Edit count for Keilana[edit]

Edit count
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. 
User:Keilana

    run at Sun Jan 6 03:45:37 2008 GMT

Category talk:         15
Category:              18
Image talk:            1
Image:                 15
Mainspace              5783
MediaWiki talk:        2
Portal talk:           2
Portal:                92
Talk:                  511
Template talk:         2
Template:              106
User talk:             5039
User:                  394
Wikipedia talk:        106
Wikipedia:             1173
avg edits per page     1.39
earliest               17:09, 29 April 2007
number of unique pages 9540
total                  13259

2007/4   2
2007/5   658
2007/6   382
2007/7   2236
2007/8   2718
2007/9   1112
2007/10  1193
2007/11  2620
2007/12  1902
2008/1   436

(green denotes edits with an edit summary (even an automatic one), red denotes
edits without an edit summary)

                  Mainspace
101 Adam Clayton
89  List of U2 awards
70  Odyssey Number Five
60  U2 discography
51  Hurricane Charley
44  Where the Streets Have No Name
44  Assassination of Benazir Bhutto
27  Larry Mullen Jr.
23  U2
22  List of Red Hot Chili Peppers band members
20  Double Allergic
19  Le Havre
16  Carbon
12  Intabulation
11  Iquito

              Talk:
24 Where the Streets Have No Name
12 White people
8  Adam Clayton
6  Larry Mullen Jr.
6  The Edge
4  Ground provisions
4  Mother Tucker
3  Defence Research Agency
3  U2 discography
3  Squamous cell papilloma
3  James Paul Lewis, Jr.
3  Lemass Era
3  The History Channel
3  SS France (1961)
3  Afrocentrism

 Category:
2 Profanity

      Image:
2 U2 barnstar.JPG

MediaWiki talk:
2 Common.css

        Portal:
6 U2/Quotes
5 U2/Things you can do
5 NATO
5 U2/U2 news
5 U2
5 U2/Intro
4 U2/U2 topics
4 U2/Categories
3 NATO/NATO news
3 U2/AOTW/37, 2007
3 U2/WikiProjects
3 U2/Did you know
3 U2/Selected article
3 NATO/Selected picture
2 U2/Related portals

Portal talk:
2    U2

              Template:
4 Announcements/Current collaborations
3 Portuguese ethnicity
3 U2 Barnstar
2 GA number
2 U2 Collaboration Barnstar
2 User label Nunavut
2 User label AL

              User:
39 Triddle/stubsensor/20070716/1
38 Keilana/sandbox
27 Keilana/monobook.js
24 Triddle/stubsensor/20070716/2
22 Politics rule/new userpage
13 BOTijo/Images for biographies/1
12 Triddle/stubsensor/20070716/3
12 Triddle/stubsensor/20070206/8
12 Keilana/userboxen
11 Keilana/Recall
8  Triddle/stubsensor/20070206/17
8  Jonathan/Admin coaching
7  Keilana/userboxes
7  Keilana/monobook.css
6  Politics rule/userboxen

       User talk:
101 ArielGold
85  Smithcool
63  Dihydrogen Monoxide
59  Ag�eyban�
43  Politics rule
40  Acalamari
21  Husond
18  JetLover
17  Phaedriel
17  Jmlk17
17  Angel David
17  Runewiki777
16  Anonymous Dissident
14  Keilana
14  Alagaesia dragon

                    Wikipedia:
99 Administrator intervention against vandalism
57 Help desk
37 WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Drive/12
35 WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Drive
31 Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
27 Requests for page protection
25 WikiProject Keep It Simple
22 Requests for checkuser
17 Usernames for administrator attention
15 Administrators' noticeboard/3RR
15 Requests for adminship/Neranei 2
15 Featured list candidates/List of U2 awards
15 Featured article candidates/Odyssey Number Five
14 WikiProject U2/layout/news
13 Village pump (policy)

                         Wikipedia talk:
19 Requests for adminship
11 WikiProject U2
8  Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-08-19 White people
7  AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage
7  School and university projects/ITESM Campus Toluca/LovelyGirls
6  Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-07-28 The History Channel
6  Wikipedia Signpost/2007-09-03/WikiScanner
5  WikiProject U2/collaborationofthefortnightdepartment
4  School and university projects/ITESM Campus Toluca/ZYANYA06
4  WikiProject Accessibility
4  School and university projects/ITESM Campus Toluca/Copitas
3  Articles for deletion/James Barker (athlete)
2  WikiProject U2/collaborationofthefortnightdepartment/timetable
2  Requests for adminship/Footballfan190
2  Requests for checkuser

If there were any problems, please email Interiot or post at User talk:Interiot
.
Based directly on these URLs: [1], [2], [3]
  • The edit count was retrieved from this link at 03:45, 6 January 2008 (UTC).
Speedy Close
  1. I support this user but ask for this to be speedy closed, just like any other unnecessary reconfirmation RFAs. Húsönd 01:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Deskana said that no 'crat would close it early. Also, if I withdraw, I lose the tools. Just to clarify. Keilanatalk(recall) 01:37, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Why would you lose the tools if you withdrew? Sorry Keilana, you are one of my favorite users but these reconfirmation RFAs are becoming a much unneeded trend. You are open to recall and only a recall RFA should be in order. This is not the case. Húsönd 01:50, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Errm, it actually is a recall RFA - Alison ❤ 01:54, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    This is a reconfirmation RfA. Same diff. The result of RRfAs (as they are called) is that "failed/no consensus --> tools removed". — Dihydrogen Monoxide 02:00, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Indeed, thanks for clarifying, Alison and DHMO. This is a recall request, technically, and I would lose the tools if I withdrew because it would be closed as a failure/no consensus for me to have the tools, and I would have to ask for desysopping on Meta. Again, not a "I think I'll go through RfA to get a bunch of nice compliments" request, more of a "someone asked me to stand again" thing. Regards, Keilanatalk(recall) 02:02, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    This is not a recall. The word "recall" isn't mentioned in the nomination, and this RFA doesn't even comply to User:Keilana/Recall. How can this be a recall? Húsönd 02:11, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Because of comments I made on WT:RFA saying that I would accept recall/reconfirmation if anyone wanted it because of the recent issues; it was a temporary suspension of my recall procedures. It really should've said recall. Regards, Keilanatalk(recall) 02:13, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Keilana, users participating in this RFA won't be able to guess that this is a recall. And in fact, it is not, as it does not follow your own criteria/procedure for a recall. I strongly recommend that you fix this by providing a detailed explanation on whether this is a reconfirmation or a recall RFA. If it can be fixed at all, that is. Húsönd 02:40, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Where should I go about this? I don't want to mess with Dihydrogen's nom. Keilanatalk(recall) 02:46, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Can't get any messier. ;-) Húsönd 02:56, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    True. I'll clarify what I can. Keilanatalk(recall) 03:00, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    We have consistency in our set period of days RFA. Sometimes however, it does not take that long to get a consensus on something. Consensus seems clear in this case, and I don't think this RFA has a snowballs chance in heck of failing. I ask, no, I call for the logical conclusion. Thank you, M-ercury at 03:04, January 7, 2008
    So I stand corrected, given wmarsh's evidence. M-ercury at 04:24, January 7, 2008

I am damn confused as to what led to this request for reconfirmation. The users edit history is intact and available, and no accusations of abuse of position has been declared. It seems to me that this reconfirmation was requested just because the ability to do so existed.

Advice to admins out there, if you are going to be open to recall make criteria, like "You must have some sort of a reason". Better advice, don't be open to recall, let the existing procedures handle it, the new ones don't work. Otherwise you get this sort of nonsense where instead of asking "Should this person be desysoped" we are asking "Should we let this admin be an admin" for no reason other than the fact that somebody could do it so they did. 1 != 2 18:38, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I thought one of the conditions with recall was that there had to be a legitimate reason for a recall. I didn't think one could be initiated "out of the blue" in case certain people had a grudge against a particular admin. Acalamari 18:51, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The person who initiated has also voiced "support", I believe. I find this rather ironic as somebody who voiced some minor objections about the current renaming process but advised against an RFA. --kingboyk (talk) 00:08, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
More