User talk:Ssd

If I answer your comment within a day of you posting it, I'll answer here unless you request otherwise.

I don't bother archiving what was here. If you wanna see it anyway, look for DELETED in the history.

Sysop

Congratulations! After receiving 100% support on RfA, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Good luck. Angela . 21:10, Jul 24, 2004 (UTC)

That's a helpful link! I've put them all in my watch list, and downloaded for later persual the ones I dind't read on the spot. I'll go through all of them in the next couple of weeks (offline) and read the relevant ones sooner. --ssd 03:51, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Categories for deletion maintenance

Hey, I need a sanity check on this, and since you're one of the other administrators that works on CfD, I thought you'd be a good person to ask.

I've done some restructuring at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/resolved which I think brings it closer to what it's supposed to be. (That is, interesting decisions are summarized, not included in full unless they are likely to be controversial, in which case I have archived them on sub-pages.) Is that acceptable? (I'm not done with all the summaries, obviously.)

I'd like to move on to archiving the entries at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/unresolved, which is generally a much bigger mess. I figure that individual entries there ought to all be archived on sub-pages, since they wouldn't be on unresolved if the discussion weren't worth retaining. I'd like to have my work checked by someone else before I start on this enormous project, however. --Aranel ("Sarah") 15:01, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I love the summaries you've written, very nice! Including the date was a good idea. It may be a good idea to also include the final vote count (this is even more important on unresolved). I'd like to see links to the archived discussion; I don't know if the discussion is important on /resolved, but it is fairly critical on unresolved. People might add their comments to unresolved, so it might be a good idea for the date to indicate when the count on the summary page was last updated/changed. Good work! --ssd 15:56, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

anti-dejavu?

Ok, so I'm reading along in this discussion, and I find this fairly long and really pecular comment, and I think to myself either "What fool wrote this garbage, must have been half asleep" or "What clever guy wrote this? I agree with it totally!" and I get to the end, and it's ME!! Ugh. Creepy. --ssd 2:30am EST, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

The same thing sometimes happens to me as well. Tell me if there's a better name for this than anti-dejavu.

--DavidCary 02:53, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think some call it CMS (crumbling mind syndrome), but I don't think that's a better name. Do you? --ssd 04:04, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Years in Canada

I notice you created Category:Years in Canada, which contains articles whose titles begin with a year. If you have time, could you please go through and make sure the articles are sorted in their respective year (or year-in) parent categories using sortkeys as outlined at Wikipedia:Categorization#Year categories? (Don't forget to start the sortkey with a capital letter.) If you've done this already, thanks and sorry for bugging you about this. I plan to go through a ton of such pages early next year; it would be nice if some of the work were already done... - dcljr (talk) 01:29, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Semi protection is NOT to be used for edit wars

It's for vandalism only. I don't even see a real edit war there. Too slow simmering. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 19:59, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the purpose for semi-protection was to reduce vandalism from anonymous sources. That's exactly what this looks like to me. --ssd 20:14, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

electricity

I'm enjoying the discussion at Talk:Electricity#Voltage_doesn.27t_exist_.28or_does_it_.3F.29 . I like to think that I understand this stuff, but sometimes it's difficult for me to explain. I hope that Wikipedia helps people find better, less-confusing (but just as accurate) explanations. --DavidCary 02:53, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dipoles

SSD - wait a second, let me re-incorporate your additions Kgrr 19:37, 8 January 2006 (UTC) I fixed your reference for the ARRL handbook and moved the other one to the Balun article. Kgrr 19:46, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised the balun reference wasn't already in that article. --ssd 02:52, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]