Vicifons:Magistratus

Magistratus possunt paginas delere, deletas (vel mutatas) restituere, omnino aut partim protegere, usoribus obstruere nuntiaque interficialia recensere et spatium nominale MediaWiki recensere.

Quisque magistratus apud Vicipaediam aequali communique suffragio eligitur: #Petitio magistratus.

Haec pagina Index Magistratuum est.

1. Candalua (talk • contribs) (Magistratus)
2. Doug (talk • contribs) (Grapheocrates, Magistratus)
3. John Vandenberg (talk • contribs) (Grapheocrates, Magistratus)
4. Lew XXI (talk • contribs) (Magistratus)
5. Matthead (talk • contribs) (Grapheocrates, Magistratus)
6. OrbiliusMagister (talk • contribs) (Grapheocrates, Magistratus)
7. VIGNERON (talk • contribs) (Magistratus)

Census magistrātuum: unquam • 1 annus • 6 mēnsēs • 3 mēnsēs
(N.B. the above stats do not include stats for Accurimbono or ThomasV, who retired as admins; Accurimbono, who was also a bureaucrat, had the most admin actions over the life of the project at the time of his retirement)

Vetera

Petitio grapheocrates

Lew XXI

Lew XXI (talk • contribs) SUL

(This is part of a group of nominations - see Vicifons:Scriptorium#Promotions)

I nominate Lew XXI for Bureaucrat. Lew has been an active member of the Latin Wikisource since March 2006 and an administrator since October 2010 (Vicifons:Magistratus/Vetera#Lew XXI/Specialis:Acta/rights). As far as I can tell, he is the longest active member next to Accurimbono.--Doug.^{(Disputatio • Conlationes)} 08:40, 4 Octobris 2011 (UTC)

• Support as nom.--Doug.^{(Disputatio • Conlationes)} 08:40, 4 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
• Support, VIGNERON 09:19, 4 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
• Wary as Bureaucratship is mostly a technical flag, and since even Lew's sysop activity is not his main concern, I don't see this as a necessary step. I have nothing against Lew's great work and my written thought is by no means flawless. I just state my POV. - εΔω 09:26, 4 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
  • It's true that he's not an active admin but he's an active user and thus available. His trustworthiness is unquestionable and after all these years on the project, I'm sure he can figure out the tools should he need them. I see value in having so many crats that we can always find one and I'm not much of one for determining admins by necessity, but I'll keep that debate out of the vote here and post it on the discussion page.--Doug.^{(Disputatio • Conlationes)} 03:59, 5 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
• Support --Accurimbono (disp) 09:29, 4 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
• Abstain for now, as Lew XXI has not accepted yet. --Matthead 02:05, 17 Octobris 2011 (UTC)

NOT DONE. Waiting for user feedback. --Accurimbono (disp) 15:30, 24 Octobris 2011 (UTC)

• Ego suscipiam --Lew XXI 04:01, 29 Ianuarii 2012 (UTC)

Review. The user accepted the nom over 3 months later. I still support this nom and I think that for our small project Lew's support was sufficient though there was some abivilence to promote and as the nominator I would prefer not to close. I will leave this here a while to see if anyone else comments or is willing to close.--Doug.^{(Disputatio • Conlationes)} 23:54, 19 Februarii 2012 (UTC)

• Promoted. It has been a week since Doug ask for more comments. We're a small project; I doubt anyone else will appear here for another three months. ;-) John Vandenberg (talk) 13:41, 24 Februarii 2012 (UTC)