Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kappa

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Kappa

final (30/14/1) ending 07:05 8 June 2005 (UTC) I've had an account since October 2004, and have over 8,000 edits. Although I have different opinions from many wikipedians I believe I always remain civil, and when I have an edit conflict I generally find a compromise or walk away.

I watch New Pages and especially candidates for speedy deletion a lot, (looking for things that can be fixed), so it would be helpful to be able to delete real junk. If I delete something that looks like it was a speedy candidate but a good faith effort, I would be able to communicate the reason for that deletion. Also I would like to be able to view previously speedied articles, to see if there was content worth recreating. Kappa 07:12, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Self-nomination Kappa 07:26, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Support

  1. Support.-gadfium
  2. Support. Kappa was the user who finally convinced me to register here. Excellent janitorial work, and has done the often neglected task of salvaging countless articles form the Speedy deletin category. Excellent work throughout! Sjakkalle 09:21, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  3. Support. —Xezbeth 15:49, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)
  4. support Kingturtle 18:50, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  5. support  =Nichalp (Talk)= 19:05, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)
  6. Support Based on my experience with this person on Bemani articles (btw, ever considered bring Dance Dance Revolution to a featured article?) SYSS Mouse 19:38, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  7. As per Radiant. I trust him to use his powers only for consensus, never for evil. Meelar (talk) 19:40, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)
  8. Support. Disturbingly good with a mob and bucket. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 20:05, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  9. Support, a good contributor who can definitely be trusted with speedy deletion. JYolkowski // talk 20:46, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  10. Strong Support. I often find myself having an opposing viewpoint to Kappa on VfD, but the user's civility has been noteworthy, and the user is anything but trigger-happy with deletions.--Scimitar 21:39, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  11. Mgm|(talk) 22:25, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)
  12. Support. We disagree on many things, but Kappa should certainly be allowed to wield the mop and bucket. --TenOfAllTrades (talk/contrib) 01:52, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  13. Support from me, too. One of the more rational voices on vfd. Grutness...wha? 01:55, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  14. This should be no big deal. JuntungWu 02:12, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  15. →Iñgōlemo← talk 02:41, 2005 Jun 2 (UTC)
  16. Support Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:35, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  17. Sure thing With Kappa, all articles are safe.Klonimus 05:41, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  18. Support. Great user, trustworthy, and very helpful. As long as you're not a mischeivious water imp. — Knowledge Seeker দ 06:14, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  19. Support. Keep up the good work!--Jondel 08:11, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  20. Support --BaronLarf 11:26, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
  21. Support. In general I don't like self-nominations, but Kappa is a good exception to a general rule. --Unfocused 16:30, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  22. Support - strong editor. Johntex 23:48, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  23. Support. Sure; adminship is no big deal. Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 01:50, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)
  24. Support. – ugen64 04:44, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  25. Support--Duk 16:08, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  26. Support. Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 22:35, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  27. Support extreme inclusionist :) We need balance or something.  Grue  05:34, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  28. Support The votes opposing Kappa for adminship have spoken even more eloquently of his good qualities than those in favor. To call him an extreme inclusionist is simply incorrect. [1] [2] [3].--Tony Sidaway|Talk 17:46, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  29. Sypport ~~~~ 18:43, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  30. Support тəzєті 01:34, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Sorry, I don't see enough substantial contributions to articles to merit adminship yet, and the two articles cited as examples of his contributions are not much better than stubs. Willing to support in the future should this change. Gamaliel 15:16, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  2. Oppose. Extreme inclusionist. RickK 20:35, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
    Inclusionism has no bearing on being a sysop. Extreme undeletionism, on the other hand, would be a problem. – ugen64 06:00, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    This is of course, merely your own personal opinion, and has no bearing on my own opinion, nor on the validity of my vote. RickK 23:42, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)
    I used to think it was only the deletionists that got opposed on this ground. (Oh wait, I already opposed TBSDY for inclusionism. My bad!)  :) → Ingoolemo ← talk 02:43, 2005 Jun 8 (UTC)
  3. Oppose, I agree with RickK and I also don't see much participation in areas outside the school debate and vfd--nixie 01:42, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  4. Oppose. If there's a balance outside the schools/VFD vote, I would like to see it. Mike H 15:17, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)
  5. Oppose. Sorry, but I agree with the Oppose votes above, and also note that two of the four things Kappa wants admin powers for seem to be housekeeping tasks that anyone can perform (delete copyvios and post "test" messages). Bishonen | talk 23:25, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    Anyone can list copyvios for deletion, but only an admin can actually delete them. Also {{test}} messages assume that test pages have been deleted already, so it only makes sense if an admin sends them. Kappa 00:05, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    We must be at cross purposes here. I used to post lots of {{test}} messages before I was an admin, without any page deletion being involved, and it seemed to make fine sense (click on the link and see). The same with deleting copyvios (you're asked to start by deleting text, not pages) Anyway, never mind, the weightier part of my objection was the concerns of RicKK and Mike above, so I'll leave my vote at Oppose. Bishonen | talk 01:14, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  6. Absolutely not: The reasons for wishing admin status ring false, and Kappa routinely ignores existing deletion policy on VfD. One should not become an admin simply to try to pull articles out of deletion. You can already remove speedy tags, already add content to articles to keep them from being speedies, and already go to VfU and argue for restoration of improper deletions. Reaching into the deletion log and undeleting articles is not valid by anyone. VfU is required for every single one. Geogre 23:48, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    I already do those things (except I don't ignore policy AFAIK), I just want to be able to view deleted articles without asking, I'm certainly happy to take them through VfU. But really it's frustrating to keep looking at things which need to be speedied but not be able to zap them, even inclusionists want to delete some things. Kappa 23:58, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  7. Oppose. I have the same concerns as mentioned by others here. I will also note that Kappa is extremely inclusionist on Wikipedia:Categories for deletion and Wikipedia:Templates for deletion, and some types of categories and templates can be, sometimes, more disruptive to Wikipedia (in the sense that they affect far more pages) than many individual articles that are listed on WP:VFD. —Lowellian (talk) 13:51, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)
  8. I agree with many of the concerns listed above. Carbonite | Talk 17:04, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  9. Oppose Does not meet my admin criterion. If you disagree and think that you do and would like me to reconsider, please leave a note on my userpage, jguk 19:15, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  10. CryptoDerk 06:41, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)
  11. I expressed concern earlier about Kappa's lack of response to his talk page. If he had addressed that matter, he would quite possibly have persuaded me to support his RFA. However, as he hasn't responded to it, I feel I have to oppose, as I think communicating is a very important part of adminship. Radiant_* 22:46, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)
    • I respect your judgement, I don't really want to nag you for examples of noncommunication. Kappa 22:56, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • Support, although I rarely agree with Kappa it's been a pleasure working with him. Radiant_* 11:23, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC) I'm withdrawing my vote because it appears to me that Kappa often does not respond to comments on his talk page. For a self-nom, I'm not sure that's wise. Radiant_* 15:10, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)
  12. Andre (talk) 23:01, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)
  13. Oppose. Either pushing an agenda, or simply a troll. Routinely wastes other peoples' time with frivolous VFU nominations. Wile E. Heresiarch 03:12, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • I strongly disagree with your assertion that Kappa might be a troll. Do you have any examples of Kappa engaging in trollish behavior? My interactions with him have shown that Kappa's behavior is a model for others in civility and good conduct. As for his VFU nominations, Kappa's nominations have nearly all got some undelete votes, so calling them "frivolous" is in my view completely unjustified. Sjakkalle (Check!) 06:18, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  14. Oppose. Neutralitytalk 21:07, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)

Neutral

  1. I'm not ready to vote in support. On examining recent VfD's, some of Kappa's comments are annoying responses that really amount to nothing more than "Keep, because I think this article should be kept." Others, however, are well-articulated and move the discussion forward. He is not a robot-like inclusionist by any means. In response to my comment below he gave examples of some good short articles he contributed, and he has over 3000 edits in the main namespace, but on looking at them it seems to me that he mostly does minor touchups. However, becoming an admin is not supposed to be a big deal and I don't see any particular reason to oppose, either. Dpbsmith (talk) 23:29, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Comments

  • You did set the "UserName" entry wrong in the vote here section - which some users consider evidence of a lack of understanding of the machinery of Wikipedia. --JuntungWu 15:48, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Thanks for fixing it, I'll try and be more careful next time. Kappa 16:46, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? (Please read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.)
A. As mentioned, speedy deletions, and sending {{test}} messages. Also I'd enjoy deleting copyvios. I'm quite likely to un-block things when there seems to be no further need.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A. Jam and Lewis and Ganta Hospital, mainly because they help balance coverage of underrepresented areas. Also I took part in efforts to reach a compromise over the school issue.
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 will deal with it in the future?
A. If I am in a conflict over editing, I generally look for a compromise, or other opinions, or I walk away. I've never wanted to use admin powers, except one case where someone was persistedly adding copyvio to an article (that eventually resolved itself however).
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/e/q/Wikipedia%7ERequests_for_adminship_Kappa_b6eb.html"