Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Teke

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] Teke

Final (76/1/1) ended 15:16, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Teke (talk · contribs) – Teke (talk · contribs) (previously known as TKE)– from Tennessee, United States has been editing since November 2005 and has contributed a lot of time to Recent Changes Patrol, stub sorting, as well as helping at AfD and being a voice of calm reason on article talk pages.

On the writing front, Teke has written articles such as Lynn Peterzell, Sea Island, British Columbia as well as maintaining Tau Kappa Epsilon, showing a good grasp of WP:NPOV, the fundamental pillar of encyclopedic integrity, also evidenced in this edit.

Teke is at all times calm and polite, and has not engaged in edit-warring, nor been the recipient of any blocks. His email is enabled and his userpage is noncontroversial.

Teke can be seen engaging in calm, skillful and rational debate, at pages such as Talk:Northern Exposure ([1]), Talk:Edward Teller ([2], [3]), Talk:Queen Anne-Marie of Greece ([4]), Talk:Athenian democracy ([5]), Talk:Neil Patrick Harris ([6]) [7] and Talk:East Timor ([8]), where sensitive issues such as sexual orientation, nationalism and anti-Semitism are present.

His AfD participation and nature of his comments show rational thinking, logic and commitment to quality debate, which would be required of an administrator in closing non clear-cut debates (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zachary Eastham, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Tsou, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Toronto poker, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NikeTalk, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Logically inevitable andWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Markus Kuhn)

He also has a good understanding of image copyright as can be seen by his uploads ([9]). He has also helped to track sockpuppets (User_talk:Redvers/Archive09#IntheGhetto06) and helping new users ([10]), as well as a solid policy knowledge shown by helping to compile evidence for Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Monicasdude (no he was not the party under investigation).

I ask the community to consider Teke for adminship.Blnguyen | rant-line 07:21, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I humbly accept the nomination. Teke 17:06, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


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 am eager to get started with some of the more obscure pages, such as Wikipedia: Requested moves, WP:COPYVIO, and WP:RFP. I started to tackle WP:MERGE, a huge backlog, several weeks ago, but put that on hold as that backlog would greatly benifit with admin tools in merging page histories. I will be more than happy to clear out CSD and AIV should it get backed up while I'm online, and look over the five-day-old XfDs and PRODs as they expire.
I also would make great use out of the server based rollback, as my .js one has been ornery and doesn't always do what I like. I am certain that I will be active in every aspect of administration, I already read WP:PAIN and WP:AN/I daily and I am more than ready to aid in conflict resolution with an admin hat ready.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A: I state on my userpage that this is the encyclopedic edit that I am most proud of out of historical significance. I've also enjoyed maintaining Two Gallants (band), which used to be a copyvio press release. I am not a writer , I am critical analyser and discussor by nature (hence my decision to major in history). Therefore I'd say my pleasure come from the Talk resolutions I've participated in mentioned by the nominator, as well as chasing away of the Matt Leinart Vandal, who has not vandalized Matt Leinart since my checkuser request.
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: I have not been in any conflicts over my own editing, and none of the other conflicts I have been engaged in have been particularly heated. I know that as an administrator this changes rapidly, with protections, blocks and deletions angering users that were often making changes in good faith, they just didn't know what they were doing wrong and as such they lash out. I will have no problem dealing with these users. For the ones who get angered and take it too personally, there's nothing I can do about that except give the best advice I can for correcting the error. I've had much experience in online conflicts over the years; I have a thick skin and know when to walk away.
Comments

All user's edits.Voice-of-All 20:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Viewing contribution data for user Teke (over the 4383 edit(s) shown on this page) (FAQ)
Time range: 269 approximate day(s) of edits on this page
Most recent edit on: 19hr (UTC) -- 21, Aug, 2006 || Oldest edit on: 20hr (UTC) -- 26, October, 2005
Overall edit summary use (last 1000 edits): Major edits: 100% Minor edits: 100%
Average edits per day: 16.15 (for last 1000 edit(s))
Article edit summary use (last 462 edits): Major article edits: 100% Minor article edits: 100%
Analysis of edits (out of all 4383 edits shown on this page and last 10 image uploads):
Notable article edits (creation/expansion/major rewrites/sourcing): 0.05% (2)
Significant article edits (copyedits/small rewrites/content/reference additions): 0.52% (23)
Superficial article edits (grammar/spelling/wikify/links/tagging): 9.01% (395)
Unique image uploads (non-deleted/reverts/updates): 7 (checks last 5000)
Superficial article edits marked as minor: 24.12%
Special edit type statistics:
All edits to deletion pages: 10.47% (459 edit(s))
Marked XfD/DRV votes: 3.83% (168 edit(s))
Article deletion tagging: 0.11% (5 edit(s))
Edits to "copyright problems" pages: 0.09% (4 edit(s))
Edits to RfAs: 1.3% (57 edit(s))
Marked RfA votes: 0.66% (27 support vote(s)) || (2 oppose vote(s))
Page moves: 0.66% (29 edit(s)) (19 moves(s))
Page redirections: 0.43% (19 edit(s))
Page (un)protections: 0% (0 edit(s))
User talk warnings: 9.15% (401 edit(s))
Breakdown of all edits:
Unique pages edited: 2655 | Average edits per page: 1.65 | Edits on top: 11.68%
Edits marked as major (non-minor/reverts): 36.23% (1588 edit(s))
Edits marked as minor (non-reverts): 14.99% (657 edit(s))
Marked reverts (reversions/text removal): 30.94% (1356 edit(s))
Unmarked edits with no summary: 15.2% (666 edit(s))
Edits by Wikipedia namespace:
Article: 39.49% (1731) | Article talk: 4.84% (212)
User: 8.83% (387) | User talk: 29.14% (1277)
Wikipedia: 16.34% (716) | Wikipedia talk: 0.48% (21)
Image: 0.21% (9)
Template: 0.57% (25)
Category: 0.05% (2)
Portal: 0.05% (2)
Help: 0% (0)
MediaWiki: 0% (0)
Other talk pages: 0.02% (1)
Current tally: (76/1/1)
Support
  1. Beat the nominator cliche support. JoshuaZ 17:26, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  2. Support After looking at all the things Teke has done, I think he would be a great admin. –- kungming·2 | (Talk·Contact) 17:52, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  3. Support - Teke seems to be experienced and have a good grasp of policy. I see no evidence that he would abuse the tools, and his editing would benefit significantly from having them as outlined in his response to the first prompt. Fabricationary 18:02, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  4. Support Will make a very good admin. --Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 18:11, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  5. Support seen nothing but good things. (good to see a frat member up for rfa) alphaChimp laudare 18:24, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  6. Yes please. - CrazyRussian talk/email 18:31, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  7. Support Excellent main to WP space ratio. An excellent editor all round who deserves the buttons. Martinp23 18:45, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  8. Support Unlikely to abuse admin tools based on past edits by this user. Has a good grasp of policy too. --Siva1979Talk to me 18:51, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  9. Support. - Mailer Diablo 18:59, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  10. Support - Baseball,Baby! balls•strikes 19:06, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  11. Support. Has a good deal of user_talk, talk, and Wikipedia namespace edits. I think Teke knows the Wikipedia policy very well, and will definitely be successful as admin. --Nishkid64 19:27, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  12. Support. SynergeticMaggot 19:41, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  13. Support, give him the mop :) -- Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 19:41, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  14. Support. Bigtop 19:43, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  15. Support Will use the tools well. Not that it actually matters at this point, but I'm changing to strong support per Teke's responses to Kokota below. Any editor who can handle themselves as well as Teke can, and have other contributions as excellent as Teke's, deserves the word "strong" in my support of their adminship. -- Kicking222 20:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
    • In addition, trying to get one's girlfriend involved in WP is extremely cute. Well done! -- Kicking222 04:31, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  16. Support ForestH2 t/c 20:29, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  17. Support. Looks good. Seems to have an interest in tasks that need more admins too.Voice-of-All 20:31, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  18. Support -- Agathoclea 21:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  19. Support Good grasp of policy; gets stuck in to awkward-but-essential areas such as moves and merges; good spread of edits. Let this editor flourish the mop.  (aeropagitica)   (talk)  21:38, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  20. Support per (aero). RandyWang (chat/patch) 21:47, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  21. Support will make an excellent admin. Stubbleboy 23:14, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  22. Support per above. --Rory096 23:16, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  23. Strong support. Blnguyen | rant-line 00:33, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  24. Pile on Support - is this one going to be a all support sweep.... -- Tawker 01:12, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  25. Support will make a great addition to the admistrators. --Ageo020 01:17, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  26. Support - per the Tawkerator :) - GIen 01:56, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  27. Dogpile support. Every experience with Teke thus far has been positive, I have no reason to suspect he would abuse any of the tools, and I believe he's dedicated to improving Wikipedia. Luna Santin 02:55, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  28. Support ~ trialsanderrors 03:12, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  29. Support seems good to me. —Khoikhoi 04:59, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  30. Support Per Above. Daniel's page ☎ 05:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  31. A 16oz Beefsteak tomato Support per very well written nom and personal experience with editor.—WAvegetarian•(talk) 05:48, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  32. Support looks okay and ready. Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 05:59, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  33. Support I like that the candidate is willing to help out on some of the bigger backlogs and it seems as if he/she is certainly to be trusted with the extra buttons hoopydinkConas tá tú? 06:02, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  34. Helped me tremndously support --WillMak050389 06:06, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  35. TKO by TKE support. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:18, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  36. Support, will make a good administrator. --Terence Ong (T | C) 09:46, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  37. Support, don't know this person personally, but I believe this person will make a good admin. —Jared Hunt August 22, 2006, 11:45 (UTC)
  38. Support. Seems sensible and well-intentioned, from what I can tell. -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 13:00, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  39. Merovingian - Talk 13:39, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  40. Support of course. G.He 15:19, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  41. Support per all of above. Excellent user, can use tools effectively, no problems. Newyorkbrad 15:43, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  42. Support per all of above. Do I even need to say much? --Deenoe 15:44, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  43. Support Looks like this person will be a good admin. A-OK. JungleCat talk/contrib 15:53, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  44. Strong Support Yanksox 17:54, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  45. Support--Kungfu Adam (talk) 18:17, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  46. Support) CFIF ☎ 22:31, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  47. Support. Good editor, will make a good admin. Zaxem 01:17, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  48. Support. --Slgr@ndson (page - messages - contribs) 01:34, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  49. Support—anyone who will help reduce the backlogs on requested moves with solid previous behavior should be an automatic admin. Do good work! Williamborg (Bill) 02:21, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  50. Strong support, great editor, very civil and friendly.--TBCTaLk?!? 03:59, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  51. Support, Per all of above. -- Lego@lost EVIL, EVIL! 05:17, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  52. Support. —Quarl (talk) 2006-08-23 05:29Z
  53. Support per all of the above and the assistance I have received from this user in the past. Ryūlóng 06:17, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  54. Support. Well, why not.Weird Bird 16:16, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  55. Support. Clearly a fully qualified and candidate, who is dedicated to Wikipedia.-- danntm T C 19:59, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  56. Y. E. S. Exclamation mark. A very helpful and civil editor. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 23:19, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  57. Piling On Support excellent mop candidate. MLA 12:53, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  58. support: Ombudsman 18:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  59. Support Will only do good with the tools. Thε Halo Θ 18:19, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  60. GDI support. If you can't go Greek, go...be a sysop. :) youngamerican (ahoy-hoy) 02:38, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  61. Support of course. Fabulous user, plain and simple. If I go to Tennessee in the next few years, maybe I'll stop by for a beer. Grandmasterka 03:51, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  62. Not for Wealth, Rank, or Honor, but for Personal Worth and Character, do I Strongly Support Frater Teke for Wiki-Pyjanitor, er, adminship. ZB#695, CQJ 05:55, 25 August 2006 (UTC).
  63. Support - looks good. Michael 17:53, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  64. Support. — FireFox (talk) 20:31, 25 August 2006
  65. Support. —Angelbo 09:11, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  66. Support --Srikeit (Talk | Email) 10:58, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  67. Support - Everything looks good to me. --WinHunter (talk) 18:29, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  68. Support - He's a good guy, I'm sure he'd make a wonderful admin :) TehKewl1 00:08, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  69. Support - he would make a good admin Appleboy Talk 00:33, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  70. support --W.marsh 03:20, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
    support—I'll sleep fine at night with the admin wand in his hands. Williamborg (Bill) 04:05, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
    Duplicate vote. - CrazyRussian talk/email 07:33, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  71. support - Chris24 04:28, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  72. Support Misza13 10:54, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  73. Support. —Scott5114↗ 15:24, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  74. Last Minute Support I would have been first if I had seen it earlier. ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 19:03, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  75. Also a last minute support - Per above. Can be trusted with the mop. - Aksi_great (talk - review me) 20:02, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  76. 'Super strong support!! I can't believe I almost missed this... Srose (talk) 13:16, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Kokota 22:27, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
    This vote was the user's fifth edit on wikipedia, one of which was the removal of a protection tag from an article [11] Martinp23 23:22, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
    Note to closing bureaucrat, user has six edits to date total in Wikipedia. Kokota (talk · contribs) --Stubbleboy 23:14, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
    Another note to the closing bureaucrat: This user is suspected to be a sockpuppet of indefinitely blocked user YaR GnitS for this edit concerning several deleted and recreated articles about homosexuality and this band. Ryūlóng 03:56, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Neutral
  1. Neutral - would prefer significantly more article Talk: page interaction. Jayjg (talk) 05:19, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
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.