Closed as successful by Cecropia 17:13, 8 June 2007 (UTC) at (59/0/0); Scheduled end time 16:14, 8 June 2007 (UTC) reply
KrakatoaKatie ( talk · contribs) - KrakatoaKatie, formerly known as BaseballBaby, is an experienced Wikipedian with over 8,700 edits to her name. She is a regular participant in XfDs and RfAs, and fully understands what is expected of an admin. She is also active in contributing to articles as a member of several WikiProjects. Given that we need more admins (anyone who doesn't believe me should watch CAT:CSD for a couple of days), I think KrakatoaKatie is a good candidate and should be given the tools. Walton Assistance! 16:11, 26 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Co-nomination by Samir: I agree entirely with Walton, and it's my pleasure to add a co-nomination. KrakatoaKatie is a well-rounded contributor here, and has participated heavily both in article space (I first met her through her excellent editing of a number of articles at WP:GI), and in deletion discussions, suggesting to me that she understands both content and policy very well. She's kind, always civil and even-tempered, and has shown an interest in helping blast through backlogs. I think she'd make an exceptional administrator, and ask for your support -- Samir 18:39, 26 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following optional questions to provide guidance for participants:
While doing RC patrol I'll almost always find a stub or start-class article in which I'm interested, and lately I've been rewriting, expanding, and referencing some of those articles. Examples are Doyle Holly, NetNewsWire, First Report on the Public Credit, David L. Payne, De'Mond Parker, Diana Vincent, Clean Energy Act of 2007, and University of Connecticut Marching Band. Just today I wandered to Donna Nelson.
I also enjoy welcoming new users. It's great to give a newbie the help he/she needs before he/she realizes the need for it.
When I first began to participate in RC patrol and reverting vandalism, I unintentionally reverted a few changes that were actually correct and mistook content disputes for vandalism a couple of times. The editors involved notified me about it, so I quickly learned what is and is not vandalism. I'm grateful for their explanations, and I think about it every time I welcome a new user.
I was editing frequently and receiving comments about my edits, and I think two or three of those comments came in over a two or three-day period. One editor, User:66.235.35.207 (probably a sock of User:Lovelinelistener) was upset over one of those mistakes I made, and I apologized for it twice – but he either didn't see my apology or didn't care because he made seven increasingly creepy edits to my user talk page over a three-day period. I nearly left Wikipedia for good after making so many errors and getting hammered so hard for them, but I didn't. I tried to be civil to friend or not-friend, and I took each one as a step along the way to Wiki-nirvana. This experience is the main reason why I try to help new editors.
I also feel I should explain a bit about the MedCab case I was forced to abandon in September/October 2006, when real life violently interfered with my offline and online activities not once, but twice. I took a MedCab case between User:Cedars and User: Light current over Electrical engineering. I had amassed over a dozen pages of notes between the two editors and I'm pretty sure I had drilled down to the bottom line for both parties and understood the problem. I was not confident, however, that I could move Light current away from his stubborn, dogmatic definition of electrical engineering and convince him he didn't own the article. Before I could find a compromise, I had to leave Wikipedia suddenly and couldn't complete the negotiation. Light current, of course, has since been banned, which made me feel a little better about my own perception of the situation – but then again, he said he thought the mediation was going well, so I'm not sure what that says about my skills. I enjoyed doing this but I haven't taken a MedCab case since then, only because I think my talents and interests are better used elsewhere. If necessary, I'd be happy to mediate another case or any dispute.
Optional joke question from Nishkid64
Admins cannot use the admin tools to win arguments, delete pages which they do not like, or otherwise behave in a privileged or superior manner toward other editors. Neither can any editor use IAR to promote or accomplish their own personal aims at the expense of the encyclopedia and/or everyone else. That's the only hard and fast statement I can make on the subject because each case is unique.
Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/KrakatoaKatie before commenting.
Support
Oppose
Neutral
Closed as successful by Cecropia 17:13, 8 June 2007 (UTC) at (59/0/0); Scheduled end time 16:14, 8 June 2007 (UTC) reply
KrakatoaKatie ( talk · contribs) - KrakatoaKatie, formerly known as BaseballBaby, is an experienced Wikipedian with over 8,700 edits to her name. She is a regular participant in XfDs and RfAs, and fully understands what is expected of an admin. She is also active in contributing to articles as a member of several WikiProjects. Given that we need more admins (anyone who doesn't believe me should watch CAT:CSD for a couple of days), I think KrakatoaKatie is a good candidate and should be given the tools. Walton Assistance! 16:11, 26 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Co-nomination by Samir: I agree entirely with Walton, and it's my pleasure to add a co-nomination. KrakatoaKatie is a well-rounded contributor here, and has participated heavily both in article space (I first met her through her excellent editing of a number of articles at WP:GI), and in deletion discussions, suggesting to me that she understands both content and policy very well. She's kind, always civil and even-tempered, and has shown an interest in helping blast through backlogs. I think she'd make an exceptional administrator, and ask for your support -- Samir 18:39, 26 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. You may wish to answer the following optional questions to provide guidance for participants:
While doing RC patrol I'll almost always find a stub or start-class article in which I'm interested, and lately I've been rewriting, expanding, and referencing some of those articles. Examples are Doyle Holly, NetNewsWire, First Report on the Public Credit, David L. Payne, De'Mond Parker, Diana Vincent, Clean Energy Act of 2007, and University of Connecticut Marching Band. Just today I wandered to Donna Nelson.
I also enjoy welcoming new users. It's great to give a newbie the help he/she needs before he/she realizes the need for it.
When I first began to participate in RC patrol and reverting vandalism, I unintentionally reverted a few changes that were actually correct and mistook content disputes for vandalism a couple of times. The editors involved notified me about it, so I quickly learned what is and is not vandalism. I'm grateful for their explanations, and I think about it every time I welcome a new user.
I was editing frequently and receiving comments about my edits, and I think two or three of those comments came in over a two or three-day period. One editor, User:66.235.35.207 (probably a sock of User:Lovelinelistener) was upset over one of those mistakes I made, and I apologized for it twice – but he either didn't see my apology or didn't care because he made seven increasingly creepy edits to my user talk page over a three-day period. I nearly left Wikipedia for good after making so many errors and getting hammered so hard for them, but I didn't. I tried to be civil to friend or not-friend, and I took each one as a step along the way to Wiki-nirvana. This experience is the main reason why I try to help new editors.
I also feel I should explain a bit about the MedCab case I was forced to abandon in September/October 2006, when real life violently interfered with my offline and online activities not once, but twice. I took a MedCab case between User:Cedars and User: Light current over Electrical engineering. I had amassed over a dozen pages of notes between the two editors and I'm pretty sure I had drilled down to the bottom line for both parties and understood the problem. I was not confident, however, that I could move Light current away from his stubborn, dogmatic definition of electrical engineering and convince him he didn't own the article. Before I could find a compromise, I had to leave Wikipedia suddenly and couldn't complete the negotiation. Light current, of course, has since been banned, which made me feel a little better about my own perception of the situation – but then again, he said he thought the mediation was going well, so I'm not sure what that says about my skills. I enjoyed doing this but I haven't taken a MedCab case since then, only because I think my talents and interests are better used elsewhere. If necessary, I'd be happy to mediate another case or any dispute.
Optional joke question from Nishkid64
Admins cannot use the admin tools to win arguments, delete pages which they do not like, or otherwise behave in a privileged or superior manner toward other editors. Neither can any editor use IAR to promote or accomplish their own personal aims at the expense of the encyclopedia and/or everyone else. That's the only hard and fast statement I can make on the subject because each case is unique.
Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/KrakatoaKatie before commenting.
Support
Oppose
Neutral