User:Kevin
run at Thu Jun 12 02:51:07 2008 GMT
Category talk: 1
Category: 3
Image: 14
Mainspace 3238
Portal talk: 10
Portal: 2
Talk: 258
Template: 4
User talk: 1985
User: 97
Wikipedia talk: 37
Wikipedia: 1005
avg edits per page 1.43
earliest 11:19, 19 August 2005
number of unique pages 4668
total 6654
2005/8 2
2005/9 0
2005/10 1
2005/11 38
2005/12 45
2006/1 37
2006/2 19
2006/3 5
2006/4 212
2006/5 2028
2006/6 437
2006/7 632
2006/8 141
2006/9 0
2006/10 0
2006/11 0
2006/12 0
2007/1 0
2007/2 0
2007/3 0
2007/4 0
2007/5 56
2007/6 854
2007/7 493
2007/8 500
2007/9 130
2007/10 3
2007/11 52
2007/12 48
2008/1 29
2008/2 4
2008/3 15
2008/4 57
2008/5 472
2008/6 344
(green denotes edits with an edit summary (even an automatic one), red
denotes edits without an edit summary)
Mainspace
23 [2]Adelaide
17 [3]American International School Hong Kong
15 [4]Construction
13 [5]List of Christian metal bands
12 [6]Bhutan
10 [7]List of convicted Australian criminals
9 [8]Dji Dieng
9 [9]Linda Strawberry
9 [10]The Tracker
8 [11]Animal rights
8 [12]Coco Marie Austin
8 [13]Today (Australian TV program)
8 [14]Sugar Man
8 [15]1930 British Empire Games
8 [16]Patti LaBelle
Talk:
15 [17]Bhutan
6 [18]Melissa Farley
4 [19]Abir Sabri
4 [20]All-time medal tally of Commonwealth Games
4 [21]Adelaide
4 [22]Game sweatshop
4 [23]Peter Costello
4 [24]American International School Hong Kong
3 [25]Dragan Vasiljkovic
3 [26]Mel Gibson/Archive 2
3 [27]Chelsea Lately
3 [28]Barracuda Networks
3 [29]Animal rights
3 [30]Institute of Robotics in Scandinavia AB
3 [31]Resistivity
Image:
2 [32]Cocainemagcover.jpg
2 [33]Chung negative resistance setup.png
Portal talk:
10 [34]Discrimination/Selected picture
Template:
3 [35]Afc top
User:
33 [36]Kevin/monobook.js
16 [37]Kevin
5 [38]Kevin/AGF Challenge
2 [39]Warcipedia
2 [40]CelticJobber
2 [41]Dfrg.msc
User talk:
133 [42]Kevin
7 [43]InvestorInYou
7 [44]193.226.251.101
5 [45]67.171.76.136
5 [46]Comprendo
5 [47]Mantaka
5 [48]Tijuana Brass
5 [49]StationNT5Bmedia
5 [50]Thekez
4 [51]Pascaweb
4 [52]Craphted
4 [53]210.104.58.60
4 [54]Chzz
4 [55]Bearmonkeycougar
4 [56]Carbine
Wikipedia:
53 [57]Articles for creation/2006-07-11
37 [58]Administrator intervention against vandalism
26 [59]Articles for creation/2006-07-29
22 [60]Articles for creation/2006-07-05
18 [61]Suspected copyright violations
17 [62]Articles for creation/2006-07-16
17 [63]Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
16 [64]Help desk
15 [65]Articles for creation/2006-07-26
14 [66]Administrators' noticeboard
12 [67]Articles for creation/2007-08-21
11 [68]Articles for creation/2006-08-08
10 [69]Articles for creation/2006-07-15
9 [70]Articles for creation/2006-07-12
8 [71]Articles for creation/2006-07-17
Wikipedia talk:
15 [72]Requests for adminship
5 [73]Articles for creation/Archive3
5 [74]RfA Review
2 [75]WikiProject Comics
If there were any problems, please [76]email Interiot or post at
[77]User talk:Interiot.
The edit count was retrieved from this link at 02:51, 12 June 2008 (UTC).
Extended discussion regarding xenocidic's neutral
It is my policy to oppose not to support people who don't read the self-nom instructions properly (because it may indicate inattention to detail) but because of his other contributions, I'll stay neutral for now likely revisit this !vote after I have time to examine them. xenocidic (talk) 12:28, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think there was a glitch in following them, ergo the conclusion may not correctly follow policies as well. However, IMHO, has demonstrated understanding of admin related polices, W.Z.B.W.. Dlohcierekim 13:24, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The very first bolded word consists of just this: "Stop." If people followed the instructions as literally as you want, no one could ever nominate themselves! Those instructions are not very well written and seem more subject to the whims of RFA regulars than they are any genuine attempt to make RFA a workable process for self-noms. What should matter is whether he conveyed his nomination in a way we can understand, which he did. We are not a bureaucracy... people should not be judged based on how well they fill out forms, that kind of stuff is for the DMV, not Wikipedia. --Rividian (talk) 13:40, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Attention to detail is a quality I value in an admin. As it stands now, people might not be sure if he's accepted the nomination! A word of related advice, I'd suggest checking out User:Balloonman/How to pass an RfA#Things that kill RfAs, in particular #3. This is a neutral remember, and as I said above "for now". When I have time to properly review the candidates contributions, I may well switch to support. (Leaning that way after looking at the deleted contribs). xenocidic (talk) 13:48, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am not even supporting this candidate, you'll notice... I really don't care if it passes, I'm just objecting to a silly and bureaucratic attitude which you seem to have conveniently waited until barely a week after your own RFA to display. "people might not be sure if he's accepted the nomination"... that's sheer bureaucratic speech. This seems like a good rule to ignore... it seems you're asking him to follow it for the sake of following it, which is exactly the sort of attitude Jimbo created WP:IAR to whack with the cluebat. --Rividian (talk) 14:52, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I opposed left neutrals for this reason before my RFA as well [1][2]. Attention to detail is a quality I value in an admin. P.S. The "people might not know if he's accepted" was a bit of a joke. xenocidic (talk) 15:01, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Attention to pointless detail is more like it. The only reason you can come up with for following that rule, you just admitted, is "a bit of a joke". --Rividian (talk) 15:08, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For the third time, attention to detail is a quality I value in an admin. Properly reading and following the self-nom instructions is an indication of such a quality. Out of respect for the candidate, you can visit my talk page if you wish to discuss this further. xenocidic (talk) 15:20, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
But it's a pointless detail, an instruction to be followed only for the sake of following it. I applaud anyone who ignores such a rule. --Rividian (talk) 15:22, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And you should support it. Honestly - it's a neutral - you've made your feelings about my voting behaviour known - out of respect for the candidate, you can visit my talk page if you wish to discuss this further. Some disinterested party - please hide this long section unrelated to the candidate. xenocidic (talk) 15:36, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
