead of deleting it. If I find more single-entry ice hockey player categories, would you like me to let you know instead of tagging them for quick deletion? --Auntof6 (talk) 02:42, 7 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I was bored at work and noticed that you tagged it so I figured I would be productive and create some articles. But if you want to do that you can. :) Saves you from having to tag I suppose. -DJSasso (talk) 02:47, 7 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

removal of bot flag for Rameshngbot

Hey, Thats ok. This is a fair decision. Since I had some problems in the interwiki py, the bot is not active nowadays. I will let you know in case the bot becomes active and if require a bot flag.--Rameshng (talk) 03:15, 7 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Patroller rights

Hi Djsasso, it's been some time since I last became active on this wiki. I understand your concerns with regards to my granting of patroller rights to Orashmatash, especially in view of his limited experience with article creation. I had taken into consideration his unsuccessful request for such rights, made in September of this year, before finally making the decision to grant him the rights. Regardless, if my actions have cast my abilities as an admin in doubt, I am open to recall. It would be good to re-visit issues get a fresh mandate from the community as well.-- Tdxiang 16:15, 7 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, you may be wondering how I came across this. To be honest, I saw the edit on #cvn-simplewikis. I agree with the point that Djsasso raised, but have you seen me do anything wrong with the rights? Something that I shouldn't have? Anyway, considering the point, I couldn't care less if the rights are revoked, but they're helping me gain experience in article editing. I have been using my rights to tag articles for maintenance, stubs, punctuation, grammar, spelling etc. While I like having the rights and once again promise to use them properly until you reach a decision, feel free to do what you want. But please let me know as soon as you reach a decision, and before you actually do anything with them. I don't want to be patrolling an article if my rights are suddenly revoked. Thanks, Orashmatash 16:30, 7 October 2011 (UTC) I like... Television!Reply
You haven't actually patrolled a single article yet...which leads me to believe you don't actually know what the patroller right even is. -DJSasso (talk) 17:39, 7 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
I have! I have patrolled lots of articles, actually. I don't know what would lead you to believe otherwise. The icon at the very bottom right of the page "Mark as patrolled" has been clicked by me loads of times. Should it be showing up? There must be a glitch then, because rest assured, I have patrolled a lot of articles. Orashmatash 17:41, 7 October 2011 (UTC) I like... Crisps!Reply
Actually you are right you have patrolled some. Wasn't showing up when I did a search of your public logs for some reason. But when I go more specifically to patrol logs they show up. -DJSasso (talk) 17:43, 7 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
Phew, thank god for that. I thought I was going to have to somehow prove that I was actually using the rights... More specifically, I actually have over 500 patrols... I didn't realise I did so many... Orashmatash 17:51, 7 October 2011 (UTC) I like... Chips!Reply
You only have about 75. There hasn't even been 500 new pages recent enough for you to have that many patrols. :) -DJSasso (talk) 17:59, 7 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
Really? I go into my public patrol logs and it gives me the option to go to the 500th patrol. Must be a bug, unless it's counting the patrols I have done on ENWP. Either way, 75 is still pretty good for me, considering I have other things to do here... :) - Orashmatash 18:08, 7 October 2011 (UTC) I like... Chocolate!Reply
You always have the option to pick 500...but it will only actually show you how many you have. Just click on older 50 and then you will see that only about half the page is full and won't let you do another 50. -DJSasso (talk) 18:09, 7 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
Oh, O.K.. That threw me a bit, so I thought I had 500 patrols, which did actually sound a bit stupid when I typed it... Sorry about that. Orashmatash 18:14, 7 October 2011 (UTC) I like... Dogs!Reply

Protection page

Hi DJsasso. I think that it would be better protect this page. What do you think?--Frigotoni ...i'm here; 17:46, 7 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I agree with you, Toni, considering that it's a GA, a potentially controversial topic, and has had a lot of vandalism from a lot of different editors. But considering the positions DJ takes on protection, you may be barking up the wrong tree Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 18:15, 7 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
It's only been vandalized a couple times a day at the most. Nothing to block access to the page to everyone that shows up. Because its a VGA its watched by pretty much everyone on the wiki I would bet. Not likely to have vandalism get missed on it. And any editors that do vandalize can easily be reverted and blocked because they are not being vandalized at a high rate of speed. -DJSasso (talk) 18:17, 7 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
Hi DJsasso. Sorry, but i didn't want to set off this mess. This was just a suggestion, since, in these cases, on .it Wikipedia we are used to proctecting the page.--Frigotoni ...i'm here; 20:18, 7 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
If only simWP was more like itWP...better articles, more users, and more things silverlocked Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 20:58, 7 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
Do you even speak Itallian? How do you know our articles aren't as good. Why you are obsessed with the number of silverlocked articles is beyond me. -DJSasso (talk)
  • We know why you are calling it that. But pretty much no one calls it that so it makes you look ridiculous. Its like that wierd guy that is always trying to create some new phrase and make it a "thing" but it never catches on and the guy looks ridiculous, sort of like how Barney is on How I Met Your Mother. And it is amusing that you point us to redirects that you created as if to back yourself up. -DJSasso (talk) 15:12, 8 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
  • Ok, now we all digress. :) Purple, you are not odd, just know that not all of us know what a silverlock is, even us admins and crats. But we all know what full prot and semi prot is. What is a bit odd, is the desire to protect everything. Things need to be as open as possible. Jon@talk:~$ 16:28, 8 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Quick deletion

Thank you for declining the quick deletion of Yield and Chemical synthesis. I want everyone to be friends and to work together as colleagues. I also want to learn the craft of writing Simple English. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 11:57, 9 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Senkaku Islands

This subject is very controversial.

If you please, will you review my sentences here?

Please note that inline notes contain hidden text excerpts which make the citation support more specific. --Tenmei (talk) 18:18, 10 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Your comment on Auntof6

Okay, thanks for that. I will refrain from {{fact}}ing things that probably won't be questioned. Thanks for your help, and remember, if you do see me do something wrong, I'm still learning! Let me know, and suggest alternatives. :) --Orashmatash 16:57, 11 October 2011 (UTC) I like... Wikipedia!Reply


Hi, I just wanted to thank you for blocking a lot of disruptive editors around here (Particularly You're a great Great admin Bureaucrat ;) Orashmatash (talk) 14:06, 14 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. -DJSasso (talk) 14:09, 14 October 2011 (UTC)Reply


Hi DJSasso, I QD'd this article but noticed it was you who created it. Its just that its a loop on itself. Was there another article you were meaning to redirect it to? Cheers Normandy (talk) 12:09, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Whoops yes it was supposed to be an ndash not a hyphen. -DJSasso (talk) 12:40, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
I fixed the redirect for you. Orashmatash 12:43, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
I already had fixed it... -DJSasso (talk) 12:45, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
Oh, so you did. My bad. :\ Orashmatash 12:49, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
Ah okay. I tried searching for an article with a similar name but probably couldn't tell the difference between the usual - with the — :) Normandy (talk) 12:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)Reply


Hello, how are things going? I haven't contributed much to en.wp over the past two weeks because, well, there isn't a whole lot left for me to do right now. I've created most articles for the top-level Euro leagues, and IIHF events. My recent articles have had more context in them. Eventually, I will fill in the other few hundred standings pages with more context and other general fixes. I will hopefully be able to help out at simple.wp a little more in the next while. What ice hockey articles are most needed here on? --Hockeyben (talk) 21:24, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

NHL players. We don't have many. -DJSasso (talk) 11:27, 18 October 2011 (UTC)Reply


Hey DJ, just added another comment or two at the stub-sorting project. I think we can improve some of this quite easily, I'd be interested in your opinion over there, if you have the time. Cheers, The Rambling Man (talk) 16:02, 19 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Oops, just seen you've seen it, ignore this!! The Rambling Man (talk) 16:03, 19 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I've QD'd some templates you created

They are {{goca}}, {{sica}}, and {{brca}}. Reason: they duplicate templates {{gold1}}, {{silver2}}, and {{bronze3}}, which are used by more articles (yours were only used by one article). Let me know if this is a problem. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:56, 21 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Redirect (especially templates because people copy and paste tables from en)....looking at it I actually created both sets...well imported one. -DJSasso (talk) 11:36, 21 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
OK, thanks, sounds good! --Auntof6 (talk) 19:09, 21 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Quick deletion of Template:NHL award/noimage


The page you wrote, Template:NHL award/noimage, has been selected for quick deletion. This is because the page was deprecated or replaced by a newer template and are completely unused and not linked to. If you think this page should be kept, please add {{wait}} below the line {{QD}} and say why on the talk page. If the page is already gone, but you think this was an error, you can ask for it to be undeleted. Auntof6Bot (talk) 00:31, 27 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Becareful you aren't deleting sandboxes eh? This particular one I haven't used in awhile so its no big deal but a lot of pages that /whatever are usually sandboxes if they aren't part of the code of the main template. So you might want to check with the author prior to deleting. -DJSasso (talk) 00:44, 27 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Bot stub sorting

Can you approve PiRSquared17Bot1 (bot requests approval)? πr2 (talk • changes) 01:00, 29 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Cut out the personal attacks

Stop taking pot-shots at me. You've done this now over half a dozen times, to a point where it brings up NPA and disruption concerns. Also, a couple weeks ago, you didn't even get the facts mixed up Jon and Julian. More detailed response by me on my page. Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 19:20, 28 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I think you need to learn what is an actual personal attack. You don't seem to know. -DJSasso (talk) 12:24, 31 October 2011 (UTC)Reply


Hello, Djsasso.

Since your request for checkuser was successful, and you are identified to the foundation, I have given you the flag. Please contact an operator on IRC (see meta:IRC/Channels#wikimedia-privacy) to get access to the #wikimedia-privacy and #wikimedia-checkuser channels. Also, please subscribe to the checkuser-l mailing list. Congratulations and regards, -- Mentifisto 19:08, 30 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I just closed it as successful and requested the rights for you on meta. Mentifisto assigned you the permission. Ping me on IRC so I can give you access to the checkuser channel. Also, please subscribe the mailing-list (mail Leinad or Risker via Special:EmailUser on meta) and ask for access, also for the wiki. Have fun with the new tool. -Barras (talk) 19:12, 30 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Grats! Normandy (talk) 12:21, 31 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
Thanks! -DJSasso (talk) 12:22, 31 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
Well done dude. Worth the wait. Welcome onboard. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:24, 31 October 2011 (UTC)Reply


Congrats on your CheckUser request. All the best --Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 23:40, 30 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! -DJSasso (talk) 12:22, 31 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
Also, does this tool tracks down sockpuppeteers who evades a block/ban. --Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 23:36, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Reply
Yes it does. -DJSasso (talk) 12:13, 2 November 2011 (UTC)Reply


Not to be a burden, but we have red links to: Template:Chembox RefractIndex, Template:Chembox Structure, Template:Chembox Thermochemistry, Template:Chembox MainHazards, and Template:Chembox OtherCations. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 10:12, 16 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

For future reference if you need it done quickly and can't wait for me to do it you can just cut and paste it over here as long as you note in the edit summary they it was from en.wikipedia. -DJSasso (talk) 12:57, 16 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
Actually, under the terms of my mentorship, I can't start any new articles or templates without the permission of User:Barras. He is on a wikibreak now. So I am very grateful for your help. I have also discovered we need Template:Chem/13. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 09:31, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
Many thanks. It will keep the {{chem}} from breaking. Racepacket (talk) 15:42, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

When you have a chance, we have red links to: Template:Chembox SystematicName, Template:Chembox Beilstein, Template:Chembox Gmelin, Template:Chembox 3DMet, and Template:Chembox pKb. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 14:42, 18 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Many thanks for those. We now have red links to: Template:Chembox MolShape, Template:Chembox Dipole, Template:Chembox CrystalStruct, Template:Chembox SpaceGroup, Template:Chembox Coordination, Template:Chembox PIN and Template:Chembox PEL Racepacket (talk) 16:27, 18 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
Many thanks for the rest. I will let you know if any others crop up in chemistry articles. Racepacket (talk) 03:13, 23 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Please excuse me if I'm wikistalking, but when you create those templates, would you please put them in Category:Chembox templates? Thanks! Let me know if you need any assistance with that: in case you're not familiar, putting templates into categories is different from putting articles in categories. For now, I think I'll go through all templates starting with "Chembox" and make sure they're in the category. --Auntof6 (talk) 03:42, 23 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

As I understand it, the category designators go inside <noinclude></noinclude>. Racepacket (talk) 03:45, 23 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
That's true if the categories are right in the template page. Sometimes they're on the documentation subpage, in which case they go inside <includeonly></includeonly>, along with interwikis, if any. --Auntof6 (talk) 03:53, 23 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

We now have red links to: Template:Chem/su1m2, Template:Chembox OrbitalHybridisation, Template:Chembox DeltaHf, and Template:Chembox Entropy. Many thanks! Racepacket (talk) 03:33, 29 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

We have red links to: Template:Chembox HeatCapacity, Template:Chembox Autoignition, Template:Chembox ExploLimits. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 11:58, 7 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

We have a red link to: Template:Chembox DrugBank. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 03:40, 17 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

arXiv citation template

Thank you for all of your help. On a related point, Template:Cite arXiv is a red link. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 21:39, 17 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Deletion of DotA

I saw you deleted the article on notability grounds (it has since been recreated). However I see it is a Featured Article on ENWP... Maybe either a better reason to delete it is needed, or a clean up/wikify tag, but not an A4 deletion. Regards, Yottie =talk= 14:01, 21 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

A4 doesn't mean its not notable, it means it doesn't make a claim of notability. It is two different things, something notable can still be deleted for A4 even if it is notable. -DJSasso (talk) 14:03, 21 November 2011 (UTC)Reply
I understand the article is not great, but compared to some other articles we have here, I'm sure it can be brought up to standards. Do we want to attract people to this wiki, or scare them away. The more positive thing to do might have been to ask the editor to fix the article, or fix it yourself/ask someone with the knowledge to fix it. This isn't How to scare away new users wiki... Yottie =talk= 14:07, 21 November 2011 (UTC)Reply
Feel free to fix it if you like otherwise move on. -DJSasso (talk) 14:09, 21 November 2011 (UTC)Reply
I will now you ask, but I am only trying to act in this wiki's best interest. If we want more help, let our actions reflect that will. Yottie =talk= 14:11, 21 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Google books citation template

I've noted that Template:Google books is also a red link. Could you possibly be so kind as to move it from En Wikipedia? It would be very useful. Many thanks! Racepacket (talk) 15:51, 21 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Template Barnstar

  The Template Barnstar
for elevating ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 country codes to an art form Racepacket (talk) 21:11, 24 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Usurp Confirmation

This is just to confirm that I am control the SUL for the account Sasso. -Sasso (talk) 20:49, 30 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Is this your request? If so, you must complete it, otherwise we will not process it. Thanks, Ary29 (talk) 19:01, 5 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Self-named categories

Please take a look at User talk:Philosopher#Cats. Thanks. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 17:46, 5 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Never mind, you already have.  :) --Philosopher Let us reason together. 17:46, 5 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

usurp @ trwiki

About the ZErGoo block

Hello Djasso. I just see you blocked ZErGoo for abusing multiple accounts. Could you please send me a list of his known sockpuppets ? The aim is to see if there are issues with other WMF projects, because he contributes to 5 other projects. If you don't want to release it on-wiki, please just send them by mail or on the CU mailing list. Thanks a lot by advance ! -- Quentinv57 (talk) 14:12, 8 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Just when you'd said we don't do Wikiprojects here...

...there are these new pages: Category:Wikipedia WikiProjects and Wikipedia:User categorisation. Do they warrant deletion? --Auntof6 (talk) 00:26, 9 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

DJ, I'm sorry. I watch your page. :) If I may?
Auntof6, perhaps instead of us deleting, we might influence the editor to userfy the stuff. If you might? Best, Jon@talk:~$ 03:32, 9 December 2011 (UTC)Reply
Right, I was too quick to hit the D-E-L-E-T-E keys. :) I will post a message to them. Good chance to exercise my atrophied people skills and be less bitey. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:29, 9 December 2011 (UTC)Reply
It is true. Deletion is an absolute last resort. Always see if there aren't other options available first such as re-purposing. And see if there isn't a use that someone else might get out of it even if you don't. Everyone uses the wiki differently and that is something we all need to keep in mind. There isn't only one way of doing things. -DJSasso (talk) 14:24, 9 December 2011 (UTC)Reply


  The Working Man's Barnstar
It's on my to-do list. You do good work here, keep it up! :) -Orashmatash- 18:19, 13 December 2011 (UTC)Reply


Isn't the template outdated and followed by the user warning templates?  Hazard-SJ  ㋡  01:36, 18 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Different people use different warnings. -DJSasso (talk) 01:37, 18 December 2011 (UTC)Reply
I guess that's fair enough, but do you know of it being used recently?  Hazard-SJ  ㋡  01:55, 18 December 2011 (UTC)Reply
No idea, but it doesn't hurt to leave it. It doesn't actually save space to delete something as its still there. Non-admins just can't see it. -DJSasso (talk) 01:58, 18 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Most Wanted

Im confused as to how Christopher Moore (author) is a Most Wanted article when nothing here links to that page other than pages tied to the most wanted list. (talk) 02:17, 18 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

The most wanted list has stopped being the most linked to list years ago since templates cluttered up the list we did have. And the other bot created list we had stopped being updated. It's more a case of articles that people want. Generally we try to replace articles in one topic area with one from the same general topic area. For example I replaced a book with an author. -DJSasso (talk) 02:21, 18 December 2011 (UTC)Reply
Although I am probably going to replace him in a minute...decided to start taking articles off the expanded list of articles every wiki should have. -DJSasso (talk) 02:22, 18 December 2011 (UTC)Reply
As I was the person that actually created and maintained the list in the first place (it was built for my personal use in my userspace and found useful by another and moved to the WP: space later), I understand its inherent difficulties. I was just curious where the new entries such as that one were being drawn from. (talk) 02:27, 18 December 2011 (UTC)Reply
That was an off the top of my head one. meta:List of articles every Wikipedia should have/Expanded is where the rest are coming from. -DJSasso (talk) 02:30, 18 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Orphaned articles

Racepacket has opened a thread at Wikipedia:Simple talk#Orphan articles you might be interested in. Osiris (talk) 12:16, 19 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Inactive rights removal

Hey Dj!

I noticed that you removed my admin rights and asked for my crat/cu rights to be removed on Meta earlier today. Of course the fundraiser ended today as well so I started trying to log into CUwiki to catch up and found myself blocked because of the removal :). Obviously if we decide that I'm too inactive (I think it's only about 50 edits in the past year) to have my rights that's fine and I can either become active enough or not but I'm a bit hurt by the fact that there was not a single notification to me either on my user page here (which I get notified about ) or by email. I also can't seem to find any discussion or announcement here on wiki where I would have posted though I assume that's because you thought it was a standard/uncontroversial. James (T C) 02:41, 2 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

It is 100 edits in a year which you were well below. I couldn't pick and choose users to keep the rights even through they didn't meet the requirements because that would be unfair to the other users. If you do actually become active again I am sure a RFA would just be a formality for you. It obviously was nothing personal but the community gave all admin a years notice when the policy was put into place in November 2010. I had intended to put notes that it was done on each admins page when I was done but being New Years day I got called away and didn't get back to do it. -DJSasso (talk) 14:44, 2 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
DJ, I got all the respect for you. At a minimum, please let these guys know on their talk page (when you adjust rights)... they at least get that. Best! Jon@talk:~$ 15:18, 2 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
As I said I had intended to but got called away so did not get around to doing it and have now done so. -DJSasso (talk) 15:32, 2 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
Aye, when I said 50 edits I meant that was all that I had done, not how many the policy was. My main concern was the lack of warning or notice before it was done given that people forget about policies and procedures. I know I certainly forgot that this would come up on January 1st. I would have tried to make edits or ask the community for a stay until after the fundraiser. Perhaps just something to think about for future runs next year. If I'm not active enough then I'm not active enough and the community certainly has the right to make that decision (and I believe you actually opposed the 100 edit rule so I can't blame you for that :) ). I had hoped to try and keep an eye over here more and if I become active enough again to keep access (I imagine I'll at least wait for 100 edits :) ) then perhaps I'll ask for the tools again and go through the week long process etc. It is what it is :) James (T C) 16:25, 2 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
Yeah I did actually oppose it which is why I felt I should make the removals so people couldn't claim whoever did it was out to get them. Notification ahead of time might be good but I think part of peoples reason for wanting this policy was to stop the practice which had people coming back just to make one edit to avoid being removed when it was zero edits instead of 100. Giving that warning could cause people to come back and just make those 100 edits and we would be back at the same position. But as long as we are clear I just did it for everyone the same and would !vote you to have your flags back in an instant if you were active we are good. :) -DJSasso (talk) 16:47, 2 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
Can we add them back with a quick note on Simple, to forgoe the RFx and impending cracy. Jon@talk:~$ 18:08, 2 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
The policy specifically mentions they need to go through an Rfx. I believe the idea was that they needed to show they had caught back up to current policy which can change drastically in a year sometimes. At least that is what I get from the discussion that created the policy. -DJSasso (talk) 19:02, 2 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Template:Enwp based

Thanks for taking care of part of the edit-protected request here. Is there a particular reason you didn't address my request of adding categories at the end? The change you made affects articles that use the template; the other change will put the template itself in categories. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 21:31, 3 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Expanded Essential article list

The source of the expanded list is not indicated. If it is on meta, I would be willing to edit the master list directly because the capitalization is inconsistent with both the En and Simple MOS and current article titles. Tnanks, Racepacket (talk) 13:28, 4 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

It's from meta:List of articles every Wikipedia should have/Expanded. They are all en links but en has the redirects in place whereas we don't. -DJSasso (talk) 13:29, 4 January 2012 (UTC)Reply


You reverted Tamara Toumanova to indef blocked [1] Biographyspot's version. He uses a large amount of interwiki sockpuppets[2] who made anti-Armenian comments and deletes Armenia-related information, especially from this one article, despite the sources are provided by me. I suggest to look at Tamara Toumanova and correct it youreself. (talk) 13:40, 4 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

I did look into it and the appropriate action was taken. -DJSasso (talk) 14:22, 4 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
if the deletion of sourced material and backing an indef blocked user is appropriate action then maybe you're not an admin but vandal called an admin?
  Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make helpful changes to Wikipedia. However, some of your changes, like those to "Tamara Toumanova", did not seem to be helpful and have been removed. If you want to try out changing Wikipedia to learn more about how it works, please use the sandbox. Thank you. (talk) 14:40, 4 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
No, he's actually an admin :P Normandy 14:56, 4 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
Adopting such a stance is not helping you in making your case known. Chenzw  Talk  14:57, 4 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
It is not my case, it is YOUR case. I am right so I am stronger. (talk) 15:31, 4 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hello Djsasso! FYI: is an IP hopping sock master identical with Rast5 and Gazifikator and several others. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gazifikator/Archive. Best regards Janitor Joe (talk) 22:50, 6 January 2012 (UTC)Reply


Sheesh... talk about flooding RecentChanges :P Normandy 13:26, 9 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Yeah renaming does that lol. :P -DJSasso (talk) 13:26, 9 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Template BD

Hi. I noticed that you sometimes do runs of substituting this template. I like to substitute it, too, but I've also noticed people replacing the defaultsort, birth/death date, and living people categories with this template, in effect the reverse of substituting it. Was there ever a guideline or anything saying that it should be substituted? --Auntof6 (talk) 21:00, 12 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Yeah the instructions of the template are to subst it. (it even says "It should not be used to replace existing DEFAULTSORT and/or category tags.") There are many reasons for substing it. But there was a user who used to do the reverse as you said and convinced a few people that it should be like that so there are the odd person who do it backwards which makes zero sense since the point of the template is to speed up adding categories to new pages. But I usually find its not worth the hassle of arguing it with people and am just slowly subst'ing them all. The original person who was doing it backwards has long since been chased off the wiki. He was an edit count addict so I think that is why he was doing it that he could get extra edits. -DJSasso (talk) 22:48, 12 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Category:Infobox person using deprecated location parameter

Sorry, I only created this category today because I didn't think I'd get around to getting all of them fixed by today. But all instances of the parameter have been eliminated from here, and from enwiki as well- see en:Category:Infobox person using deprecated location parameter (should have pointed that out in the edit summary). Osiris (talk) 05:31, 26 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

No worries I should have looked at the en version myself. It was late at night. I will speedy it now. -DJSasso (talk) 12:36, 26 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
Thanks   Osiris (talk) 12:41, 26 January 2012 (UTC)Reply


Thanks - I had to stop pretty quickly once I came across protected pages :) Was in the process of making a 'to-do' list until I noticed you cottoned on to my thoughts. Good stuff, cheers Normandy 14:07, 26 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Yeah I noticed your change to Huji and was like oh hey good idea. -DJSasso (talk) 14:07, 26 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
This may help, if you've not thought of it already. Normandy 14:10, 26 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
I just went through the category. But I will take a look there to see if I missed any. -DJSasso (talk) 14:11, 26 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
User:Tholly for one, but I've no time and must leave now so will leave that up to you? (or I'll get it later). Cheers Normandy 14:13, 26 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

doi references bot

Whatever you can do to encourage the En bot to also cover Simple would be appreciated. I really don't have many contacts left at En. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 16:38, 27 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

If I get a chance tonight or this weekend I will write something up for him and ask how difficult it might be for his bot to swing through simple as well. -DJSasso (talk) 17:42, 27 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Error on 555 different pages.

Your changes to the common.css removed the hidden attribute used for the template {{Persondata}}. three references to Persondata were removed from the file. That template gets copied in a lot with transwiki/translated bios and show never be seen on the page as it is just for information gathering. It is currently showing up active on 555 pages. (talk) 04:13, 28 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Opps I forgot to update the persondata template. Fixed now. -DJSasso (talk) 12:12, 28 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Rollback tool

Hello, Mr. Djsasso!

Please feedback from you about this request. Hopefully you can approve the submission. Thank you. Wagino 20100516 (talk) 12:35, 28 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Asa Butterfield

hi!! i want to know because remove Asa Butterfield,zorry for my weak english :)a hug Carliitaeliza (talk) 13:53, 28 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Something's wrong...

We are agreeing on too many things lately. I used to have pretty much the exactly opposite opinion to you on most topics, now we align on most. Have you changed or I? :P Normandy 13:15, 30 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

I think we always did lol. I think you just got mad at me for something and didn't realize that. lol. -DJSasso (talk) 13:16, 30 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
Well its certainly easier thats for sure... :) Normandy 13:17, 30 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
Yeah, like I said before I harbour no ill will. People just need to remember I put the wiki ahead of every single editor on here. So while it may seem I am out to get someone, its more a case I am out to protect the wiki. Not here for friends, just to create an encyclopedia. But yes, it is much easier when you don't have to argue with everyone lol. -DJSasso (talk) 13:35, 30 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

RFP Protection

Protected since 09, lets give it a look see and hope nothing happens. This work? Best, Jon@talk:~$ 01:54, 31 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

As I said if it needs to be unprotected that should be discussed on AN by the whole community or the admins. Not just a lets wing it and see what happens. -DJSasso (talk) 12:44, 31 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
I respectfully disagree. It was protected so long ago, and I can't find a discussion where it was had. What I can tell is that is it causing someone difficulty in posting to a subpage for whatever reason. It is not contentious, and it need not be discussed, of course, unless someone //needs// to bring it up. I can't see where this is controverisal at all. I imagine that yes, the unprotection of a visable area such as a GA (if we protected those) or the blocking of a known editor, of deletion of articles not under QD would need discusssion. But this, is so small. Best, Jon@talk:~$ 13:48, 31 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

My page

You want to tell me what's going on? First a bogus block notice from a vandal, then a welcome template and now you delete my talk page. Slightsmile (talk) 02:21, 31 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

A vandal vandalized your page so it was deleted. The welcome notice probably slipped in there between and was not noticed. -DJSasso (talk) 12:43, 31 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
Okay thanks. Three edits and they're on me. Gets a little busy here does it? Slightsmile (talk) 19:12, 31 January 2012 (UTC)Reply


Hello, Djsasso. You have new messages at Auntof6's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

DJDunsie (talk) 16:44, 1 February 2012 (UTC)Reply


  The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
For updating the convert template in what looks to be an avalanche of imports. Many thanks, Osiris (talk) 16:52, 3 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
Yeah I figured might as well start bringing stuff over. If you feel like helping there is a list of ones we are missing that en has in my User:Djsasso/sandbox. -DJSasso (talk) 17:40, 3 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
Eeek! Tell me that's the complete list. Osiris (talk) 17:42, 3 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
As far as I can tell. I just did a compare of the sub templates categories on both wikis with AWB and this is the list it spit out that en had and simple did not. -DJSasso (talk) 17:43, 3 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
Nifty. Can we skip sandboxes? Osiris (talk) 17:45, 3 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
Yeah I need to do em all at once either. I have only been doing 20 or so every few hours so as not to overwhelm everyone. Since they are unused they aren't really affecting anyone if we take a bit to bring them over. -DJSasso (talk) 17:51, 3 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
Okay, cool, I'll add it to my to do list. Osiris (talk) 17:54, 3 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Yes, hello

 To join the secret cabal follow me!


Do not take this seriously. Someone wants to let you know you did something silly!

Mainly for flooding recent changes, but now I'm one more edit closer to keeping my adminship! PeterSymonds (talk) 21:46, 4 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Yeah I totally forgot I had to log back out when I give myself the flood flag and log back in...didn't notice till I made like 150 edits...oops. -DJSasso (talk) 21:47, 4 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
Only kidding! Nobody reads RC anyway (by nobody I mainly mean me). PeterSymonds (talk) 21:56, 4 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
Yeah personally I would never use the flag if I had my way...people here are too touchy about flooding it. -DJSasso (talk) 21:57, 4 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport

I would have to argue against the transwiki qd of Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport.. While structurally the same, there was extensive simplification to the language and sentence structure of that article before I saved it. (took me 2 days to see it was deleted/up for delete or would have said something sooner.) --Creol(talk) 08:54, 9 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

I can certainly restore it if you think its good or can fix any problems there are with it. As I said I would restore any that people wanted to fix. -DJSasso (talk) 12:26, 9 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
To be honest, I don't remember what changes I made on creation/simplicatation on that article. I do crunch through a bit at times... and they blur. I do know I have a habit of keeping the basic structure of the En:Wp articles when I translate and that tends to make people think A3 when they glance at them (as per a previous A3 notice on this IP's talk page) but on a close look, the similarity was just cosmetic. I have faith that if I gave an article a translation to SE, there was extensive changes to the vocabulary and sentence structure used even if a quick glance doesn't show it. (and that is often enough for a QD to slip though) I always aim to get at least 2+ reading levels lower (aiming for 6-7 on all but the more technical/medical articles) before saving and know I put a solid effort into that one (though again.. no clue what - just know I wasnt slacking). I just ask for a check on the changes from the deleted copy put forward and the en:wp listed on the talk page (or current version - not likely major changes there) and a personal opinion if edits were substantial enough. As its deleted, I can't toss out how the changes affected the readability level to show value and defend my changes and can only hope they are noticable to those that can see them. (talk) 07:24, 10 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
And bloody hell.. I thought it was one i did, not a Racepacket i got drawn into... but since I opened my mouth on it, its now up to me to clean it up to standards.. ah well. (talk) 08:07, 10 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
Turns out I only touched the intro before tagging it complex and setting it free.. oh well. Trimmed unneeded parts and beat the rest with a simple stick - dropped it from a 49.00 reading ease/ 10.4 average level to a 67.5 ease/ 7.4 level. Well within tolerance now. (talk) 09:17, 10 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
Yup it wasn't one that you created or I wouldn't have speedied it because I agree that you do good work on simplifying articles. It was just part of a big sweep of Racepacket articles that had sat with the speedy tag on them for a few days so I decided that it had been enough time for others besides him to object. -DJSasso (talk) 15:02, 10 February 2012 (UTC)Reply


Can I get a copy of this article [3] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:21, 12 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Emailed. -DJSasso (talk) 22:45, 12 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Please can I have a copy of the deleted User:Racepacket/GRB 970228? E-mail is fine, thanks, DJDunsie (talk) 17:42, 15 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Emailed. -DJSasso (talk) 18:18, 15 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Big Weekends

Hi Djsasso, I was looking through the arguments on the Big Weekend talk page and have tried to come up with a solution. I would like you to coordinate a Big Weekend in June that could deal with some of the issues that you raised, especially on creating articles from the list of what we should have. Can you have a look at the page and let me know if you be interested? Thanks.--Peterdownunder (talk) 05:47, 17 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

On the s-block

I finally figured out the table problem!! I found that there is a enter key at the border thing!!--Kc kennylau (talk) 08:52, 17 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Possible block evasion

Is this what I think it is? Osiris (talk) 16:22, 18 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Probable. But since it hasn't edited in quite awhile I won't touch it. If he does I will block or you can get any other admin to block. -DJSasso (talk) 21:09, 18 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Please, block

Hi, please take a look at recent changes. An IP is vandalizing a few pages at this moment. Thank you. ” Teles (T @ L C S) 13:30, 7 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi mate. I need you to whack two more of these at VIP. Thanks, Osiris (talk) 14:54, 7 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

Ta. Osiris (talk) 15:00, 7 March 2012 (UTC)Reply
Oh, and can you flood-flag me. Made a request at AN, but you're the only one online so might as well move it here: Adding a navbox to 190 pages. Osiris (talk) 15:02, 7 March 2012 (UTC)Reply
I guess so. I usually just say go ahead and flood. I disagree with the paranoia of flooding recent changes. Two seconds and you will have the flag. Just message me here when you are done. -DJSasso (talk) 15:03, 7 March 2012 (UTC)Reply
Thanks, I promised Yottie I would try not to flood whenever possible. Osiris (talk) 15:05, 7 March 2012 (UTC)Reply
Yeah there are a few people from back in the day that are paranoid about it...because a few people used to do thousands of edits really fast. Ironically Yottie was one of them I believe. In most cases unless you are doing like 1000 changes just go ahead and do them...just make sure you go back over the recent changes during that time to make sure no vandalism slipped through. That is really the only thing people are concerned about so if you check then its not really an issue. -DJSasso (talk) 15:07, 7 March 2012 (UTC)Reply
I'm done. Cool, I'll note that for the future. Thanks, Osiris (talk) 15:34, 7 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi. When you re-blocked, why did you enable account-creation? --Bmusician 13:46, 7 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

Because its a public IP. I hadn't meant to block account creation to begin with. -DJSasso (talk) 13:48, 7 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

Regarding the "ancient" RFA's and RFB's you're creating

Hi Djsasso. I wonder if you would be kind enough to explain the reasoning behind the creation of RFA's and RFB pages which date back well over 7 or 8 years, please. I've tried to vote on three of them before discovering they were older than when I originally came to Wikipedia. Maybe you could mark them as being old, so that people looking through RC don't click on them thinking they're current? BarkingFish (talk) 17:59, 27 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

They will be getting marked as old as part of the process. The archives are being separated out to make them conform to our new way archiving RfX's to make them more searchable and easier to find and locate. It only takes a couple seconds to see as soon as you are on the page that they aren't for current users anyways. -DJSasso (talk) 18:01, 27 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

Mass article creation

Hi DJ, Thanks for adding to the discussion on Japan Football's talk page. I did consider just going to deletion, but I've been trying to be more patient. Rather than answer, JF (I do sometimes wonder if JF is Nameless User returned.) went ahead and created a couple dozen more. I have asked him stop and not create more until he discusses them with other editors. If JF doesn't, I do plan to ask for deletion of all 79 articles, plus any more. In the last version of the endless discussion about mass-created place stubs, I think we had a consensus to stop mass creation of stubs. I wonder how to carry this out? I don't want to post 79+ different requests for deletion. Single post to Admin Noticeboard or Simple Talk? Thanks, Gotanda (talk) 21:34, 2 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

Oh I am positive it is him returned....(but nameless has been gone too long for me to be able to CU) See the player articles I can accept because they are about people and include some info about them as people. The season articles however violate WP:NOTSTATS at the moment. You can just make a single post to Afd and list the articles you are talking about in your single nomination. I would say give him a day or two to see if he continues. -DJSasso (talk) 23:51, 2 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

AWB request

Hey. Before you log out today, if you have time, would you have a look at the pending request at the bottom of the AWB check page? A no-doubt trusted but inactive user—for my own future reference... Osiris (talk) 16:09, 3 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

I haven't touched it on purpose. Being that he doesn't edit here I am hesitant to give it out so I leave it to someone else to do. Mostly because I don't want to get into the flooding debate which most of these people who have just came from en have been doing. None of them are familiar enough with simple to know that a lot of people don't like the RC flooded which is why we rarely give out AWB. Personally I don't care about the flooding but I am just staying out of it just in case. -DJSasso (talk) 16:12, 3 April 2012 (UTC)Reply
Oh that's fine then, my thoughts were about the same. I'll try and work something out with him; maybe get him to start editing and then give him a rundown beforehand. Osiris (talk) 16:26, 3 April 2012 (UTC)Reply
Nevermind looks like Pmlineditor did it. -DJSasso (talk) 17:04, 3 April 2012 (UTC)Reply
Sweet, all sorted then I guess. Osiris (talk) 17:11, 3 April 2012 (UTC)Reply


Just a suggestions, I'd put in a permanent link to the original request into the summary at least. Since the complete edit history is kind of lost with the creation of subpages, it only leaves a reference back to the original request... -Barras talk 17:19, 4 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

Yeah I was thinking about it. Will take a bunch of digging through the old Rfa page to find them since the only history on the archive page anyways is the paste of the Rfa as it was archived so what I have done isn't really any different at the moment. But I will add it to my todo list. -DJSasso (talk) 17:21, 4 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

STOP, harm, undo

Please review my words here.

I wrote 柄の悪い投稿はやめてください。迷惑です。

  • Translation: "Please stop the bad post pattern. It is annoying."

Can you suggest a better wording? a better strategy? --Horeki (talk) 15:34, 5 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

Mission complete

I think the list is done. Mostly just test pages and /doc supplements left. From what I can tell, we now have more of these than does, so there may still be some inconsistencies to iron out. Although, someone told me recently that simple is sometimes used as a testing ground for new versions/templates... Osiris (talk) 00:22, 19 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

Looks good. The only real issue left is that there may be many out there that are not up to date but those can be fixed as errors are found (if there are any) or as people stumble onto them. -DJSasso (talk) 12:13, 19 April 2012 (UTC)Reply
Return to the user page of "Djsasso/Archive 4".