Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kralizec!

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

Kralizec![edit]

Final (47/0/0); Ended Tue, 11 Dec 2007 22:54:35 (UTC)

Kralizec! (talk · contribs) - Co-nomination by Khukri & Kubigula - It is with great pleasure that we present Kralizec! for your consideration.

Co-nomination by Khukri: This exceptional editor has been with the project since March 2005 and in that time has accrued nearly 12,000 edits across the project. Kralizec! first came to my attention as a member of the user warnings project as a very clear and concise editor. His input has been greatly appreciated and is usually one of the first to help with questions at WP:UTM or direct editors to the correct guideline, essay or process, which to me demonstrated his clear understanding of policy. To many of you he will also be a familiar name at WP:AN and WP:ANI assisting with problems that don't necessarily require admin intervention. It was his informative responses here that led me to believe he was an admin, and was very suprised when I found out recently that he wasn't.

Even though it was his behind the scene work that led me to this nomination, upon investigation I have become extremely impressed by someone who is a seemingly tireless article editor and contributor. As one of the driving forces behind WikiProject Ships, he has singularly created a good number articles which have included quite a few Did you know's. He has also been an integral part in raising one article to FA status and another to GA status amongst his ~5,500 mainspace edits.

It's is my great pleasure to nominate Kralizec!, an editor whose across the board contributions I admire and wholeheartedly recommend to the community. Khukri 09:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Co-nomination by Kubigula: I am most familiar with Kralizec! from seeing his comments at WT:UTM and WT:UW, and I always know when I see his name that the comment will be both friendly and helpful. Like Khukri, I was operating under the assumption that he was already an admin, and it is past time to make this happen. As I did my due diligence prior to co-nominating him, I was consistently impressed by his contributions.

Kralizec! is a excellent well rounded contributor to Wikipedia. He is very active in several Wikiprojects, a quality mainspace contributor (and he has been for a while[1]), a donor of images [2], a vandal fighter, active in Wikipedia space, and friendly and helpful to boot.

In short, he has the complete package of background and experience to make good use of the tools, and I have absolutely no doubt that the encyclopedia will benefit if he gets them.--Kubigula (talk) 03:49, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:
I am honoured to accept the nomination. Kralizec! (talk) 21:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Questions for the candidate[edit]

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia as an administrator. It is recommended that you answer these optional questions to provide guidance for participants:

1. What admin work do you intend to take part in?
A: My initial uses of the tools would be in those areas where I currently frequent, but only have limited, non-admin abilities such as Templates for deletion, Administrators' noticeboard, and Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. At TfD, I would thoughtfully conclude discussions and implement decisions as per both consensus and policy. However keeping WP:DGFA in mind, I would be careful to never close any debate that I have participated in. On AN and AN/I, I would use the tools to address issues that need admin intervention such as reports of block evasion, legal threats, and cases of complex vandalism. Likewise, I am excited about being able to actually fix the issue when someone reports that the DYK update is overdue.
Other areas where I would use the tools include reducing any backlogs at Administrators' noticeboard/3RR, Requests for page protection, WP:AIV, and especially Category:Proposed deletion. For PRODed articles, I feel that my experience in de-stubbing combined with my knowledge of Wikipedia’s guidelines and official policies gives me a good perspective for determining which articles should be deleted, which should be sent to AfD, and which ones are salvageable.
Additionally, as I become more proficient with the tools, I would like to get involved in WP:CSD and WP:DRV.
2. What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
A: To date I have created around 30 articles, with nine having been selected for DYK. I also had the pleasure of working as part of WikiProject Oklahoma's collaborative efforts to bring Tulsa, Oklahoma up to FA status and Oklahoma City bombing up to GA status. I especially enjoy doing “back office” work with templates and categories in order to give our naval articles a consistent, standardized look and feel. To that end, I have created over 30 navigational templates and 70 categories.
Photography is another area where I have taken great pleasure on Wikipedia. So far I have been able to contribute over 60 of my own photographic works either here or on Commons. I am extremely honoured that two of my pictures were nominated for picture of the day (one here, and one at Commons), and while they were not successful, just being nominated is a fantastic compliment to a budding amateur photographer! In addition to my photo contributions, I have also created five map illustrations.
My participation in WikiProject Ships has been both highly productive and a lot of fun. In July I worked as a member of the team that refined the project’s assessment criteria and in October I added additional functionality to the template parser of the {{WikiProject Ships}} banner. I also worked very diligently in the article assessment drive that saw our project actively tag over 3700 articles and assess over 6200 in just 54 days. Most recently, on December 2nd I concluded the nomination and selection process where we chose the project’s first ever barnstar.
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: Earlier this year a frustrated editor posted an AN/I request asking for assistance on the Walt Disney World Monorail System article.
On investigating the situation, I discovered that new editor HeadMouse (talk · contribs · logs · block log) was having WP:COPYVIO issues with several of his text and image contributions, and extreme WP:OWN issues on the article in question. The more I and others tried to help him understand Wikipedia’s official policies and guidelines, he responded with increasing levels of incivility and belligerence. When various admins blocked him for WP:POINT or WP:3RR violations, he would say we were just ganging up on him, or claim the admin in question did not understand that he was only trying to improve the article. Within a few days of a block’s expiration, he would quickly return to his old obstinate tricks.
Wikipedia is at its very best when editors work collaboratively to build a better encyclopedia, so dealing with editors who refuse to read –let alone follow– our official policies and guidelines can be intensely frustrating for everyone involved. While I honestly believe that HeadMouse really just wanted the Walt Disney World Monorail System article to be the best possible article, his refusal to listen to others and work toward consensus really showed me the importance of patience and assuming good faith. It also illustrated to me how blocks can be an important tool for protecting the project from disruption, but only when they are used thoughtfully and with understanding.

General comments[edit]

Please keep discussion constructive and civil. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review Special:Contributions/Kralizec! before commenting.

Discussion[edit]

Support[edit]
  1. Support - as nom, and first one comes for free. Khukri 22:56, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support! Kralizec is awesome - dedicated, experienced, and level-headed. TomTheHand (talk) 23:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support as co-nom. Good luck!--Kubigula (talk) 23:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support Excellent contributions, and very thorough answers to questions. Master of Puppets Care to share? 23:17, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support. (I was going to put an exclamation mark after the support in honor of your username, but saw that TomTheHand beat me to it) Great answers to questions, good luck. Malinaccier (talk • contribs) 23:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support Epbr123 (talk) 23:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support. I've actually been mulling over a own nomination of Kralizec for quite some time. Kralizec is a article writer, photographer, and wikignome with a wide breadth of experience with the project. I've worked with him on a few difficult issues involving copyrights and exasperated users, and have been impressed with the way he's handled things. Although he can be tough and bold when he needs to be, I'd be remiss if I described him as anything but a very cautious fellow. That he frequently solicits opinions and advice from others before acting, though, only makes me more confident in trusting him with administrator tools. I am sure that he'll do a great job with TfD, PRODs, complex vandalism, or wherever he chooses to help out. ×Meegs 23:35, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support - An excellent Candidate. PookeyMaster (talk) 00:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support Kralizec is experienced, friendly, dedicated, and meticulous in all aspects of his work. I have complete confidence in his ability to wield the mop without spilling the bucket. Maralia (talk) 03:48, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support - I have no concerns about the the fitness of the candidate to correctly wield the tools properly. -MBK004 05:15, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support, always happy to see another member of the "Obscure Dune Username" club make the grade! Lankiveil (talk) 08:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
  12. Support. Another worthy candidate. Axl (talk) 10:35, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support per Dune reference in username, use of exclamation mark in username, and (third most important) being a good and sane editor. Neil ☎ 11:54, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support per nom statement. --Siva1979Talk to me 12:14, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support completely support. Level headed, wouldn't go crazy with the tools. Woody (talk) 13:12, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support - Just excellent. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up® 14:54, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  17. I'm Mailer Diablo (talk) and I approve this message! - 15:23, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support; I see no reason not to. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:51, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support. Looks good, no issues, meets every possible standard, great User page, can be trusted. Bearian (talk) 17:53, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  20. — Rudget contributions 18:33, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support!. You look like a fine editor. J-ſtanTalkContribs 20:07, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support - yup. Looks just fine - Alison ❤ 20:58, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support A great candidate! Midorihana(talk)(contribs) 22:02, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support Seen user around, and have been pleased with what I have seen. Strong editor, and will do a great job with the mop. Jmlk17 22:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  25. I must say, I was expecting this to be a drama filled RfA, since I was so sure you were already an admin, and the only reason this would exist is that you had resigned your flag. Weird. Oh well, excellent candidate. I (talk) 22:51, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Support Yup, looks good! :D GlassCobra 23:34, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Support unreservedly. Kablammo (talk) 00:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  28. No reason to oppose. Only reason to support is the Dune reference. ;) - TwoOars (Rev) 01:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Support, much experience shown in wikipedia-namespace, and theres no reason to oppose.--Sunny910910 (talk|Contributions) 02:29, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Support Contributions check reveals a very solid candidate with no issues, would use the mop wisely. Orderinchaos 02:56, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Nothing wrong here. --DarkFalls talk 06:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Support NHRHS2010 talk 03:14, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Support.↔NMajdan•talk 16:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Support. Absolutely. Dedicated, good user. --MoRsE (talk) 21:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Support - no-nonsense contributor. Gatoclass (talk) 21:16, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Support - --NAHID 21:18, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Support -- especially for the WikiProject Ships work ... despite my fears of a new Kabalistic Konspiracy. C'mon -- Kralizec! co-nominated by Khukri & Kubigula -- doesn't this bother anyone else? Isn't anyone else paying attention here? (Wikipedia Review anyone?) --A. B. (talk) 15:15, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • There is no Kabal. If you persist in these baseless allegations, you may well find yourself blocked by Kurykh or Kukini.--Kubigula (talk) 18:17, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I feel like I've stumbled into a Mortal Kombat game... at any rate, there is a Kabal. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Support Seen him around occasionally & messmates' comments inspire confidence. Johnbod (talk) 15:46, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Support FlowerpotmaN·(t) 02:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Support Kralizec is a very helpful and dedicated wikipedian. A mop in his hand would look as normal as a paintbrush in a painter's. I have complete confidence in him. JERRY talk contribs 04:43, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Support as he seems committed to improving the project. Best, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 05:48, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Support --ROGER DAVIES talk 08:50, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Support Tim Q. Wells (talk) 19:05, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Support Per Khukri's nomination statement. --WriterListener (talk) 00:36, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  45. Excellent user. Acalamari 02:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Support Kralizec! has done great work on Oklahoma-related topics. From time to time, the Oklahoma City bombing article attracts people pushing conspiracy theories with unreliable sources or not sources at all. Kralizec! has handled these situations well, with civility. Certainly, Kralizec! would make an excellent admin. --Aude (talk) 18:22, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Support good user. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:35, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose[edit]
Neutral[edit]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Kralizec!&oldid=1146518554"