Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Khukri 2

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

(65/0/0); End 23:45, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Khukri (talk · contribs) - Good morning/afternoon/evening, if I may, I'd like to start with a quote;

- Jimbo Wales,^[1][2] Wikipedia co-founder

I now ask, why can't we give Khukri the mop? Where do I start..... He's been an editor here since 12th December 2005. Khukri has a great spread of contributions across all namspaces, however, his real passion lies in template work. There are few editors here that are able to edit templates as well a Khukri, adminship would allow him to edit all those templates that are protected due to all those lovely vandals. A member of Wikipedia:WikiProject user warnings, he's done great work with a number of other editors revamping all our user warning templates, which I am sure everyone would agree, give far more informative warnings, this shows that Khukri has a good understanding of the blocking policy and relevant steps that should be taken before the block button is pressed. He gives good contributions to WP:AIV, where he always gives consise reports which always lead to a block, giving him the tools would allow him to bypass this page and protect the encyclopedia from users who wish to disrupt. Since Khukri's last RfA, he has developed far more project wide experience which was the major concern of the opposing parties. I think Khukri's major quality is to assume good faith, he's an extremely nice guy and always looks out for others, a quality that is critical on a collberative project like wikipedia. I really hope that you can help me give this excellent user the tools, he will be a credit to the team. Ryan Postlethwaite 21:51, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

I gratefully accept ^Khukri 23:15, 11 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:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?

A: My first would be the standard WP:AIV, even though this is rarely backlogged these days. New editors usually take up RC Patrol as one of their first roles in helping the project. I believe it essential that this is monitored almost continually. Yes the main reason for AIV's existance is to remove disrupting influences on the project. However I also believe that it also plays a more subtle role for those who wish to contribute to the project. AIV is often their first real dealings with the inner workings of Wikipedia, and if we can show efficiency there and keep new editors interested and that their reports are not falling on deaf ears (even if it's only 10 minutes) then maybe they will continue to be interested and eventually find themselves in the fortunate position I am today. My second area would be helping with CSD, XfD's mainly TfD.

2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?

A: I believe that only other editors can tell what my best contributions to Wikipedia are, however I'm most proud of the work that has been done on the uw- series of warning templates. I edited, wrote and added a few articles early on in my editing career, but in comparison to the work that was done over the last 7 months on the warning templates, these pale into insignificance. I am genuinely proud of the templates and the work that was done to put them in place. Yes they did have their detractors, primarily over the harmonised icons, but far more editors gave positive feedback. When I see on ANI or on other forums a question, and some one replies that they issued Template:uw-???, I'm proud to think I had a part in those.

3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

A: My job in real life is about avoiding conflict situations. Understanding why someone is acting or re-acting to a situation in a certain way often leads to an understanding of how to dispel an issue in the first place, before it gets to become stressful or out of hand. By nature I'm not a stressful person and as I said in my previous RfA, I do this because I enjoy it.

4. How would you interpret ignore all rules and when would you apply this policy?

A: I've added this as I will be away most of tomorrow and so as not to appear to be avoiding the question I've pre-empted it's asking. My response is carefully, with a meticulous thought process and get ready to justify my actions. I personally have only ever seen IAR used once in my opinion correctly (Cyde's deletion of childhood wikipedians category), where even though I disagreed with his actions with respect to the rules, to me this typified the meaning of IAR. IAR is not just applicable to admins, it's just they can do more damage. With the speed of response these days on the admin channels, recent password hacking is a good example, I'd more as likely pass by either ANI or the IRC channels and ask for the thoughts of those whose opinions I respect.

• See Khukri's edit summary usage with mathbot's tool. For the edit count, see the talk page.
• Links for Khukri: Khukri (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
• Link to first RfA - Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Khukri

Please keep criticism constructive and polite. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Khukri before commenting.

Support

1. Support John254 23:05, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Strong support as nom - lets do this. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:25, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Support Good range of experience, good editor. Just the sort we need.--Anthony.bradbury 23:31, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. --U. S. A. 23:38, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Support I have been working with Khukri in WP:UW for a few months now. He has always been someone knowledgeable, kind, always available and offering to help. He is able to make compromises when someone disagrees with him, knows policies, has been around for a while now, has worked on numerous faces of Wikipedia, ... Finally, I would lend him my keys without any second thoughts if he was my neighbor. I support his nomination. -- lucasbfr ^talk 23:40, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. Support as per previous RfA. A good candidate for the admin tools. (aeropagitica) 00:13, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. For sure. Majorly (hot!) 00:16, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
8. I thought Khukri was one support of course. ~ Magnus animum  ^{BRAIN FREEZE!} 00:22, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
9. Support. We have sysopped a Scimitar, we have a sysopped a Blade... then why not a Kukhri too? Another awkward attempt at cheap comedy-support brought to you by Phaedriel - 00:30, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
10. Support ditto above. The Rambling Man 00:59, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
11. Support The mop is no big deal. We could use more editors like Khukri. Cool Blue^{talk to me} 01:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
12. Support Excellent editor as far as I've seen and could definitely use the tools. Concerns of last RfA seem to be gone. On an unrelated note, I can't resist complaining about the nomination: Jimboism is never a great idea and the 2003 "adminship is no big deal" quote is a close second to the "sum of all human knowledge" for most absurdly often overused Jimbo quote. (no offense Ryan, I just had to say it...) Pascal.Tesson 01:06, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Whether Jimbo said it or not, the fact is - adminship is no big deal, it just gives the user a bigger work load :-) Ryan Postlethwaite 01:09, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

13. Support. No reason not to. --Mschel 01:32, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
14. Support Have been impressed by interactions with the user (not to mention the UW WikiProject), who has enough edits in relevant areas. Xiner (talk) 01:40, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
15. Support: Has plenty of experience and edit summary usage is excellent. I am also impressed with the amount of work done in Templates and User Talk. Should be an assest as an administrator.  Orfen ^{User Talk} | _Contribs 01:47, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
16. Strong support Ryan Postlethwaite has chosen another good candidate. Acalamari 02:02, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
17. Support. WjBscribe 02:13, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
18. Support User Talk shows great communication skills needed by an admin. the_undertow ^talk 02:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
19. Support; he's been doing a lot of good work for a while now. Good candidate. Antandrus (talk) 02:27, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
20. Support inasmuch as I am quite sure that the candidate is possessed of the sound judgment, civil disposition, deliberative demeanor (I am most heartened by his construing IAR rather reservedly, although Cyde's deletion of Child Wikipedians was surely not, to my even-more-process-oriented eye, an appropriate invocation thereof), and conversance with policy the presence of which is quite auspicious in a prospective admin, such that I think one can conclude with a much confidence that the net effect on the project of Khukri's being sysopped should be positive. Joe 02:28, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
21. Annoyed-because-I-would-have-liked-to-have-nominated-him-myself-support (Postlethwaite, that's the 3rd candidate you've stolen from me!). Has greatly improved since last RfA, great work with user warnings project, etc. More like this one, please! – Riana_ऋ 02:48, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
22. Support by level-headedness and Q3. Lack of mainspace edits is not too relevant. –Pomte 03:27, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
23. Support. An experienced and reliable editor. --Muchness 03:40, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
24. --Phoenix 03:44, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
25. Watchlist Support. I supported before, then I saw Khukri's great work at the WP:UW project and I will definitely support again! -- Renesis (talk) 03:51, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
26. Support - a very good and reliable editor..Good Luck..----Cometstyles 04:14, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
27. Support - Demonstrates stellar communication skills with other users and a long-time editor with plenty of experience. No reason why he shouldn't be given extra tools to deal with vandalism and other related tasks. -- _Hdt83 ^Chat 07:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
28. Support I like the idea! Jmlk17 08:54, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
29. I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this message! - 10:44, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
30. Support you didn't need a Jimbo quote to convince me. Khukri is a reliable Wikipedian. —Anas ^talk? 11:44, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
31. Support I think he will do a fine job. Having another template guru with access is never a bad thing. I like his answer re: WP:IAR. It's one of the best I have heard. JodyB _talk 12:44, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
32. Support An excellent user, nice strong answers to questions and has greatly improved since the last RfA, good luck to you! The Sunshine Man 13:19, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
33. Support Seems highly qualified. --St.daniel ^Talk 13:26, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
34. Support Good candidate for adminship. Captain panda 13:30, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
35. Support I was a bit disappointed with Khukri's decision to close his first RfA after a few opposes regarding his activity levels, but I can see now that there appears to be no problems with giving Khukhri the tools at this time. He's a great candidate, and should do fine as an administrator. Nishkid64 (talk) 17:29, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
36. Support, a great user and good answers to questions. Tim.bounceback^{(review me! | talk | contribs | ubxen)} 18:14, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
37. Support - resilience displayed in helping maintain the user warning project is outstanding; logical communication is a plus. Just promise you won't fully protect them all if you become an admin ;) Gracenotes^T § 18:31, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
38. Support. I've found him level headed, dedicated and a pleasure to work with.--Kubigula (talk) 21:21, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
39. Support I tend to like a candidate that has devoted a lot of time to at least one article at least once in their tenure in WP. In Khukri's case, this has not happened and he's had no or few mainspace edits this week or this month. This has the potential of making someone lose touch with editors who write; people that the admins administer over. However, I do not oppose or am neutral about Khukri...just a different kind of editor.VK35 21:31, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
40. support this person who has been here for many years with a good history of admiration yuckfoo 00:04, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
41. Support: Has some good experience, and my interaction with him when discussing the user warnings suggests he's a reasonable person with the proper temperament for an admin; civil and reasoned. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 02:29, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
42. Support Thought that this user already was one. I would certainly trust them and expect that they would be a great admin. GDonato (talk) 11:37, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
43. OpposeSupport, but wish I'd been told about this so that I could co-nom/support earlier :~). Martinp23 13:03, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
44. Support all that has to be said.... Booksworm Talk to me! 13:47, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
45. Support F'n-A yeah --Infrangible 17:53, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
46. Support--Agεθ020 (ΔT • ФC) 19:57, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
47. Support of course. It was about time. :-) Húsönd 23:03, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
48. Support Real96 10:31, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
49. Rettetast 19:28, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
50. suppport per nom, Pomte, Hdt83, Lucasbfr, Pascal, Heimstern and others. JoshuaZ 20:31, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
51. PeaceNT 10:37, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
52. Support--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:10, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
53. Strong support - I've had very good interactions w/ this clever wikipedian. Go ahead. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 18:45, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
54. Support - it's time. Good candidate. Georgewilliamherbert 20:34, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
55. Support A very responsible, intelligent, thoughtful and insightful Wikipedian, one whom I feel sure will handle the responsibilities of adminship appropriately. Askari Mark (Talk) 16:18, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
56. Support +1 for the "he's not already?" crowd.↔NMajdan•talk 20:44, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
57. Support - pile on. - Richard Cavell 04:21, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
58. Support What a shame that such a veteran contributor who has consistently demonstrated his competence has yet to be entrusted with sysop rights. AmiDaniel (talk) 07:35, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
59. Support come on board. cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 11:18, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
60. Support - Looks good to me! James086^{Talk | Email} 14:39, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
61. Support, no reason not to.--Wizardman 14:44, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
62. I totally meant to support earlier but forgot. —dgies^t_c 16:43, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
63. Strong Support He will be a good admin.!!!!!!Felixboy 20:05, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
64. Support. Based on interactions with and observations of Khurkri at WP:UW, I believe nominee has a temperament well-suited for adminship. Mature, level-headed, listens and responds thoughtfully, and excels at fostering consensus among differing opinions. Even if sysop status was a big deal, this one is an easy call. -- Satori Son 03:33, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
65. Support. The quote was maybe a just bit much (very 'wear sunscreen' ;) but that obviously doesn't change anything. After reviewing his contributions, I don't see a reason why he shouldn't get the bit. -- Seed 2.0 17:21, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Neutral

neutral for lack of mainspace ediots that the only thing luckingOo7565 22:20, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Understand your concern, but can you be more specific? He's got over 2,000. Ryan Postlethwaite 22:24, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stricken comment by user who's spammed every single RfA with awkward, irrelevant comments.--Húsönd 22:56, 16 May 2007 (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.