Wiktionary:Bureaucrats: difference between revisions

From Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Browse history interactively
← Go to previous editGo to next edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
modifying intro text based on experimental evidence
Line 2: Line 2:
{{shortcut|WT:B}}
{{shortcut|WT:B}}


Bureaucrats can change an account's user level. Their first and foremost task is making people into sysops (when [[WT:A|approved]]), but since the change in April 2006, they also set (and, when necessary, revoke) [[WT:BOT|bot flags]]. Bureaucrats can also [[Wiktionary:Changing username|change an account's name]]. However, they '''cannot''' remove administrator status from accounts - [[m:steward|stewards]] have to do that. Nor do they have access to the [[WT:C|CheckUser]] tool.
Bureaucrats can change an account's user level. Their first and foremost task is making people into sysops (when [[WT:A|approved]]), but since the change in April 2006, they also set (and, when necessary, revoke) [[WT:BOT|bot flags]]. Bureaucrats can also [[Wiktionary:Changing username|change an account's name]]. However, they '''cannot''' remove bureaucrat status from accounts - [[m:steward|stewards]] have to do that. Nor do they have access to the [[WT:C|CheckUser]] tool.


==See also==
==See also==

Revision as of 22:42, 28 December 2009

Shortcut:
WT:B

Bureaucrats can change an account's user level. Their first and foremost task is making people into sysops (when approved), but since the change in April 2006, they also set (and, when necessary, revoke) bot flags. Bureaucrats can also change an account's name. However, they cannot remove bureaucrat status from accounts - stewards have to do that. Nor do they have access to the CheckUser tool.

See also

Template:mid2

List of bureaucrats

User Appointed
Eclecticology March 17, 2003
Paul G August 2, 2005
Dvortygirl July 20, 2006
Hippietrail July 20, 2006
SemperBlotto September 21, 2007
EncycloPetey July 12, 2009

/Past nominations

User:Hippietrail

Dvortygirl

Since Eclecticology has been absent for months now (with a brief interlude), and Paul has been less active for the past weeks, I'd like to nominate a third bureaucrat, and I think Dvortygirl is an excellent candidate for this position (most of you will know why). I have also asked Hippietrail whether he'd be interested, but given his past successful nomination, it might not be necessary to repeat that vote. Anyway I think both these people are the most likely candidates to do the job. — Vildricianus 10:58, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Accept, and thank you all for your confidence in me. I would add one caveat. While I intend to remain active in the community here, I presently have personal matters at home that may draw me away at any time. I do usually leave my IRC client open and check my messages regularly, but I may not do so much editing here over the next few months and may include some interruptions. —Dvortygirl 16:37, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Support
  1. As nominator, of course. — Vildricianus 10:58, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. GerardM 11:01, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. And she's also often here on irc, which is really important for a bureaucrat in my opinion. Kipmaster 11:05, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. \Mike 11:06, 14 July 2006 (UTC) Indeed.[reply]
  5. Strongest support ever in the history of strongest supports ever. The Queen of Wiktionary not a bureaucrat? What a ludicrous notion. —Celestianpower háblame 11:50, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Jolly good! SemperBlotto 16:45, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Yes please! Widsith 16:57, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  8. The real question is: Why did no one think of this before? --Wytukaze 17:03, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. job. :-) Rod (A. Smith) 04:16, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. --Connel MacKenzie 07:23, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Jon Harald Søby 09:43, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. --Dijan 18:46, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. --Pill δ 21:16, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. --Red Baron 21:48, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Yes. Andrew massyn 22:00, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Definitely. Jonathan Webley 21:12, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  17. This is late, but I am ashamed to have missed voting for her, so I shall now long after she was elected. - TheDaveRoss 17:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Hmm, I seem to have overlooked it as well. —Stephen 21:35, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
Comments
Appointed by Paul on July 20, 2006.

Vildricianus

As one of the most clear-headed contributors, Vild seems to be an obvious nomination. His timezone is complementary to the existing Bureaucrats. His language skills are very good. His technical grasp of the functions of the various Wikimedia software functions is excellent. I'm honored to nominate him as a Wiktionary bureaucrat. --Connel MacKenzie 18:59, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Accept - although surprised. — Vildricianus 20:18, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support
  1. (Nominator) --Connel MacKenzie 20:06, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Jon Harald Søby 20:10, 20 July 2006 (UTC) Duh![reply]
  3. Support - contingent on nominee accepting the nomination. - Amgine/talk 20:12, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --Thogo (talk) 20:16, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  5. —Celestianpower háblame 20:20, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  6. --Dijan 20:21, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Yes. Diplomatic skills a plus. — This unsigned comment was added by Andrew massyn (talk • contribs).
  8. Do we need more than 4? If so, I agree that Vild is the perfect choice. Widsith 16:01, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    If we didn't, I wouldn't have accepted. Ten hands can do more than eight, certainly if four or six of them are suddenly absent or less active for a while. With two backup pairs, they can take a more relaxed break without having to worry about backlogs or waiting users. — Vildricianus 22:30, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. ok, if he continues to be as addicted active as he is for now (he's also on irc, which is a plus). Kipmaster 18:04, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  10. —Stephen 18:55, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Jonathan Webley 14:09, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Certainly. \Mike 12:12, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  13. What a good idea! bd2412 T 16:15, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Jonathan Webley 14:58, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
Comments

Appointed by Dvortygirl 04:23, 22 August 2006 (UTC). Welcome aboard.[reply]

Requests for bureaucrat rights

If you would like to nominate someone (including yourself) to be a bureaucrat, please do so here.

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

  1. Support Robert Ullmann 13:36, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support DAVilla 13:41, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support Versageek 13:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. 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]
  5. Support —Stephen 14:00, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support Yes please. Widsith 14:28, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support Thryduulf 14:54, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support Rod (A. Smith) 16:43, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support —RuakhTALK 16:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Support Connel MacKenzie 16:48, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support \Mike 17:33, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support Tohru 01:55, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support ArielGlenn 03:47, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Support EncycloPetey 00:33, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Support. bd2412 T 02:11, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support —Saltmarsh 06:01, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support Williamsayers79 17:22, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support As per nom. Neskaya talk 21:15, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Support Medellia 15:47, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support Dmcdevit·t 07:07, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support H. (talk) 14:28, 28 August 2007 (UTC) definitely.[reply]
  23. Support Cynewulf 22:55, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support I like this person and see potential. Thecurran 06:06, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Abstain

Decision

User:EncycloPetey for bureaucrat

  • Vote starts: 00:00 11 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Vote ends: 24:00 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Support

  1. Support Neskaya kanetsv 21:21, 10 June 2009 (UTC) Wait, you mean he isn't already?  :) --Neskaya kanetsv 21:21, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support.​—msh210℠ 23:01, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support Equinox ◑ 23:03, 10 June 2009 (UTC) Why not, eh? Equinox ◑ 23:03, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support Bequw → ¢ • τ 23:30, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support Daniel. 00:59, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support I would be hard pressed to think of anyone else more deserving of such a pain in the ass (except SB, of course, who has already been burdened with it).  :-) -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 01:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support Caladon 07:11, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support and not as a early vote neither. DAVilla 13:42, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Support Ƿidsiþ 14:14, 11 June 2009 (UTC) Sure thing.[reply]
  10. Support —RuakhTALK 15:22, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    BTW, are we in specific need of a new bureaucrat, or is this is a might-as-well thing? (Not that that affects my vote either way.) —RuakhTALK 15:22, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Most of our crats are currently sporadic or practically inactive. My informal understanding has been that we should have at least two regularly available crats, and we currently have only Semper and Hippietrail. I accepted on those grounds, although I couldn't find any specific statement about how many are supposed to be around. The crat is needed to grant admin rights, handle bot flags, and deal with user renaming requests, but neither Meta nor Wikipedia seem to have any additional guidelines or recommendations beyond the process for approval of a new crat. --EncycloPetey 15:38, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Support —Stephen 19:04, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Support —Rod (A. Smith) 21:34, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Support SemperBlotto 21:38, 11 June 2009 (UTC) It's not normally much of a burden, but I do intend to go on holiday one day[reply]
  14. Support Matthias Buchmeier 06:21, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Support Ivan Štambuk 15:06, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Support. --Duncan 16:55, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Support. --Panda10 10:11, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Support Dan Polansky 06:00, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    1. Support Jackofclubs 16:31, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Support Diuturno 17:16, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Support. -- WikiPedant 03:08, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Support Definitely, a great contributor with plenty of history. A lot more than me anyway, that's for sure ;) 50 Xylophone Players talk 20:13, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Support Logomaniac 22:01, 30 June 2009 (UTC) I echo Neskaya's comment above - definitely yes!! :) Logomaniac 22:01, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Tho, just out of curiosity, won't it be kind of strange having a Wiktionary 'crat with a username homophonous with the word encyclopedia?!? Sort of traitorous, wouldn't one think - no offense, though, all in good fun, and it shouldn't affect anyone's votes . . . . . . . Logomaniac 19:38, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Support Robert Ullmann 15:43, 4 July 2009 (UTC) sure we could use another 'crat.[reply]
  26. Support DCDuring TALK 23:34, 8 July 2009 (UTC) Almost missed this.[reply]
    1. Support Rising Sun 11:31, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    2. Strong support, one of the most experienced users on the whole site. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:55, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. Oppose Knepflerle 02:40, 5 July 2009 (UTC) - had an unpleasant interaction with this user as a new editor, and I gather this was not an isolated incident. Unsuited to dealing with requests from inexperienced users.[reply]

Abstain

Decision

Retrieved from "https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Wiktionary:Bureaucrats&oldid=8154467"