Final count (24/0/0) ended 17:21 19 October 2005 (UTC)
Kzollman (
talk·contribs) – Kevin is a dedicated Wikipedian, who has accumulated 2297 since he first edited on 1 March 2005. He started the successful
WikiProject Game theory which he clearly puts a lot of effort into. Judging from his contributions he would certainly make good use of the various admin capabilities. He is also very calm, polite, rational and easy to work with.
Martin17:21, 12 October 2005 (UTC)reply
Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
Support beyond remarkable work on the game theory wikiproject, I've been struck by his patient and constructive dealings with people I'd have dismissed as vandals. Sharp, long fuse, has my vote.
Pete.Hurd04:18, 14 October 2005 (UTC)reply
A. Probably most often I would use the rollback button to correct tests and vandalism that I come across on my watchlist. I would also help close AfDs and help sort through the backlog of copyright tagged articles (in homage to Martin :). I like to find things that don't require real deep thought to do when I'm tired, and I think these two would satisfy that desire. I'm pretty game to help out wherever people need help, except RC patrol. If I do that for too many days in a row it starts to feed my misanthropic tenancies too much. --best, kevin ···
Kzollman |
Talk···18:21, 12 October 2005 (UTC)reply
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. I just (yesterday) posted a substantially rewritten version of the
Game theory article. Although, I was planning to work on it for another week, the Nobel committee inspired my haste. I'm really happy with how it turned out. I have also worked on a lot of game theory games. Of those, I'm probably most proud of
Stag hunt and
Centipede game (although, I'm happy with all of them; see my userpage for a list). --best, kevin ···
Kzollman |
Talk···18:21, 12 October 2005 (UTC)reply
3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
A. As I said above, RC patrol freaked me out a bit. I don't think I really did anything inappropriate when I was regularly doing RC patrol, it just made me too anxious (especially for what is my hobby) Nowadays, I only deal with a few vandal/testers a day on my watch list. With respect to disputes, I try to deal with them in a couple different ways. First, I think often the prudent action is to ignore it. Obviously, one should not feed trolls, but also I try to stay out of conflicts when others are handling them well. Although I dealt with many of
Dot Six's edits, I really didn't try to deal with him myself. Other users were doing a great job trying to reason with him, and I thought my jumping in would just cause more confusion and turmoil. When I need to deal with someone regarding content, I try to always both keep myself calm and take whatever action I think will help defuse the other user. After using an impolite edit summary
[1], I think I handled a conflict with
User:Wragge well
here. Also, I think its always important to cite sources for one's arguments, this keeps egos from getting too involved (for example, see my discussion at
Talk:Complete information). --best, kevin ···
Kzollman |
Talk···18:21, 12 October 2005 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.
Final count (24/0/0) ended 17:21 19 October 2005 (UTC)
Kzollman (
talk·contribs) – Kevin is a dedicated Wikipedian, who has accumulated 2297 since he first edited on 1 March 2005. He started the successful
WikiProject Game theory which he clearly puts a lot of effort into. Judging from his contributions he would certainly make good use of the various admin capabilities. He is also very calm, polite, rational and easy to work with.
Martin17:21, 12 October 2005 (UTC)reply
Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
Support beyond remarkable work on the game theory wikiproject, I've been struck by his patient and constructive dealings with people I'd have dismissed as vandals. Sharp, long fuse, has my vote.
Pete.Hurd04:18, 14 October 2005 (UTC)reply
A. Probably most often I would use the rollback button to correct tests and vandalism that I come across on my watchlist. I would also help close AfDs and help sort through the backlog of copyright tagged articles (in homage to Martin :). I like to find things that don't require real deep thought to do when I'm tired, and I think these two would satisfy that desire. I'm pretty game to help out wherever people need help, except RC patrol. If I do that for too many days in a row it starts to feed my misanthropic tenancies too much. --best, kevin ···
Kzollman |
Talk···18:21, 12 October 2005 (UTC)reply
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. I just (yesterday) posted a substantially rewritten version of the
Game theory article. Although, I was planning to work on it for another week, the Nobel committee inspired my haste. I'm really happy with how it turned out. I have also worked on a lot of game theory games. Of those, I'm probably most proud of
Stag hunt and
Centipede game (although, I'm happy with all of them; see my userpage for a list). --best, kevin ···
Kzollman |
Talk···18:21, 12 October 2005 (UTC)reply
3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
A. As I said above, RC patrol freaked me out a bit. I don't think I really did anything inappropriate when I was regularly doing RC patrol, it just made me too anxious (especially for what is my hobby) Nowadays, I only deal with a few vandal/testers a day on my watch list. With respect to disputes, I try to deal with them in a couple different ways. First, I think often the prudent action is to ignore it. Obviously, one should not feed trolls, but also I try to stay out of conflicts when others are handling them well. Although I dealt with many of
Dot Six's edits, I really didn't try to deal with him myself. Other users were doing a great job trying to reason with him, and I thought my jumping in would just cause more confusion and turmoil. When I need to deal with someone regarding content, I try to always both keep myself calm and take whatever action I think will help defuse the other user. After using an impolite edit summary
[1], I think I handled a conflict with
User:Wragge well
here. Also, I think its always important to cite sources for one's arguments, this keeps egos from getting too involved (for example, see my discussion at
Talk:Complete information). --best, kevin ···
Kzollman |
Talk···18:21, 12 October 2005 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.