Wiktionary:Votes/2012-06/Well Documented Languages

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

Well Documented Languages[edit]

Voting on: Changes to the WT:CFI page and accompanying pages to expand the languages with limited online documentation to try and cover all the living languages of the world. To do so, this vote takes the reverse approach, that is, naming the languages that are "well documented" instead of those that have "limited documentation."

In addition to the change in languages covered, there are two other changes:

  • the elimination of Dacian (to be addressed in a later extinct language vote),
  • the addition of constructed languages, something that had been omitted before, and

The specific changes are:

1. Deletion of Wiktionary:Criteria_for_inclusion#Languages_with_limited_online_documentation. It is no longer necessary.

2. Change from

Number of citations[edit]

In general, three citations in which a term is used are the minimum number for inclusion in Wiktionary. For terms in extinct languages, one use in a contemporaneous source is the minimum. For languages with limited online documentation, only one use or mention is adequate, subject to the following requirements:

  • the language community should maintain a list of materials deemed appropriate as the sole source for entries based on a single mention,
  • each entry should have its source(s) listed on the entry or citation page, and
  • a box explaining that a low number of citations were used should be included on the entry page (such as by using the {{LDL}} template).[1]

to

Number of citations[edit]

For languages well documented on the Internet, three citations in which a term is used is the minimum number for inclusion in Wiktionary. For terms in extinct languages, one use in a contemporaneous source is the minimum. For all other spoken languages, only one use or mention is adequate, subject to the following requirements:

  • the community of editors for that language should maintain a list of materials deemed appropriate as the sole source for entries based on a single mention,
  • each entry should have its source(s) listed on the entry or citation page, and
  • a box explaining that a low number of citations were used should be included on the entry page (such as by using the {{LDL}} template).[2]

3. The addition of a line or box at the top of Wiktionary:Criteria_for_inclusion/Languages_with_limited_online_documentation, saying (with font size and style appropriately adjusted for clarity): "As per the vote on [[Wiktionary:Votes/2012-06/Well_Documented_Languages|Well Documented Languages]], this page is now obsolete."

4. The addition of a page at Wiktionary:Criteria_for_inclusion/Well_Documented_Languages whose content is as follows:

Well Documented Languages[edit]

The languages well documented on the Internet as provided on the Criteria for inclusion page are:

  1. Albanian, Basque, Belarusian, Bulgarian, Catalan, Czech, Danish, Dutch, English, Estonian, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hungarian, Icelandic, Italian, Irish, Latvian, Lithuanian, Macedonian, Norwegian (Nynorsk and Bokmål), Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Russian, Scots, Serbo-Croatian, Slovak, Slovene, Spanish, Swedish, Ukrainian and Welsh;
  2. Armenian, Azeri, Georgian, Hebrew and Turkish;
  3. Algerian Arabic, Egyptian Arabic, Libyan Arabic, Modern Standard Arabic, Moroccan Arabic, North Levantine Arabic, South Levantine Arabic and Tunisian Arabic;
  4. Afrikaans, Swahili, Xhosa and Zulu;
  5. Bengali, Hindi, Kannada, Malayalam, Persian, Punjabi, Sindhi, Tamil, Telugu and Urdu;
  6. Cantonese, Hokkien, Japanese, Korean and Standard Mandarin;
  7. Standard Indonesian, Malay, Tagalog, Thai and Vietnamese; and
  8. approved constructed languages.

This page may be modified through general consensus. To make a request to add or exclude a language, go to the Beer Parlour and click the "+" tab at top to input your request. When making a change to this list, consideration of how to handle existing entries should be taken into account.

  1. ^ Wiktionary:Votes/2012-04/Languages with limited documentation
  2. ^ Wiktionary:Votes/2012-06/Well Documented Languages


Support[edit]

  1. Symbol support vote.svg Support --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds
  2. Symbol support vote.svg Support --BB12 (talk) 01:13, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
  3. Symbol support vote.svg SupportRuakhTALK 01:50, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
  4. Symbol support vote.svg Support (previous discussion). Having a short list of three-cite languages is much simpler than having an enormous list of one-cite languages. - -sche (discuss) 04:13, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
  5. Symbol support vote.svg Support Liliana 19:51, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
  6. Symbol support vote.svg Support.​—msh210 (talk) 17:03, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
  7. Symbol support vote.svg Support. Armenian is not well-documented on the Internet. I guess I should have said something before the vote started. --Vahag (talk) 16:29, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
    We can try to change that in the Beer Parlour when this vote is over. --BB12 (talk) 18:15, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
    Yes, I hope for some flexibility too in terms of adding languages poorly documented languages, especially as most contributors use internet resources, not library books these days. In Indo-Aryan it's Oriya and Dravidian Malayalam, which I was thinking. I don't know why all Arabic dialects are listed but it's too late to change. Standard Arabic is well documented, although web-resources remain extremely poor but dialects - no. --Anatoli (обсудить) 03:49, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
    I personally have no opinion or knowledge about those languages. There are still 20 more days left for this vote. We can discuss proposing a change to the rules in the Beer Parlour later this month if this proposal continues to get support. --BB12 (talk) 05:47, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
  8. Symbol support vote.svg SupportInternoob 17:57, 10 July 2012 (UTC) On a side note, I don't know if Haitian Creole should be on this list. It may be easily attestable compared to, say, Volapük. I'll take a look at it later.
    Volapük isn't exactly easy to cite terms in, but conlangs (ones like Volapük especially) tend to allow for tons of logically formed terms, so if we're choosing to allow certain conlangs in the main namespace, I think we oughtn't to give them a free ride. I'd be really surprised in Haitian Creole can make it, but I'd love to see what there is out there in the land of durably archived media. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:03, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
  9. Symbol support vote.svg Support --Anatoli (обсудить) 03:49, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Oppose[edit]

Abstain[edit]

  1. Symbol abstain vote.svg AbstainUngoliant (Falai) 18:19, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Decision[edit]