Wiktionary : Votes/bc-2007-08/User:SemperBlotto for bureaucrat
Nomination: I hereby nominate User:SemperBlotto as a local English Wiktionary Bureaucrat . To the extent that "bureaucrat" is a title of respect, few contributors are so clearly deserving. My selfish intention in this nomination, however, is simply to have a bureaucrat that's always available. DAVilla 12:43, 17 August 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Vote ends: 17 September 2007 23:59 UTC
Vote started: 17 August
Acceptance:
OK. This time I have read the small print, both here and on Meta , and have no objections. I cannot guarantee to be "always available" but I do logon several times on most days. SemperBlotto 13:28, 17 August 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Support Robert Ullmann 13:36, 17 August 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Support DAVilla 13:41, 17 August 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Support Versageek 13:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Support Jeffqyzt 13:49, 17 August 2007 (UTC) ...BTW, didn't User:Vildricianus resign as 'crat? Should there be resigned/inactive sections of that page (as per w:Wikipedia:Bureaucrats )[ reply ]
Support —Stephen 14:00, 17 August 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Support Yes please. Widsith 14:28, 17 August 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Support Thryduulf 14:54, 17 August 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Support Rod (A. Smith ) 16:43, 17 August 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Support —Ruakh TALK 16:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Support Connel MacKenzie 16:48, 17 August 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Support \Mike 17:33, 17 August 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Support Tohru 01:55, 18 August 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Support ArielGlenn 03:47, 18 August 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Support EncycloPetey 00:33, 19 August 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Support . bd2412 T 02:11, 20 August 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Support —Saltmarsh 06:01, 20 August 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Support Williamsayers79 17:22, 20 August 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Support As per nom. Neskaya talk 21:15, 20 August 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Support Medellia 15:47, 23 August 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Support Dmcdevit ·t 07:07, 24 August 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Support H. (talk ) 14:28, 28 August 2007 (UTC) definitely.[ reply ]
Support Cynewulf 22:55, 28 August 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Support I like this person and see potential. Thecurran 06:06, 7 September 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Does this vote need +25 or is this enough? DAVilla 19:29, 20 September 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Judging by the other votes at Wiktionary:Bureaucrats , this is plenty. We just need to wait for one of the existing bureaucrats to notice this and take care of it. :-) —Ruakh TALK 19:36, 20 September 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Do bureaucrats have the ability to appoint other bureaucrats? DAVilla 19:57, 20 September 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Yes. At least, they certainly used to be able to, and the documentation still says that they can. —Ruakh TALK 22:44, 20 September 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
The only time "minimum 25" comes into play, is when meta: rules override local policy - such as for CheckUser votes. --Connel MacKenzie 19:37, 20 September 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Stating the obvious here. Passes 23-0-0. DAVilla 19:57, 20 September 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]
Appointed --Dvortygirl 04:43, 21 September 2007 (UTC) [ reply ]