Wiktionary:Votes/2016-10/Removing label proscribed from entries

Removing label proscribed from entries

Voting on: Giving a go ahead to all automatic and semi-automatic edits that remove label "proscribed" from Wiktionary entries.

• Rationale: See Wiktionary talk:Votes/2016-10/Removing label proscribed from entries#Rationale. The voters only vote on the proposed action, not on the rationale.
• Vote starts: 00:00, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
• Vote ends: 23:59, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
• Vote created: Dan Polansky (talk) 19:38, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Discussion:

• Template talk:proscribed
• Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2016/October#Vote: Removing label proscribed from entries
• Wiktionary talk:Votes/2016-10/Removing label proscribed from entries

Support

1. Support. I agree with Dan Polansky in that the label "proscribed" is imperative in disguise, and it implies that we, the English Wiktionary, are proscribing a word or a sense. We can use the "Usage notes" section to mention if there are any authoritative sources that consider a certain term or spelling incorrect. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 00:04, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose. Most of these could be labelled better (and it should be made explicit what authorities are doing the proscribing), but this is still valuable information that shouldn't be merged. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 00:46, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
2. Oppose. If native speakers perceive certain words as proscribed, we need to know that. If the usage of a term, e.g. Russian ложи́ть (ložítʹ) is considered proscribed in Russia, foreigners need to know about this and avoid using these terms, even if they are used and attested.

   My opposing to removing the labels doesn't mean I'm opposing to having such entries in Wiktionary. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 00:58, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

3. Oppose --WikiTiki89 01:03, 28 October 2016 (UTC)