Hello – welcome! I'm Katie and I'm an American from the central part of the United States. I'm an avid knitter, reader, music lover, baseball fan, and enthusiastic Wikipedian.
I've been here a long time, but for a while I've been a very casual, intermittent participant in the project. I had some health issues for a time, and I think I was a little burned out, but I'm better now. I may step away for a few days here or there, especially around the end-of-year holidays, but I'm enjoying the work again, and that's what's important. :-)
I suffer from severe cluster headaches. Our article on clusters is in lock step with the symptoms I have, and they hit me with little warning. The clusters last anywhere from a couple of days to a couple of weeks, then they go away until the next cluster hits. If you see me suddenly disappear but I've been doing AIV work or other admin-type stuff, and my status up there is still 'online', it's probably due to a massive headache. I'll be back as soon as I can stand sound and light again.
Who is Krakatoa Katie?
So, what's a KrakatoaKatie?
Krakatoa Katie is a character from a 1945 Mighty Mouseanimated film from Terrytoons titled Mighty Mouse in Krakatoa. The six-minute film is set on the island of Krakatoa, where a community of friendly mice live, including a female mouse named Krakatoa Katie. Katie, wearing a sarong, performs a seductive dance to a very catchy song that notes how well she "shakes her sarong."
The song and dance make the volcano angry, and it erupts. The mice send out a worldwide plea for help and a seismologist gets the message. He magically transforms into Mighty Mouse. Mighty Mouse saves Katie and her friends from the eruption, he gets a kiss from Katie, she dances some more, and all is well in the end.
The memory of this film is ingrained in me from my childhood, and I chose this username to honor that memory. You can see the film or a clip of the song by searching for it on YouTube. Be careful, though – it's an earworm.
Some words on my editing style...
... if you come across a contribution of mine that is incorrect or seems nonsensical to you, please feel free to fix it in the appropriate manner. I rarely get frazzled or personally upset over Wikipedia content. If my edit was correct in adding or deleting material, that material will find its way into or out of the article eventually, and I don't particularly care if I'm the one who actually performs the task. If I was incorrect, kudos to the person who repairs my error. The encyclopedia improves no matter who gets the credit, so don't worry about offending or bothering me.
Because of my philosophy, I do not and will not start or participate in an edit war, but do not mistake my stance for apathy or indifference. As a RN who has spent thousands of nights caring for post-CABG and other cardiac intensive care patients, I tend to look at the 'big picture' when pondering such matters. In the big picture – at least in my big picture – becoming upset or angry over a Wikipedia edit isn't worth the stress caused by anxiety or irritation.
Wikipedia is a tremendous gift to the world and deserves attention and financial support from as many people as possible. I have given and will continue to give time and treasure and hope everyone else does the same... but before lashing out in fear or anger, at me or anyone else, please take a step back and look at your own 'big picture.'
Some words on my administration philosophy (protecting, deleting, unprotecting, undeleting, and so on)...
... if you're here because I deleted an article through either the speedy deletion or the proposed deletion process, I will restore it upon request. (Please ask nicely. Please.) If I'm not here (see above), ask another admin to do so, stating in your request that I'm the deleting admin and I'm unavailable. Regardless of the admin who restores the article, you should improve it quickly – within hours, not weeks – because a restoration does not prevent someone else from nominating it for deletion through either the proposed deletion process or a formal nomination for deletion. An editor who pleads for a particular article's undeletion only to abandon the thing seems insincere, and insincerity is bad.
If you're here about an articles for deletion discussion or a request for comment I closed in a manner with which you disagree, I'm happy to listen to your viewpoint and briefly give you the reasoning behind my decision. I'm not perfect and goodness knows I've made mistakes, so I always want to be sure I'm making decisions with which the community agrees.
That said, I'll only do it once. A back-and-forth between us over a discussion that lasts five days is pointless. If you still disagree with me after I've explained my rationale, you should go to deletion review. I think all administration actions should be transparent and must stand up to scrutiny by the community, and that's why I encourage you to go to deletion review, the proper place for that kind of dialogue. The conversation is then open to everyone, not just you and me.
Seriously. I mean it. Go to deletion review (or ask another admin, if it's an RFC I've closed) and make your case. I won't get mad, or go on a vendetta to "get you," or become a bean stuffer, or any other such nonsense, and you shouldn't either. (I've reversed myself several times, usually because someone asked nicely, and if you doubt that, look in my talk archives.) Read on, and all will become clear.
If I've protected the wrong version of a page which you've been editing, too bad. I don't care which version was protected, yours or his or hers or theirs. I care that the edit war has been stopped. Use the talk page to work out your differences. Open a request for comment to get community-wide input. Go take a walk. Get a hobby. Just don't come complaining that the wrong version is protected, because short of BLP issues, I'm not going to "fix it" for you.
If you're here because I blocked you, you're in the wrong place. Follow the instructions given in the message you saw when you tried to edit. Although I've done it a couple of times, rarely will I unblock without the consensus of other admins because rarely will I block without the consensus of other admins.
This page was adapted from Gurch's design (Gurch created the essential tool called Huggle). Thanks, Gurch!
...and here's the real big picture...
This is a Wikipedia user page, not an article.
If you find this page on a site other than Wikipedia, be aware that you are viewing a copy of the page a on mirror site, with which the user 'KrakatoaKatie' is not personally affiliated. The original page is located at http:/wiki/User:KrakatoaKatie.
The Invisible Barnstar – Thank you for your continued work and assistance on Wikipedia:Copyright problems, reviewing copyright status and generally cleaning up articles that need attention or a referee. Your good work goes unseen unless someone disagrees ;) –Jeepday, April 1, 2008
I award you this Barnstar of Diligence for taking the time to seek out and repair external links that have been broken through reformatting of the external websites. Thank you for your hard work. – Johntex, August 22, 2007
You definitely deserve this RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar. – Altruism, August 1, 2007
I hereby award you the Vacuum Admin Upgrade 3000. Time to get rid of the old mop and have a modern device to suck up all this wikidust that keeps falling all over the place. Regards, Hús, July 27, 2007
The Dessert of Merit, awarded to KrakatoaKatie for passing RfA unanimously and for being one of the best Wikipedians of all time. – Walton, June 8, 2007
I award you this "exceptional newcomer" barnstar for a fabulous start on Wikipedia! – Samir, July 26, 2006
Committed identity: 36da0d1e8105996076c764849a1c8e32af47a0370ad6d70343b85278e63e79240e0b47fe1dae0ea1f6620ee3b6b1d800d1295baa5db6b0394a263a0852824d1c is an SHA-512commitment to this user's real-life identity.