User talk:Sashamorning

From YPPedia


While it's true that the edits you made to Everclearboy's page are harmless, it's also true that they're completely unencyclopedic, which means they don't belong there. It's not that the stuff you added was offensive or anything like that, it's that it means an administrator or other user has to swing by and clean it up, which is really just a waste of time and effort for everyone involved. --Ponytailguy 08:02, 29 January 2007 (PST)

Ahoy! I just want to clarify that Barrister is not being a "hater," but rather he is trying to ensure that pirate pages are kept legible, factual, and encyclopedic. The pirate pages are not meant to be "vanity" pages or a whiteboard for individual pirates, and Barrister is one of the volunteer admins tasked with the thankless job of fixing edits that don't fit within the YPPedia policy parameters. You seem to be taking his requests in good humor now, but I wanted to make sure you understood that he's not in any way in the wrong with regard to your edits of Everclearboy's page. --Eurydice 11:22, 29 January 2007 (PST)


Ahoy! I'm sorry, but we don't allow trophies on individual pirate pages. This is documented on our policy page. Please note that the pirate infobox includes a direct link to the pirate's trophy page, so they remain just a click away. --Barrister 14:47, 30 January 2007 (PST)

island flags

Ahoy! Just wanted to let you know that I renamed the pages you created. They're now:

I updated all references to them. Please let me know if you have any questions. --Barrister 19:51, 13 February 2007 (PST)


It's a copy screen and paste in chunks thing. If you think the grand frig goes slowly, you should try pasting together the estate rooms ;) --Guppymomma 10:23, 15 February 2007 (PST)


Hey, I found there are already some tables set up here. Is this what you were looking for? --Whitemonkey 11:23, 21 February 2007 (PST)


Ahoy! I tweaked Herbs to use {{R from plural}} (Usage). --Barrister 17:08, 22 February 2007 (PST)

Admiral Finius

Hi Sashamorning, have they actually fixed the spelling error in what Admiral Finius says in the game? Because that spelling error was as per how he used to say it. -- Vorky 14:29, 11 March 2007 (PDT)

Comment on frequency

Ahoy there! As you may have guessed, there is a template for use on user talk pages to warn about frequency. It can be used by {{Subst:frequency|[article title]}}, replacing [article title] with the title of the article in question.  :) -- Thefirstdude (t/c) 14:44, 12 March 2007 (PDT)

A note on Sage blockade history

I've noticed you've been adding blockades to the Sage blockade history before they actually happen. This results in extra needless edits when the blockade status changes, and noting blockades currently set to happen is the purpose of the Current blockades page (which has been relatively unused for Sage recently). Please do not add blockades to the blockade history until they have finished. --Thunderbird 11:13, 15 April 2007 (PDT)


Thank you for the correction. I only wish to contribute resposibly so feel free to push your constructive criticism over so that I may learn the do's and don't's. BTW, I think I missed it by less than 6 hours.--Biliter01 17:30, 26 May 2007 (PDT)

Links to the fruit running thingee

It'd probably be good to also add a link to it from each individual fruit article. Just add a section at the end like == See also == or == Other links == and stick it there. --Guppymomma 21:20, 5 June 2007 (PDT)

Outdated Crew List

The [Category:Outdated_Crew_Information|Outdated Crew List] is a list off all the crews that have not been updated in the past 3 months or so. It is automated off the update information fields found in all crew infoboxes. It gives us a list of crews that are in need of attention to determine there current status. I personally am the self-proclaimed patron saint of Crew Pages on the wiki. All I was doing was trying to force off all the user pages including sandboxes off the outdated list by changing the update date to show as current.

It is a daunting task that I have undertaken in updating all the out of date crew pages as there are over 400 on that list as of today. It made me feel better to quickly get about a dozen entries off that last that were similar to yours because I've been working on extensive edits to standardize crew pages and embellish information where I can but pulling it from the in-game info page or pirates wiki pages. It would be helpful if you have your crew page laid out to standard to move it to an actually crew info page and at least delete the infobox itself out of your sandbox. I haven't checked but I'm pretty sure that your sandbox page is showing up in the list of crews for your ocean which is also automated off of the crew infobox.

If you need help with your crew's page just drop me a note and I'll take a look at it again and fix anything your are having difficulty with and rearrange it to match the "standard".

Thanks for asking about it, as it and the equivalent list for outdated flags are not well known lists. Wiki on mate and if I can help you with any of your wiki pages just send me another message. --Kgarrett1969 10:15, 6 June 2007 (PDT)

Frequency template

Ahoy! When using the {{Frequency}} (Usage) template please don't put [ ] around the page name as the template does that for you. Thanks. -- Cedarwings (t/c) 12:07, 25 June 2007 (PDT)

Hey Sasha, I noticed you've been warning a few users of the frequency issue lately. Unless a user is in the double digits of edits, it is probably unnecessary to stick the warning on their page. However, the other reason I thought I'd poke you is to give you a heads up if you weren't aware. In your preferences section, there is a recent changes tab. If you select enhanced recent changes, well, your recent changes page will look much different. In short, it groups together all edits made to a single page, so that the spam is much less bothersome. I'm not dissauding you from warning people for an extreme number of consecutive edits, but for a new user, a warning after 7 edits to a page seems a little extreme. Thanks! --Fannon 12:07, 26 June 2007 (PDT)

Gem price lists

I noticed over on Talk:Gem that you were perhaps planning to create separate templates of the price lists, like you had done for the gem list infoboxes. Would you mind if I took on this project? --Chupchup 11:55, 16 July 2007 (PDT)

Brigand King adjectives

I put a few comments in Talk:List of known Brigand King ship name adjectives that I'd like your input on. Compare with List of known Brigand King swabbie adjectives. Let's at least normalize the formatting. --Chupchup 11:55, 16 July 2007 (PDT)

Rogue OMs

You're an addict! But I like it :p --Whitemonkey (t/c) 08:49, 2 September 2007 (PDT)


Barnstar2.png The Incredible Barnstar
"After reading Fruit running, I think you deserve a barnstar. It is a well thought out and researched article, excellent job! You deserve it :) " -CaptainDP 11:59, 5 November 2007 (PST)

Rogue OM categories

Hullo, I've removed the forum events category from the ROMS pages, aside from the main article and category, as the sheer quantity of articles related to the contest has given rise to the ROMS category. It's fine to just use the ROMS category on all ROMS related articles, rather than both that and the forum events one. --Featherfin 16:17, 30 November 2007 (PST)

Deleting pirate articles

Ahoy there! Just a word in your ear: even if something drastic happens to a pirate like them quitting the game or leaving a crew, we like to leave their encyclopedia entry in place, just for posterity and so that articles that link to them don't suddenly break. Your edit has been reverted for this reason... nothing personal, we just like to look to the future. Fair winds! --Belthazar451 06:19, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I understand your point, but by the same token, the page is about me, I created the page, and I provided the content. I don't wan it there anymore, and I don't see why it should remain otherwise. I'm the one who should really be concerned over its existence. Please delete? I have a copy of it saved on my hard drive just in case, which is highly unlikely. I'll be happy to go through the linked pages to remove the links but really, I think the choice should be mine, copyright nonwithstanding, and I don't think it unreasonable for OOO to honor my wishes. I have my reasons. Thanks. Sashamorning 22:49, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
One trick with the wiki is that all page content added falls under the Creative Commons licence. What that basically means is that while you're free to delete the page, we're free to put it back. That said, don't think of it as a "haha, we have your page, now it's ours" - the wiki is meant to be an encyclopedia of Puzzle Pirates. If there are security concerns, then something can be done with it, but we like posterity. We do not, incidentally, represent Three Rings - we're just normal players. On a side note, you can respond here - it's much easier to keep conversations in one place, and I'll still see it. =) --Belthazar451 02:38, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
One trick about the Creative Commons license is that the author's moral rights are not affected by the CC license. The moral rights, as defined by CC license 2.5 ( are "In addition to the right of licensors to request removal of their name from the work when used in a derivative or collective they don't like..." The name "Sashamorning" is understood by the community to be me, is the public name by which I use the site, and thus it is appropriate to be considered to be my "name." I no longer want my name associated as of the present time, and under the CC I have the right to have it removed from a collective or derivative work. It isn't the *page* I'm therefore trying to delete, it's the references to me. The removal of the page was a by-product, and the easiest way to accomplish this.
If the page is mostly blanked, then you have the page in history for posterity, but under the CC 2.5 I could technically ask for and be granted full removal from the site of any mention of my name. I am allowed to have my name removed from the derivative or collective (the site) by simply "not liking it." If I need to go that far I will, but I'm content just disappearing into the fog. Please? I'm asking nicely. Sashamorning 04:52, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
I've moved the discussion from the pirate article to the associated talk page. -- Faulkston 05:58, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm not entirely certain on why you want it removed, but we'd like at least the infobox to be retained as well. It just seems rather a shame, to me... --Belthazar451 06:19, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
I appreciate your concern, but I'd just really rather not. I don't want to go into reasons, but at least the page is retained in the history. Thank you. ^_^ Sashamorning 06:32, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

(undent)Let's quote from the Creative Commons FAQ in full:

What are moral rights, and how could I exercise them to prevent uses of my work that I don’t like?

In addition to the right of licensors to request removal of their name from a work when used in a derivative or collective they don't like, copyright laws in most jurisdictions around the world (with the notable exception of the US except in very limited circumstances) grant creators “moral rights” which may provide some redress if a derivative work represents a “derogatory treatment” of the licensor's work. Moral rights give an original author the right to object to “derogatory treatment” of their work; “derogatory treatment” is typically defined as “distortion or mutilation” of the work or treatment that is “prejudicial to the honor, or reputation of the author.” Creative Commons licenses (with the exception of Canada) do not affect any moral rights licensors may have. This means that if you have moral rights as an original author of a work, you may be able to take action against a creator who is using your work in a way you find objectionable. Of course, not all derivative works you don’t like are necessarily “derogatory.”

This reads to me that as a licensor you (the player Sashamorning) can request to remove your name (as author) from work that you contributed to this CC-licensed work, not the work itself. In addition it seems that your "moral rights" (which may not exist in this particular case) grant you the ability to object to derogatory treatment to your work.

However the article is about the pirate character Sashamorning. That such a pirate character exists, belongs to a certain crew and flag, has won a familiar, and other facts are not necessarily derogatory, nor are they necessarily derivatives, of your contributions to this collective CC-licensed work.

An example of this could be seen like so: If Bill Clinton contributed to a CC-licensed blog about human trafficking of Eastern European women to the sex trade in the United States which was then published as a book, he would (and would not) have the following rights: 1) He could ask for his name to be removed from the book. 1a) He could not ask for his articles to be removed from the book. 2) He might be able to have a different article, that heavily quoted or used large sections of one of his articles, removed from the book. 2a) He could not have an article that was critical of his immigration policies removed from the book. The fact that he is a part-author of the collective work is separate from the fact that he is also a subject of the collective work.

This is another example where the line between player and pirate is blurry. In this case I feel that anything regarding the player (love of gold, avatar collection, even ship collections) should be removed while the infobox with the familiar and basic information about the pirate's history should remain. --Fiddler 06:31, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Can't I just ask nicely? I mean... it's information about ME, not about human trafficking of Eastern European women. Sashamorning 06:38, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

So then, if I deleted my account, then what? The pirate wouldn't exist. I don't want to take it to that level. =( Sashamorning 06:42, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Even if an account is deleted, pirate pages are usually kept for historical purposes (characters are part of the history of the game). --Adrielle ♥ =) 08:28, 2 June 2010 (UTC)