Wiktionary:Votes/2011-07/Variations: namespace

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search

Variations: namespace[edit]

  • Vote starts: 00:01, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Vote ends: 23.59, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Support[edit]

  1. Symbol support vote.svg Support Tempodivalse [talk] 00:01, 6 August 2011 (UTC) per my comments in the previous, aforementioned vote. Tempodivalse [talk] 00:01, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
  2. Symbol support vote.svg Support --Daniel 00:02, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
  3. Symbol support vote.svg I'm guessing this is actually already tested well enough as a large section of the appendix. But I wonder if the heading would actually read “See also: Variations:a” or something some decipherable like “See also: Variations of 'a'”. DAVilla 05:05, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
    The latter is doable with {{xsee}}. (I'd say a new template {{foo|a}} could display it, but sometimes a link is needed to an a page besides the variations page. Well, I suppose the new template can include such in additional parameters. But {{xsee}} really suffices.)​—msh210 (talk) 16:19, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
  4. Symbol support vote.svg Support. Just my 10 cents. Would it be possible to edit the Variations:xxx page and have a bot or some process automatically update the pages mentioned on the Variations page with the See also Variations:xxx heading instead of having someone manually update each of those pages? Or do we already have something in place for that? JamesjiaoTC 23:57, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Oppose[edit]

  1. Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose; I think the appendix namespace is sufficient. - -sche (discuss) 05:43, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
  2. Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. This proposal is an improvement over the previous one, but I still don't see a need for a dedicated namespace. —RuakhTALK 00:36, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
  3. Symbol oppose vote.svg I weakly oppose per my comments below and linked to therefrom.​—msh210 (talk) 15:10, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
  4. Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think the only real utility of a separate namespace is allowing different granularity of searches. It hasn't been show that "Variations" pages would benefit from this. If the only goal is shortening titles by a few characters then we would add hundreds of new namespaces (Wikiproject:, Frequencies:, Votes:, Policies:, etc.). We have enough separate namespaces to already confuse novice editors attempting to use the "advanced search". --Bequw τ 04:07, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
  5. Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Shortening of titles of pages for faster typing is alone not a sufficient reason for the creation of a dedicated namespace. For context, the pages that would end up in this namespace are in Category:Variation appendices, which has 248 pages (=26 + 216 + 6) in total. --Dan Polansky 07:17, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
  6. Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I just don't see the need. SemperBlotto 07:19, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Abstain[edit]

Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain for now, at least, though I'm still open to arguments in either direction. I'm writing now only to voice the following: The big question for me is whether these pages serve the purpose of our appendix namespace, which is to serve as an appendix of the dictionary, with supplementary information. That is, are these pages useful sources of information proper, or only as disambiguation pages that direct readers to the pages they seek? I'm leaning toward the former, in which case appendix is the right namespace for them.​—msh210 (talk) 19:58, 8 August 2011 (UTC) Switched to opposition, above.​—msh210 (talk) 15:10, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

A reply to this from the vote's creator, and my reply thereto, are currently at my talkpage.​—msh210 (talk) 14:38, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
...and have now been archived at this vote's talkpage.​—msh210 (talk) 17:34, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Decision[edit]

  • Fails 4–6 (40%).​—msh210 (talk) 17:31, 6 September 2011 (UTC)