The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

Kukini[edit]

Final (84/1/4) ended 03:07, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Kukini (talk · contribs) – Kukini has been with us since December 2005 and has over 12,000 edits. He is familiar with the deletion process, countering vandalism, has participated in Rfa and he has welcomed many new users. He is involved the WikiProject Arizona, WikiProject Education, WikiProject Oklahoma and, he has written over twenty articles and is currently working on more. He has a good record of edit summaries. Kukini is one of the friendliest most civil Wikipedians that I know and it is my pleasure to nominate him.--Dakota ~ 02:39, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: It is an honor to accept this nomination. Thank you, Dakota! Kukini 03:01, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Support. Absolutely.--Dakota ~ 02:54, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Strong support Without a doubt. Master of Puppets FREE BIRD! 03:13, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. You Mean You Weren't One Already? per nominator. joturner 03:20, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Strong Support I thought you were one! Yanksox 03:30, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Strong Support No question. --Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉) 03:32, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support Rama's Arrow 03:35, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Strong Support - a great ambassador for wikipedia - a powerhouse of the barnstar brigade. Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 03:41, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support, very nice guy and knows a lot of the ins and outs of Wikipedia. --Deathphoenix ʕ 04:06, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support. DarthVader 04:12, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support per DakotaKahn. G.He 04:46, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support™ --Rory096 05:00, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support --Terence Ong 05:04, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support--Dwaipayan (talk) 05:32, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support No problems here. --Siva1979Talk to me 05:33, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support - per above -- Tawker 05:38, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support--Bharatveer 06:23, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support – Gurch 06:35, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support - very good editor, should make a fine sysop abakharev 06:42, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support --Haham hanuka 07:29, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Really obvious support Great interpersonal skill. And back oh-so-long ago he was the one who first welcomed me to Wikipedia =D. AmiDaniel (talk) 07:46, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support - clearly is now responsible editor, would make a reasonable admin. Captainj 10:19, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support. A solid contributor. Zaxem 10:26, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Yeah. --Nearly Headless Nick 11:08, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support!, is a very kind and courteous contributor, always very helpful and nice to work with. The answers to the questions below were obviously well thought out. -- Natalya 11:34, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support. For the same reasons as everybody else, he has more than proved his readiness. Rje 12:45, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Strong Support Kukini is a friendly member, who helps new members contribute to wikipedia better. We need admins who bring the wikipedia community together. Anonymous_anonymous_Have a Nice Day 12:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support Good attitude and caring approach to new contributors gives confidence for successful adminship. Tyrenius 13:12, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Strong Support ForestH2
  29. Support, no worries. Deizio talk 14:15, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Don't even have to edit analysis Support.Voice-of-AllTalk 14:37, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Support Naconkantari 15:26, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Pile-on Support digital_me(t/c) 15:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support anyone with this many edits should be an admin, though the 8000+ editd to User talk space is rather strange. The Gerg 15:49, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support. Absolutely! --TantalumTelluride 16:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Support - wow, looks like a great, positive user. Tony Fox 17:00, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support - outstanding welcomer (he was the user who welcomed me 4 months after I joined after he noticed that I had not been welcomed). I also like his name as I'm Hawaiian =) Kalani [talk] 18:11, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support - Lost 18:37, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support, sure. --Tone 18:46, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support--blue520 19:19, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Support and surprised he wasn't an admin already. --Elkman 20:00, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support His effort in Wikipedia:Esperanza/BB is an example for us all. Highway Rainbow Sneakers 20:08, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Support per answers to my questions below. -Ambuj Saxena (talk) 22:17, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Support Fantastico! Staxringold talkcontribs 22:40, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Support per above! —Khoikhoi 23:23, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Merovingian {T C @} 23:52, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support, of course. Sango123 23:55, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Support level headed and diligent. -- Samir धर्म 02:33, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Support. Does a lot of talking, but looks like a good choice nevertheless. Nephron  T|C 03:44, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Support. Seen this guy around and seems worthy of the mop. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/!? 04:50, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  50. 50th Support WerdnaTc@bCmLt 08:20, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Support--Jusjih 09:38, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  52. There are 52.14 weeks in a year and this is the 52nd support --james(lets talk) 11:32, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  53. SupportE Asterion u talking to me? 12:08, 3 June 2006 (UTC) as per nominator[reply]
  54. Support --Jay(Reply) 15:52, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  55. Support Great number of edits and a lot of experience. Just bring the edit summary usage for minor edits up! — Brendenhull (T + C) at 17:04, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  56. Support per nom. Royboycrashfan 17:34, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  57. Seriously, you're kidding me, he wasn't one already? --Golbez 18:49, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  58. Support per everyone else who beat me to the cliché ;) RadioKirk talk to me 21:15, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  59. Support per everything above. DakPowers (Talk) 21:27, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  60. Support yes savidan(talk) (e@) 22:49, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  61. Support -- Saluyot 01:07, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  62. Support Should have happened a long time ago jbolden1517Talk 03:26, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  63. Support--Per everythings on above. '''*Daniel*''' 03:44, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  64. Support Joe I 06:50, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  65. Support per nom. Molerat 11:06, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  66. Strong Support Great user! The Halo (talk) 16:26, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  67. Support Meets my standards; excellent user. LINUXERIST@ 01:53, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  68. Support, looks good. Kirill Lokshin 04:32, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  69. Support I've been voting "support" a lot lately, but I've seen quite a few members who truly deserve it. Kukini, you're no exception. Steveo2 11:07, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  70. Support Good, strong, all-round user. --Wisden17 15:02, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  71. Support for the creator of useful tools like User:Kukini/Welcome.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 15:31, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  72. Support with whole faith this person will do well. Yamaguchi先生 15:53, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  73. Support. --Bhadani 16:25, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  74. Support. I think I had one of the earliest interactions with Kukini on Wikipedia (Dec28), and am pleased to see that they have developed a very positive wikipersona. Syrthiss 19:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  75. Support - good user; will meet everyone's standards I am sure. -- Deville (Talk) 02:04, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  76. Λυδαcιτγ(TheJabberwock) Just met him, seems like a helpful person. 04:10, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  77. Support with pleasure - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 12:44, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  78. Jaranda wat's sup 19:06, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Support. I like to see more main space edits-- but aside from that alright. Nephron  T|C 23:50, 6 June 2006 (UTC) Note Duplicate vote. --Srikeit(Talk|Email) 12:41, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  79. Support. Will make a great one. EWS23 (Leave me a message!) 05:02, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  80. More support for you.--Kungfu Adam (talk) 20:15, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  81. Support - good answers to questions and plenty of edits, seems up to the job.--Andeh 01:49, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  82. Support -- from The King of Kings 18:57, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  83. Support I'm so glad I didnt miss this! Strong, very strong, support. What a great editor, plenty of goodwill, friendly and helpful, we need more like this. -- Banes 20:51, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  84. Support - yes! --HappyCamper 22:32, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Oppose- User does not meet 1FA, and has over two thirds of his posts in talk pages. I do not beleive it is fair to elect someone on the basis of their his or her ability to campaign. We must base the decision on the quality of his or her work. -Tombrend (not logged in)
Please log in and then vote. [1] G.He 20:17, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Very Strong Oppose. It is completely unacceptable that an admin doesn't meet User:Mailer diablo/One Featured Article. Ricardo Lagos 00:26, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, he should be banned! Someone file an RfAr! --Rory096 03:15, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm striking this "vote," as the "voter" is a vandal who is currently blocked. --Rory096 03:16, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Oppose, Willy on Wheels should not be welcomed[2]. Other unusual selections: [3], [4]. — Jun. 7, '06 [07:06] <freak|talk>
I was quickly corrected by Dakota for the WoW welcome. (and it was reverted) I did not know that was it was a known negative quantity. I saw that as a learning experience. At the time, I didn't realize that some see "welcomes" as a reward instead of as a polite "all edits are public, thus please take care in your work." Since then, I have curbed my use of welcoming and I try to avoid welcoming the more obnoxious new user names. Kukini 13:32, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

  1. Does not appear to meet User:Mailer diablo/One Featured Article, but has made exceptional service to the community. - Mailer Diablo 08:08, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Seems like an incredibly friendly person, but the imbalance of namespace edits worries me a bit. We always appreciate those who welcome and help acclimate new users, but I'm not sure what the tools would be for. Shell babelfish 12:52, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Doesn't meet my nine months. Raichu 21:37, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Neutral. The ratio of 2:1 for talkspace to normal edits is a bit much in my opinion. While welcomeing new users is definatley an important part of wikipedia, adminship does not give any extra user welcomeing tools.--SomeStranger (T | C) 00:33, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments 

Username Kukini
Total edits 12134
Distinct pages edited 10253
Average edits/page 1.183
First edit 10:44, December 28, 2005
 
(main) 1803
Talk 894
User 283
User talk 8648
Image 1
Image talk 2
Template 4
Template talk 6
Category 3
Category talk 5
Wikipedia 432
Wikipedia talk 50
Portal 3
 G.He 03:12, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
A: If I were an administrator, I would be active in a number of places, many in which I have already frequented. A few that get more of my interest include WP:RfD, WP:AIV (where there has been discussion about backlog [5], WP:RfA, WP:AN/3RR. I am also interested in learning more about WP:CfD, WP:SFD, WP:GRFA and WP:TfD, but will likely move cautiously into them as I have spent less time there. I have also spent a good deal of time RC patrolling, and will likely dedicate continued effort there as well. In my RC patrolling work, I prefer to take a positive approach with users, I like to help novice users learn about the norms and expectations of Wikipedia by leaving a detailed welcome message [6] with all those who have joined. I also have taken care to learn the process of Test1, Test2, etc. prior to reporting to WP:AIV. I really respect and admire the philosophy behind this process. I also have enjoyed being a part of the process of policy development, as such activity is open to us all. If I am granted adminship, I will seek out mentoring from more experienced SysOps as I move forward in developing skills in mopping. I hope to bring a level-headed approach to my work and am always open to feedback, suggestions, and advice. Kukini 03:01, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I have spent time over the past months working throughout the Wikipedia environment, I have found particular satisfaction in working on WikiProjects. I am a particular fan of such projects because I feel they help focus energy and build a collaborative community. After spending time working in various WikiProjects, including Wikipedia:WikiProject Oklahoma, Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago , Wikipedia:WikiProject Universities, Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Education. I was particularly inspired by the work of User:Ashlux in his work in WikiProject Oklahoma, and recently decided to try to found Wikipedia:WikiProject Arizona. It is with this work that I am most pleased to date. I also love the spirit that Esperanza brings to our project and enjoy association with this group. The articles/stubs I have initiated are listed on my user page as well. Kukini 03:01, 2 June 2006 (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:When I first began work in Wikipedia, I really didn’t understand the culture and mission of the project, and found that I should avoid any areas where my POV might get in the way of constructive work. In my first few days editing, User:Zoe, a SysOp whom I have come to respect, blocked me for a brief period due to a misunderstanding relating to a 3RR for a brief period. Although I had no intent to be harmful, I discovered that pushing for events that I viewed as important to be included in 2006 from Current Events was not a good way for me to expend energy. Nowadays, I generally only read these two pages to see what my fellow wikipedians think. As I really did not understand how things worked when this happened, this experience inspired me to become active in welcoming new members and in helping them have a good deal of information to help them learn how we do things. I believe that a welcoming and informative approach elicits the development of more agreeable and knowledgeable editors if they a) know there are many watching out for wikipedia, b) have quick and good resources offered to allow them to know how things work, and c) feel welcomed into the process and community. I believe that I am generally level-headed, calm, patient, and collaborative in my work here in Wikipedia. Editing here has actually developed into a favorite pastime of mine, as I can learn while being constructive. I generally do not get upset when other users have lapses in their civility. I find that clear responses as well as use of wikipedia protocol help me move smoothly through moments when I seem to be the target of another’s ire. Kukini 03:01, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
4. Out of your 12,000+ edits, how do you make only 88 minor edits to the article namespace? Also, please explain your 3RR block of 2006 on 6 January. Naconkantari 04:11, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A: Thank you for the questions. Answer A: As minor edits are generally a matter of personal judgment and serve to allow those doing RC patrolling to choose to not review another's work, I normally do not mark my work as "minor." Up to this point at least, I have not seen reason to mark edits as such. Perhaps I should do this more in the future? I am open to learn more on this issue, but honestly, this is the first time anyone has mentioned it around me. Answer B: As for the 3RR block on 2006, I tried to explain this issue above. Basically, I was brand new and believed at the time that something that was broadly considered a "current event" also belonged listed in the events of 2006. I actually did not see the 3RR warning prior to making the third revert that brought the block. I look back at the experience as a good learning opportunity wherein I felt guided towards more productive work. Let me know if this answer still does not clarify the issue. Best, Kukini 04:59, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(Not a response from Kukini, but something I found when I was checking this out: User talk:Kukini/Archive1#POV_Edits_in_Current_Events contains a record of the block and some outside comments from joturner (talk · contribs · count).) --Elkman 04:47, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Additional questions from Ambuj Saxena, considering that an overwhelming majority of contributions (nearly 6000, I believe) is welcoming new users.

5. What is your policy of welcoming new users? Do you look at their contributions before welcoming them? What about anonymous IPs?
A:Thank you for the questions. Answer A. My general perspective regarding welcoming newcomers is similar to that of AmiDaniel who wrote that welcomes serve as “…one of the main deciding factors between the next great admin and the next Willy on Wheels.” I believe that as a community, we should do our very best to encourage productive activity and not only discourage negative activity. Al though I really do not do nearly as much welcoming as I used to, I still find it an important part of Wikipedia citizenship. Also, detailed and informative “welcomes” serve to help new editors have a better understanding of how things work in Wikipedia and how they can bring their own knowledge, experience and talent to help build a better online encyclopedia. Answer B. I look at user contributions when RC Patrolling. It is my current perception that many new users do not realize that all of their edits can be readily tracked and even readily reverted. Many come across as quite surprised by the first message they get from another user. I currently do not see “welcomes” as a sort of reward for good editing but more as positive greetings that clarify to new users that all their editing on Wikipedia does not and will not occur in a vacuum, but instead will consistently undergo public scrutiny. I actually occasionally pair a welcome message with a “test 1” message, if the user has not been welcomed yet. Answer C. With anonymous IPs, I consider the welcome ip message to be information as well as an invitation for anon users to become users with user names. I honestly do not know if that actually works with many IP users, as none have ever let me know that they decided to sign in formally. Kukini 20:13, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
6. You see that the user you welcomed has blatantly vandalized a page and got a warning. Do you follow up to make them improve?
A: Actually, I am not sure I am philosophically comfortable with the concept of making someone improve post vandalism. I do not think we can nor should “make” anyone do anything nor that it fits in the mission or culture of Wikipedia. I do agree wholeheartedly with the philosophy behind the system in place to first encourage errant users to change their ways (such as the 3RR and Test 1, Test 2, Test 3, Test 4). I also appreciate that blocks come in varying lengths and are generally not applied permanently or for long periods of time at first, without being warranted by egregious behavior. I also feel that we can all serve to encourage better editing and writing through prompts such as ((references )) and ((wikify)). That was a long answer to say that a welcome I leave (or that anyone else leaves) in no way impacts my decisions to give feedback within established protocol. I just feel that the carrot and stick approach is better than the stick with no carrot approach. Kukini 20:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
7. You have mentioned a lot of interests (as the answer to Q1 above) you will persue after you become an admin. Do you foresee a namespace shift after becoming an admin or will your primary namespace remain "User talk"?
A:I believe I may have already undergone the phenomenon of namespace shift in the time I have been here. It is my understanding that this is not incredibly uncommon. Although I will always see value in “user talk” space for shaping the community, I have also moved in my interests into other arenas, a number of which I have listed in my answers to questions 1 and 2. I do know that my current shift has been more to Main, Talk, and Wikipedia than it was on the front end of my time here. I also tend to agree with the following Wikimedia statement: “Percentages for users vary wildly, typically ranging from 20% to 60% of all edits being made in the main namespace. Note, however, that spending too much time calculating — and/or worrying — about namespace percentages is a form of edit counting, which is generally to be avoided” [7]. Kukini 20:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
8. (An entirely optional question) What percent of users welcomed by you actually follow up to learn something?
A: I have had a number (but no idea how many) of those I have contacted follow up later. I always try to respond to their inquiries in a timely fashion and offering encouragement. I imagine you have not heard back from any due to the fact that such a repsonse is relatively rare. I imagine most people who get welcomes think that it is some sort of automated response from the system and not an actual person taking time to welcome them in and invite them to become or remain productive members of the community. Kukini 21:02, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DriniQuestion

Do you think admins performing actions (deletions, block) for reasons not covered on policy should be sanctioned/punished? If so, how? -- Drini 17:13, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A: I feel it is important that we continue to develop and maintain a sense of "rule of law" for all users at all levels within Wikipedia. Of course, I would add to this the caveat that to those who much is given, much is expected. In other words, as Administrators have abilities that other users do not, they should be held to standards of behavior. Abuse of power should, at the very least, result in temporary curtailing of some of that power. I am pleased to see that we have a mediation process that functions well as well as bureaucrats to oversee resolution of issues that might arise such as the one you mention in your question. I think the specifics of the issue of “how” sanctions or responses to abuse of power might be carried out, I believe this should be decided ultimately by us all as it affects us all. Kukini 21:40, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I?m a bit curious. How do bureaucrats oversee reslution of those issues? I don't see they having power to do such things. -- Drini 00:13, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps they don't. Honestly this is not something I know a lot about. When I read the following, it appeared to me that they might have some say on disputes..."Bureaucrats are expected to determine consensus in difficult cases and be ready to explain their decisions" (see the bottom of this page). Perhaps the cases to which you refer are a different sort of case. I imagine I am not alone in lack of clarity on the role of Bureauucrats in Wikipidia. It does appear that those who are mediators, including you, I believe, might be the bottom line on these issues. Now I am curious, is there a poll on what to do in the cases to which you refer? I do not recall seeing one as of yet. What do you think of the rest of my response above regarding rule of law? Kukini 03:30, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above adminship 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 talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.
Category