User talk:Djsasso

This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot. Any sections older than 30 days are automatically archived. Sections without timestamps are not archived. Archive #1 - Entries archived from May 2008 through March 2009. Archive #2 - Entries archived from April 2009 through March 2010. Archive #3 - Entries archived from April 2010 through August 2011. Archive #4 - Entries archived from September 2011 through April 2012. Archive #5 - Entries archived from May 2012 through September 2013. Archive #6 - Entries archived from October 2013 through Current.

Please block

Please block user Mynameismaxxd. Cosmic16 (talk) 14:58, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Already is. -DJSasso (talk) 14:58, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

December 2015

This is your only warning. If you are a member of this wiki during the holiday season again, you may be be given this holiday card without any more warnings:

	Merry Christmas!!
	Hello, I wish you and your family a Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year, Thanks for all your help on the 'pedia!    –Krett12 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 02:08, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Please Block

Hello, I wanted to ask you please block users 86.164.230.8 and 178.115.131.149, both for vandalizing more than once after being given a warning. — This unsigned comment was added by 24.214.94.65 (talk • changes) at 00:35, 20 February 2016‎.

(talk page stalker) You are asking on the wrong Wikipedia. Those IP addresses have never made any edits here. I think you meant to put this on English Wikipedia (this is Simple English Wikipedia). --Auntof6 (talk) 00:40, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Probably asked because I am an English admin. Happens now and then. -DJSasso (talk) 16:50, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Ugh just realized this was months ago.... -DJSasso (talk) 16:50, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Removal of permissions

I noticed that you removed me from Rollbackers saying "They can be, doesn't mean they will be". I assume that is in regards to gaining rollback rights because of my status on enwiki. I have not misused rollbacker in any way and have used it to revert vandalism on multiple occasions. Is there a specific reason I should not have access to rollback rights. I have only gotten more and more experienced. I have had rollback for over a month. Thanks! — Music1201 ^talk 22:09, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Just that you shouldn't have been given them in the first place. And you have barely used them since receiving them. They usually are not given out until people have a few hundred edits to look at. -DJSasso (talk) 11:26, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

But why didn't you remove the permissions until just now. I was granted rollback over a month ago and typically you are not suppose to revert another admins action unless you consult with them first. I am also trusted with rollback on English Wikipedia and Wikidata. — Music1201 ^talk 16:44, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Especially given how closely related Simple English is to English (as a language), attempts resembling hat collecting is frowned upon. Precedent exists where the rollback right was removed at least one month after the initial granting of the rights: removal of rights from Gwynhaden, with reference to Commons:Administrators/Requests/Gwynhaden/2; and removal of rights from Cyfraw. Administrators are free to use their own judgement with regards to the granting (and removal) of rollback. Chenzw  Talk  03:31, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Because I didn't look over the list of of people who were given it until then so I didn't notice it. I probably would have done it the same day had I noticed. In this case I didn't think Chenzw would have a problem since he didn't seem to want to grant them anyway. If he has an issue with me removing them I am more than willing to discuss it, but based on his comment above I am thinking that isn't the case. -DJSasso (talk) 11:33, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Your comments on bundling things at RfD

I'll take the bundling comment as your opinion. We've had quite a few bundled requests for templates where all they had in common was that they were navboxes and the reasons for deleting were the same. These templates all present information graphically, which ties them together as much as being navboxes would. Users are free to weigh in separately on each, as they have often done. Pinging StevenJ81, since he also commented. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:15, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

These felt more disparate than navboxes. I wouldn't have noticed the commonality of all being graphical if you hadn't mentioned it, while navboxes are navboxes and infoboxes are infoboxes. As long as you saw a point in common, I guess that's fine, but this one was just less obvious than many. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:51, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

I mentioned it right in the request: "four unused graphics templates". --Auntof6 (talk) 17:14, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Yeah I couldn't see how they were related at all. Still not sure I really see them as related. But yes it was an opinion. It just makes things much more complicated when its not an all or nothing thing which often isn't the case with things that aren't closely related. To be honest I don't really think navboxes should be either unless they are all related in that they are all navboxes for the same thing like say they are all team roster navboxes. (ie same subject area). The whole idea is to not make users have to weight in on each separately as it can make the discussion messy and hard to follow. By listing unrelated things separately it makes the discussions on each one easier to follow. However, when they are all closely related and the discussion is most likely going to impact them all then yes bundling works well. -DJSasso (talk) 17:19, 7 July 2016 (UTC)