Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word
Wiktionary:Votes/bc-2007-08/User:SemperBlotto for bureaucrat. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word
Wiktionary:Votes/bc-2007-08/User:SemperBlotto for bureaucrat, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say
Wiktionary:Votes/bc-2007-08/User:SemperBlotto for bureaucrat in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word
Wiktionary:Votes/bc-2007-08/User:SemperBlotto for bureaucrat you have here. The definition of the word
Wiktionary:Votes/bc-2007-08/User:SemperBlotto for bureaucrat will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition of
Wiktionary:Votes/bc-2007-08/User:SemperBlotto for bureaucrat, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
- 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)
- 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)
Support
- Support Robert Ullmann 13:36, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- Support DAVilla 13:41, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- Support Versageek 13:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- 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)
- Support —Stephen 14:00, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- Support Yes please. Widsith 14:28, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- Support Thryduulf 14:54, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- Support Rod (A. Smith) 16:43, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- Support —RuakhTALK 16:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- Support Connel MacKenzie 16:48, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- Support \Mike 17:33, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- Support Tohru 01:55, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
- Support ArielGlenn 03:47, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
- Support EncycloPetey 00:33, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
- Support. bd2412 T 02:11, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
- Support —Saltmarsh 06:01, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
- Support Williamsayers79 17:22, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
- Support As per nom. Neskaya talk 21:15, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
- Support Medellia 15:47, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- Support Dmcdevit·t 07:07, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
- Support H. (talk) 14:28, 28 August 2007 (UTC) definitely.
- Support Cynewulf 22:55, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- Support I like this person and see potential. Thecurran 06:06, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Oppose
Abstain
Decision
- Does this vote need +25 or is this enough? DAVilla 19:29, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- 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. :-) —RuakhTALK 19:36, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- Do bureaucrats have the ability to appoint other bureaucrats? DAVilla 19:57, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- Yes. At least, they certainly used to be able to, and the documentation still says that they can. —RuakhTALK 22:44, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- 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)
- Stating the obvious here. Passes 23-0-0. DAVilla 19:57, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- Appointed --Dvortygirl 04:43, 21 September 2007 (UTC)