Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/King of Hearts

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a successful request for adminship. Please do not modify it.

[edit] King of Hearts

Final (75/1/0) ended 21:48, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

King of Hearts (talk · contribs) – King of Hearts joined Wikipedia in May, 2005 making great edits. This user welcomes other users, reverts vandalized pages, and talks to vanadalizers on their talk page. This user has almost 5,000 edits, and cites his sources on sentences needed for citing sources. This user also nominated articles for deletion and upgrades many different articles in the best way he can. This user really deserves to be an admin and I think he'll make a great one. It's my pleasure to nominate him. ForestH2

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept this nomination. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:52, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Support

  1. Hahahaha, I beat the nominator Support. WerdnaTc@bCmLt 22:10, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
  2. Support. Tends to forget edit summaries on own pages; not a big deal, but it will show when the numbers are posted. Otherwise, well-rounded. RadioKirk talk to me 22:11, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
    Edit summaries are not that relevant on one's own user page, you don't have to wear a suit and tie in your own house. :) Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 03:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
    I agree; I was merely pointing out that it might affect the numbers. :) RadioKirk talk to me 06:38, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  3. Support. More than adequate time and edit count. Good balnce to edits. Was asked to accept adminship twice before this RfA was posted. :) Dlohcierekim 22:15, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
  4. Support - sometimes edit summaries do use more diskspace then they're worth (looking at user pages...) -- Tawker 22:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
  5. Support per above. Don't like your sig though. Guinnog 22:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
  6. Support As nominater. ForestH2
  7. Support. Excellent user. Will make a good admin. DarthVader 22:39, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
  8. Support if he checks the Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary in his preferences/editing, can't have admins deleting/protecting without leaving a reason. ---Eivindt@c 23:13, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
  9. Support per above Benon 23:23, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
  10. Excellent vandal fighter. --Knucmo2 23:51, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
  11. Just another star in the night T | @ | C 00:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  12. Support Need someone with both a zeal for the wiki and a friendly, mediating personality. Give 'em a broom!--CTSWyneken 00:16, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  13. Support Looks good. Nephron  T|C 00:49, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  14. Support Looks right for the job - good luck! Brisvegas 02:52, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  15. Support It is time to give him the mop. --Siva1979Talk to me 03:34, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  16. Pleased to Support. Awesome sig, btw. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 03:58, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  17. Support, excellent, well rounded editor. Phaedriel ♥ tell me - 04:19, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  18. Support very good editor with a wide variety of edits. No major or even minor conflicts, and seems like a nice person. Thetruthbelow(talk) 05:22, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  19. Support Good job so far, keep it up! ~Kylu (u|t) 05:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  20. Support per nom. —Khoikhoi 05:51, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  21. Support. Good participation in the community. -- Tangotango 05:57, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  22. Support. This is one the users that uses RC script, so I have been keeping an eye on him. Looks like someone else nominated first. He is a good vandal fighter with a good range of edits too.Voice-of-AllT|@|ESP 08:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  23. Support Per above. Love your sig. GizzaChat © 09:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  24. Support, of course. - Mailer Diablo 10:00, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  25. Support.  Grue  11:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  26. Support. I thought he was an admin already... --Tone 12:19, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  27. Support. He ticks all the right boxes, this is a no-brainer. Rje 12:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  28. Support ♪…a model wikicitizen♬ Bucketsofg✐ 14:16, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  29. Support. --Bhadani 15:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  30. Support--Jusjih 15:46, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  31. Support looks good. --a.n.o.n.y.m t 19:22, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  32. Support I've encountered this user some times before. He has shown to me what a great admin he would be. The Gerg 19:51, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  33. Support Looks like a good user. Mr. Turcottetalk 21:44, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  34. Support, this guy has done more than enough for Wikipedia and it's about time we give him the mop. Royboycrashfan 22:24, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  35. Support A Great User. Raichu 22:44, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  36. Support He's going to make a good admin. The Halo (talk) 23:58, 14 May 2006 UTC
  37. Support, excellent editor. Deizio talk 00:23, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
  38. Got my full Support. — † Webdinger BLAH | SZ 00:55, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
  39. Support Excellent editor. -- Samir (the scope) धर्म 00:57, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
  40. Support. per nominator. - Patman2648 01:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
  41. Support, looks great --Deville (Talk) 02:01, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
  42. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 02:45, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
  43. "You must be kidding!" support'. Wow, I don't know if I could support more strongly. Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 02:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
  44. Support, isn't he one already? --Terence Ong 06:00, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
  45. Support. Meets my standards. — May. 15, '06 [07:57] <freakofnurxture|talk>
  46. Support. Good and responsible contributor. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:08, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
  47. Support I've seen him around, I think. Steveo2 11:15, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
  48. Strong Support. A model user. Will use the mop well. Kukini 15:51, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
  49. Support The ideal Wikipedian. SCHZMO ✍ 21:25, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
  50. Support per nom and multiple people suggesting that he be an admin. --Elkman - (talk) 22:49, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
  51. Support based upon edit history; a solid contributor to Wikipedia and would be useful with the mop and bucket.  (aeropagitica)  (talk)  14:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
  52. 52 is the loneliest number Support ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 16:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
  53. Uh huh Kilo-Lima|(talk) 17:14, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
  54. Support Trustworthy well-rounded editor. Xoloz 19:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
  55. In Soviet Russia, editor supports YOU!!! A mop-deserving editor for sure. --→Buchanan-Hermit™..Talk to Big Brother 22:25, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
  56. Support Absolutely TigerShark 00:35, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
  57. Support of course.--Kungfu Adam (talk) 01:38, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
  58. Support. Ted's points below are well thought out, and I gave them careful consideration while reviewing KoH's edits. While I agree with his conclusions, I feel this user has a solid history that suggests he'll be a good admin. I'm watching you, KoH, do good. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 04:09, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
  59. Support, of course. --Rory096 08:17, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
  60. Kimchi.sg 13:38, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
  61. Support. Deserving of mop and bucket. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 15:32, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
  62. Support --Jay(Reply) 19:32, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
  63. Jaranda wat's sup 20:48, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
  64. Support. You are very good editor. I agree with that. Daniel5127, 23:44, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
  65. supportGeni 08:29, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  66. Support --Canderous | Talk 09:56, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  67. Support DGX 16:37, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  68. Support --Bachrach44 19:39, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  69. Support --All in 21:55, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  70. Support. A quick investigation reveals he is civil and dedicated. Good enough for me.--The ikiroid (talk)(Help Me Improve) 22:53, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  71. Support. Looks good. — Rebelguys2 talk 17:55, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
  72. Support. No reason to think they'll abuse tools. .:.Jareth.:. babelfish 21:41, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
  73. Support. RexNL 23:13, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
  74. Support. Kim van der Linde at venus 23:25, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
  75. Support. No doubts. -- Szvest 16:43, 20 May 2006 (UTC) Wiki me up™

Oppose

  1. Oppose. This candidate has few real discussions in the Article Talk space. This one entry (the largest number of edits in Talk is for Blue Whale) is telling: [1]. The ultimatum given does not bode well for an administrator. Administrators should have a minimum amount of civility and grace, and I don't see this for King of Hearts. Ted 15:19, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Neutral

Comments

Wow, thanks for pointint that out! legit! --M1ss1ontomars2k4 00:22, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Last 5000 edits. Voice-of-AllT|@|ESP 07:54, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

--Viewing contribution data for user King of Hearts (over the 5000 edit(s) shown on this page)-- (FAQ)
Time range: 124 approximate day(s) of edits on this page
Most recent edit on: 7hr (UTC) -- 14, May, 2006
Oldest edit on: 0hr (UTC) -- 12, December, 2005
Overall edit summary use: Major edits: 91.16% Minor edits: 97.25%
Article edit summary use: Major article edits: 94.06% Minor article edits: 99.23%
Average edits per day (current): 40.32
Recognized significant article edits (non-minor/reverts): 2.36%
Unique pages edited: 3368 | Average edits per page: 1.48 | Edits on top: 19.46%
Breakdown of edits:
All significant edits (non-minor/reverts): 37.78%
Minor edits (non reverts): 35.68%
Marked reverts: 22.26%
Unmarked edits: 4.28%
Edits by Wikipedia namespace:
Article: 37.08% (1854) | Article talk: 2.72% (136)
User: 6.86% (343) | User talk: 26.84% (1342)
Wikipedia: 21.46% (1073) | Wikipedia talk: 0.62% (31)
Image: 0.52% (26)
Template: 3.2% (160)
Category: 0.14% (7)
Portal: 0% (0)
Help: 0.1% (5)
MediaWiki: 0% (0)
Other talk pages: 0.46% (23)

Questions for the candidate
Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Wikipedia in this capacity. Please take the time to answer a few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? Please check out Category:Wikipedia backlog, and read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.
A: I would like to help with closing AFD's, fighting vandalism with a server-based rollback, blocking persistent vandals, and protecting pages that have undergone frequent vandalism recently. On close cases for discussions like AFD debates, I would evaluate each individual comment separately, and then decide whether to keep, delete, merge, or no consensus (keep). I would also speedy-delete pages per WP:CSD. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I have several major "content" articles, contributions, and uploads listed under User:King of Hearts#Contributions on my user page. When I'm browsing through Wikipedia, I often find a redlink, and I click on it to share what I know. Also, I have continued to fight vandalism, close obvious "keep" AFD discussions, and tag pages with {{subst:afd}}, {{subst:prod}}, or {{db-reason}} over the last few months. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:10, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
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 how will you deal with it in the future?
A: Occasionally, after I revert a vandal's edit and warn them on their talk pages, they'll try to deface my user or talk pages by blanking, adding obscenities, attacks, etc. Sometimes, I get in debates over the title to be used for an article or over other issues such as whether a line in the article is accurate. I try to make such content disputes as minimal as possible by citing reliable sources. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:16, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
The above 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.