Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2006/Vote/Kirill Lokshin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Statement

I've been a Wikipedian since June 2005 and an admin since October of the same year; at one point or another, I think I've tried my hand at most of the more interesting activities on Wikipedia. (Most of my time is spent working here, if anyone is curious.) I've participated in a handful of ArbCom cases, both as an involved party and as a not-entirely-mute member of the peanut gallery.

Broadly speaking, I think the current ArbCom setup is more-or-less successful (aside, of course, from what seems to be a chronic lack of time on the part of the Arbitrators, and the resulting slow process). There has been a certain tendency, in some cases, to dodge the underlying problem in favor of a simpler superficial one, thus not really resolving the fundamental dispute; but this has been limited enough that it does not necessarily indicate a harmful trend.

Aside from that, I won't descend into any obscenely long ruminations on wiki-philosophical issues here; if anyone is interested in my opinion on something in particular, please don't hesitate to ask!

Questions

[edit] Support

  1. Support Mike Dillon 00:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  2. Support (strongest possible) Jd2718 00:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  3. --Ideogram 00:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  4. Support – Elisson • T • C • 00:15, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  5. I'm Mailer Diablo and I approve this candidate! - 00:16, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  6. What are your orders, boss?A great admin and editor, no questions possible. -- Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 00:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  7. Support Carom 00:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  8. Alex Bakharev 00:25, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  9. ++Lar: t/c 00:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  10. --Ligulem 00:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  11. Strong Support. - crz crztalk 00:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  12. Strong. Coredesat 00:48, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  13. Strong Support. Titoxd(?!?) 00:48, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
    BhaiSaab talk 00:51, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
    This user is banned. --Srikeit 08:55, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
  14. Certainly Jaranda wat's sup 00:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  15. Certainly. — Nearly Headless Nick {L} 12:44, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  16. Hello32020 00:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  17. Sam 01:08, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  18. Strong support. Amazing dedication to the project and superior handling of the most difficult content- and user-related controversies. --Irpen 01:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  19. Peta 01:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  20. Duk 01:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  21. --Birgitte§β ʈ Talk 02:08, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  22. Very strong support. Excellent judgement, unquestionable dedication. --RobthTalk 02:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  23. Thatcher131 02:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  24. KPbIC 02:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  25. —Mira 03:11, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  26. ←Humus sapiens ну? 03:22, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  27. Ral315 (talk) (my votes) 03:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  28. Sandy (Talk) 03:56, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  29. Ars Scriptor 03:56, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  30. Warofdreams talk 04:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  31. John254 04:11, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  32. Support Excellent candidate, friendly fellow. Xoloz 04:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  33. Rebecca 04:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  34. Terence Ong 04:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  35. Opabinia regalis 04:55, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  36. Support Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 05:00, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  37. ATren 05:25, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  38. Khoikhoi 05:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  39. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  40. semper fi — Moe 05:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  41. Strongly supported. Serpent's Choice 05:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  42. weak support. Peace. --Nielswik(talk) 06:00, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  43. Support --Riley 06:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  44. Support Bucketsofg 06:10, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  45. Nufy8 06:11, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  46. Dylan Lake 06:13, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  47. Support: I've appreciated Kirill's level head many times, a great candidate. Walkerma 06:15, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  48. feydey 06:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  49. Aminz 06:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  50. -- Tawker 07:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  51. Fo shizzle. Joe 07:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  52. Support. Sound judgement. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  53. Support. Sensible hard working editor who seems totally committed to the project. Giano 09:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  54. Weak support. – Chacor 09:39, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  55. cj | talk 09:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  56. Angus McLellan (Talk) 10:21, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  57. SUPPORT-SUPPORT-SUPPORT!!! Great task force leader - Kirill should be a great ArbCon leader! NDCompuGeek 10:25, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  58. Support Carl Logan 10:44, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  59. Support - Good luck. -- Szvest Ω Wiki Me Up ® 10:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  60. Shanes 11:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  61. Support Charles Matthews 12:39, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  62. --May the Force be with you! Shreshth91 12:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  63. SuperMachine 13:10, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  64. Support. Crum375 13:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  65. Support. --Muchness 13:37, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  66. Shyam (T/C) 13:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  67. Support i've only had good experiences of this candidate. --Mcginnly | Natter 14:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  68. Support --CBD 14:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  69. Support Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  70. I don't know him that well but he seems like a sensible user.--§hanel 14:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  71. Support. Answers to my questions were satisfactory. Fys. “Ta fys aym”. 15:15, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  72. Support *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 15:39, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  73. yes -- Drini 16:25, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  74. ➨ ЯEDVERS 16:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  75. Support. I am sure he will be able to do justice to the post. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 16:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  76. TewfikTalk 16:51, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  77. Support. Great candidate, very hardworking and considerate. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 16:54, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  78. good candidate.  ALKIVAR™ ☢ 16:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  79. Support Good answers to questions, respected by several other arbcom candidates. AnonEMouse (squeak) 17:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  80. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 18:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  81. Support 100%, I was unaware Kirill was even an admin, in a heated edit war they were able to bring light to the situation and broaden the audience and come to a reasonable middle ground for everyone, as well as develop guidelines around it that everyone was able to work within. --NuclearZer0 18:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  82. Moral Support  ♪♫ĽąĦĩŘǔ_Қ♫♪  (Ŧ) 19:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  83. Support -- Mytwocents 19:14, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  84. Every time I run across him—and I've run across him a lot on both project and article pages—he's been both smart and wise. This is my only vote either way.qp10qp 19:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  85. Strong support. kind, civil, wise, measured and generally fantastic, trustworthy Wikipedian. Can't ask for any more than that. Regards, —Celestianpower háblame 20:10, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  86. Support --Duke of Duchess Street 20:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  87. Support "Snorkel | Talk" 20:50, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  88. Support User even fields edits to his own contributions in an evenhanded and good faith manner, is good at finding comprimise in that regard, and has generally proven himself to be level-headed and able to listen to both sides of a debate. Larry Dunn 20:56, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  89. Support IZAK 20:57, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  90. Support Lincher 21:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  91. Support --Zleitzen 21:15, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  92. Support intelligent, kind and consistently helpful- everything a Wikipedian should be Stilgar135 21:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  93. Support. No interactions with him so far, but I like the persuasive answers. Sandstein 21:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  94. Strongest Possible Support - has repeatedly demonstrated to me an excellent knowledge of wikipedia guidelines (often, better than anyone else's, including my own :-(, unfortunately) and remarkable tact. At this point, I'm just curious how fast he gets to the 100 votes threshold, and whether anyone else has gotten there faster earlier. Badbilltucker 22:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  95. Support BlueShirts 22:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  96. Support-- danntm T C 22:39, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  97. Support --CComMack (t–c) 22:50, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  98. Gurch 23:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  99. Michael Snow 23:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  100. Support. Unlike many of the other voters (it's a novelty to type "voters" rather than "!voters" on a project page), I have not yet had occasion to interact with this editor, apparently to my loss. The strong support across the community is a valuable addition to the candidate's already fine credentials. Newyorkbrad 01:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  101. Support  Funky Monkey  (talk)  01:04, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  102. Support. —Viriditas | Talk 01:26, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  103. Support. For the leader of the Military Project. TSO1D 01:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  104. Support —Quarl (talk) 2006-12-05 02:10Z
  105. Support Amoruso 03:33, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  106. riana_dzasta 03:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  107. -Royalguard11(Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 03:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  108. Support. Silensor 06:08, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  109. Support--Ling.Nut 06:34, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  110. Support. — TKD::Talk 07:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  111. Support Duja► 08:18, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  112. Support. --Arnzy (talk • contribs) 08:46, 5
  113. Support--ragesoss 09:00, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  114. Support - trustworthy candidate. Metamagician3000 09:42, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  115. Support, inspite of the frequent use of the words "meh". --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 11:19, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  116. Support. —Serein 11:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  117. Support,  YDAM TALK 13:01, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  118. —Nightstallion (?) 13:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  119. Support. Grokmoo 13:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  120. Support Thε Halo Θ 14:31, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  121. Support Coemgenus 16:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  122. Support -- Ganeshk (talk) 16:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  123. Support. --Endroit 18:11, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  124. Support strongest possible, one of the absolute best and broadest experienced wikipedians. Rlevse 18:19, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  125. Support Easy decision. --kingboyk 19:19, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  126. Support. I wanted to oppose, just because I'm afraid the time-consuming tasks at arbcom will take him away from his article editing work, which is much appreciated. But I can't bring myself to actually vote oppose. :) – Quadell (talk) (random) 20:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  127. Support Great candidate. Nishkid64 20:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  128. Support. Experienced. --Fang Aili talk 20:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  129. Support The success of the military history wikiproject is in good measure due to Kirill. One of the most productive Wikipedians I know - not merely via his own history but for what he brings out in others. My only excuse for hesitating is that he's so useful in different areas I'd kind of rather not see arbitration eat up his wikitime. Yet if he wants it, let him go for it. I'm certain he'll be a credit to the committee. DurovaCharge! 21:09, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  130. Wow. Andre (talk) 22:28, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  131. Support. No any doubts. Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 23:28, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  132. Steel 00:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  133. Support Earned my vote. -- Kendrick7talk 00:37, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  134. Support —ptk✰fgs 03:16, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  135. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 04:17, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  136. Support --SteveMcCluskey 05:23, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  137. support Pete.Hurd 06:50, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  138. Support Tremendous asset to the project. I can only expect that he will continue his outstanding history of service on Arbcom. Agne 08:15, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  139. Obviously. MaxSem 09:04, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  140. Addhoc 11:20, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  141. Kusma (討論) 13:00, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  142. Support. --Merlinme 13:40, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  143. Support Fred Bauder 15:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  144. Strong support - strongest candidate, I've worked with him on medical topics, one of the best editors I've ever met. NCurse work 16:10, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  145. Yes Spartaz 18:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  146. BruceHallman 19:18, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  147. Sam Korn (smoddy) 19:26, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  148. Support. Kafziel Talk 20:30, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  149. Support -- EdJohnston 21:02, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  150. Support Jakew 21:34, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  151. Support -- Polaris999 22:51, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  152. Support. Excellent answers to the questions. —Lantoka ( talk | contrib) 23:17, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  153. Good work, good answers. Okino 23:21, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  154. Support. Very responsible and sensible user. –Heaven's Wrath 23:51, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  155. Support Excellent candidate with good answers ▪◦▪≡Ѕirex98≡ 01:05, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  156. Support Most impressed with your Q & A's and very clear, to the point replies. Good for a balanced view too!PEACETalkAbout 01:31, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  157. Support. Orane (talk • cont.) 02:53, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  158. Christopher Parham (talk) 02:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  159. Support. I have been impressed with this user's participation in the Wikipedia project, and would trust their judgment on controversial issues. --Elonka 06:26, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  160. Support. 06:53, 7 December 2006 (UTC) gK
  161. Support -- Renesis (talk) 07:16, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  162. Support obviously, one of the best candidates. Fram 10:26, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  163. Support — Lost(talk) 10:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  164. Support. --Cactus.man ✍ 12:31, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  165. Avi 13:09, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  166. Support. Pia 14:16, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  167. Strong Support, for too many reasons to say them all.--Aldux 15:03, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  168. Support RHB 18:06, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  169. Support ... Kenosis 18:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  170. Support. Candidate has shown participation throughout Wikipedia, and answered questions well. --Danaman5 19:07, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  171. Support Oldelpaso 20:08, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  172. Support per Fram. Grace Note 01:31, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
  173. Strong Support. Solid candidate; I like his answers to the questions. --Idont Havaname (Talk) 05:11, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
  174. Support. Cla68 05:56, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
  175. Support HGB 07:50, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
  176. Support Dragomiloff 13:11, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
  177. Support Kristod (talk) 14:33, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
  178. Suppport I can't say it any better than Durova, so "per Durova." TheronJ 14:58, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
  179. A loss to WP:MILHIST - BanyanTree 18:16, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
  180. Support--VirtualDelight 00:26, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  181. Support Kyriakos 01:57, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  182. Support - Excellent answers to the questions posed to him. --Kyra~(talk) 11:31, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  183. Support Relentless dedication. Raymond Palmer 16:22, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  184. Support Idleguy 19:04, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  185. Support --- Deville (Talk) 19:57, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  186. Strong Support - One I really don't doubt at all about trusting this position. Kirill does very good job in WP:MIL, and clearly has good judgment. CP/M comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 20:36, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  187. Support. enochlau (talk) 00:10, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  188. Strong Support Anyone who can micromanage WP:MIL like Kirill can definatly be trusted with this position. TomStar81 (Talk) 04:49, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  189. Cryptic 12:54, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  190. Pile-on support Stifle (talk) 15:31, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
    Strong Support, I'm sure that Kirill's approach to Wikipedia is very useful for project. Ioakinf 18:41, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  191. Tra (Talk) 22:47, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  192. Support, solid and strong. - Tutmosis 23:34, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  193. older ≠ wiser 03:27, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
  194. jaco♫plane 04:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
  195. Tizio 12:54, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
  196. Support, great candidate. --Gphototalk 14:26, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
  197. I defer to the masses at this point (yes, this is a "pile-on support"). --Cyde Weys 19:08, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
  198. Support.--Berig 19:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
  199. Support --InShaneee 06:46, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  200. Support -- Longhair\talk 08:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  201. Support _dk 09:45, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  202. Michaelas10 (Talk) 19:32, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  203. Support — Omegatron 21:27, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  204. Support GRBerry 23:27, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  205. Support, Mallanox 23:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  206. Sarah Ewart 01:24, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  207. Support --Ali K 02:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  208. Saravask 04:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  209.  Satori Son 04:36, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  210. Strong Support I wasted the last 20mins trying to find something negative about Kirill and only thing I found was the "open for recall" admin thing for which I agree in the case of admins but hope he won't introduce the same once on the ArbCom Lost Kiwi(talk)22:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  211. Support Wetman 23:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  212. Support. the wub "?!" 13:24, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  213. Support. Unequivocal support. Incredible commitment to Wikipedia, works well with the community, level headed, etc. — ERcheck (talk) 18:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  214. Support. Hall Monitor 18:54, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  215. Support. Bastiq▼e demandez 20:10, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
  216. Support. RyanGerbil10(Упражнение В!) 23:20, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
  217. Support. Jitse Niesen (talk) 02:05, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
  218. Support -- Ned Scott 05:51, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
  219. Support. Michael 07:11, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
  220. Samir धर्म 20:30, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
  221. —Centrx→talk • 22:38, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
  222. —Xyrael / 22:49, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
  223. Support Krich (talk) 03:17, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  224. Support --WinHunter (talk) 04:22, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  225. support with above reasoning. Kiwidude 07:53, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  226. Strongest Support. What more can I say about this one?! He quite simply excells at every endevor he puts himself to...I have no doubt he will do likewise as an Arbitrator.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 11:14, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  227. Support NoSeptember 14:34, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  228. Support Huldra 17:50, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  229. Support Statement is not that strong, but definitly support! 18:02, 17 December 2006 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by AQu01rius (talk • contribs).
  230. Support Though, would hate to see you sidetracked from all the great work you do in writing articles and all. --Aude (talk) 18:24, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  231. Support ×Meegs 19:10, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  232. Support Level-headed. Gimmetrow 21:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  233. Support I was not familiar with Kirill Lokshin until now. I'm impressed with his work. 172 | Talk 21:30, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  234. Support - my vote comments. Carcharoth 23:38, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  235. Support Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:49, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Oppose

  1. Oppose. Too unclear. --Sugaar 10:57, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  2. Oppose A weak statement; no indication given why the candidate would be an effective arbitrator. Alan Pascoe 12:25, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  3. Oppose. Sorry,AlexPU 21:30, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  4. Oppose Susanlesch 07:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC) Questions and Village Pump (archive) Susanlesch 16:20, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  5. Oppose candidate's answer to the question regarding SPOV seems to ignore the delicate nature of the controversies that can arise. In particular, it is important to understand that reliability and verifiability are keys to determining how controversies should be described -- and that usually means that the scientific consensus is emphasized in articles that relate to scientific subjects. --ScienceApologist 16:44, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  6. Oppose poor grasp of naming conventions and the role of wikiprojects. Tim! 19:17, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
    oppose lack of qualifications. Kiwidude 07:50, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
    Voted twice, the most recent vote was in support Jaranda wat's sup 19:03, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/r/b/Wikipedia%7EArbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2006_Vote_Kirill_Lokshin_c8b3.html"