Wiktionary:Votes/2021-03/Merging Prakrit lects into one

Merging Prakrit lects into one

Voting on: Merging the following Middle Indo-Aryan lects as “Prakrit” (pra, currently etymology-only):

Ardhamagadhi Prakrit (pka)

Elu Prakrit (elu-prk)

Khasa Prakrit (inc-kha)

Magadhi Prakrit (inc-mgd)

Maharastri Prakrit (pmh)

Paisaci Prakrit (inc-psc)

Sauraseni Prakrit (psu)

Background: These Middle Indo-Aryan lects were originally considered to differ to such an extent that they were treated as independent languages at Wiktionary. However, as the coverage of these Middle Indo-Aryan lects has grown, it has become apparent that they do not differ from one another as originally thought. Furthermore, much of the academic literature on Middle Indo-Aryan collectively refer to these lects as “Prakrit” without specifying any particular lect, and the attestation of each lect varies considerably. Treating each of these Middle Indo-Aryan lects as independent languages has led to confusion, which has hindered the progress of Wiktionary's coverage of Middle Indo-Aryan. This merger will make it easier for editors to manage these Middle Indo-Aryan lects.

Further details:

• The seven language codes listed above will be changed to etymology-only languages. These seven etymology-only codes will be used for the etymologies of their descendant entries (as they are used currently).

• If a “Prakrit” term can be considered to belong to one or more of the seven Middle Indo-Aryan lects listed above, labels such as {{lb|pra|<lect name>}} would be used to automatically categorise the term.

For example:

1. is specifically attested as , so, after the merger, there would be {{lb|pra|Paisaci}} beside its definition, which would link to Paisaci Prakrit and categorise the term into a category such as Category:Paisaci Prakrit. The language-header will be “Prakrit”.

2. is attested as and , so, after the merger, there would be {{lb|pra|Magadhi|Sauraseni}} beside its definition, which would categorise the term into categories such as Category:Magadhi Prakrit and Category:Sauraseni Prakrit. The language-header will be “Prakrit”.

• There are currently no reconstructed entries in the seven Middle Indo-Aryan lects that are to be merged.

• Although the following languages are included in the family Category:Prakrit languages, they will not be merged into “Prakrit” (pra):

Ashokan Prakrit (inc-ash)

Gandhari (pgd)

Kamarupi Prakrit (inc-kam)

Pali (pi)

Gandhari and Pali have separate identities. Ashokan Prakrit represents an earlier stage of Middle Indo-Aryan, and Kamarupi Prakrit represents a later stage of Middle Indo-Aryan.

Schedule:

• Vote starts: 00:00, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
• Vote ends: 23:59, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
• Vote created: 🔥शब्दशोधक🔥 10:33, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Discussions:

• June 2011: Talk:Prakrit#Language_or_language_family
• September 2013: Module_talk:languages/Archive_1#Sauraseni_Prakrit
• October 2014: Wiktionary:Etymology_scriptorium/2014/October#jaggery
• November 2015: Wiktionary:Grease_pit/2015/November#Sauraseni_Prakrit
• February 2016: Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2016/February#Prakrit_languages
• April 2016: Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2016/April#Old_Hindi
• May 2016: Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2016/May#Merge_all_Prakrits
• May 2016: Talk:𑀳𑀢𑁆𑀣
• May 2016: Wiktionary:Grease_pit/2016/May#Prakrit
• July 2016: Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2016/July#Sanskrit_vs._Old_Indo-Aryan
• April 2017: Category_talk:Braj_language
• May 2017: Wiktionary:Grease_pit/2017/May#Sauraseni_Prakrit_transliteration
• May 2017: Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2017/May#Prakrit_merger
• May 2017: User_talk:AryamanA/2017#Devanagari_for_Prakrits?
• May 2017: Category_talk:Konkani_inherited_terms
• May 2017: User_talk:AryamanA/2017#Sauraseni_Apabhramsha
• May 2017: Reconstruction_talk:Proto-Dravidian/palṇas
• May 2017: Talk:𑀯𑀅𑀁
• June 2017: Reconstruction_talk:Proto-Indo-Iranian/úštras#Sindhi
• June 2017: Reconstruction_talk:Proto-Indo-Iranian/úštras#Nasal_consonants
• July 2017: User_talk:AryamanA/2017#Grassmann's_law
• July 2017: Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2017/July#Elu_Prakrit
• July 2017: Category_talk:Hindi_Tadbhava
• August 2017: Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2017/August#Sanskrit_vs._Old_Indo-Aryan
• September 2017: User_talk:Kutchkutch#माकड_(mākaḍ)
• September 2017: User_talk:AryamanA/2017#बंदर_(bandar)
• September 2017: User_talk:AryamanA/2017#Quotations_and_Example_Sentences
• September 2017: Talk:𐨧𐨪𐨡
• September 2017: Talk:कैसा
• October 2017: Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2017/October#Special:Contributions/98.113.14.63
• October 2017: Talk:चौकी
• November 2017: Talk:हांव#Sanskrit
• November 2017: User_talk:DerekWinters#Ashokan_Prakrit
• November 2017: Talk:जुआ
• January 2018: User_talk:Bhagadatta/2018#Prakrit_declension_tables
• January 2018: Talk:बीघा
• January 2018: User_talk:AryamanA/2018#Proto_Indo_Aryan_lemmas
• January 2018: Reconstruction_talk:Ashokan_Prakrit/𑀓𑀼𑀢𑁆𑀢
• January 2018: Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2018/January#Proto-Prakrit
• February 2018: Talk:में
• February 2018: Reconstruction_talk:Proto-Indo-European/pró
• February 2018: Talk:𐨯𐨿𐨤𐨒𐨿𐨪
• February 2018: Talk:𑀥𑀁𑀫𑀮𑀺𑀧𑀺
• February 2018: Talk:𑀇𑀬𑀁
• February 2018: Talk:𑀲𑁆𑀯𑀕
• February 2018: Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2018/February#Ancestor_of_Middle_Indo-Aryan
• February 2018: Category_talk:Ashokan_Prakrit_language#Standardization
• March 2018: Talk:नया#Error_on_this_page
• April 2018: User_talk:GeneralPericles#Dhivehi
• May 2018: Talk:𑀧𑀸𑀅
• June 2018: User_talk:AryamanA/2018#Sauraseni_Prakrit
• July 2018: Talk:𐨯𐨿𐨤𐨭𐨂𐨪#Word
• August 2018: User_talk:Victar#psu_code
• May 2019: Module_talk:family_tree#Prakrit_languages
• August 2019: User_talk:AryamanA/2019#Divehi_language
• December 2019: Talk:गोस्वामिन्#Prakrit
• December 2019: Talk:क्रोश#Prakrit
• January 2020: Category_talk:Assamese language#Kamarupi_Prakrit
• May 2020: Wiktionary:Etymology_scriptorium/2020/May#Bengali_and_Assamese_vs_Sanskrit
• August 2020: Appendix_talk:Marathi_Swadesh_list
• August 2020: User_talk:AryamanA#Pravachan_in_Prakrit!
• August 2020: Talk:𑀡𑀻𑀬#Continuing_the_discussion
• August 2020: Talk:बछड़ा
• August 2020: Talk:रोकड़
• September 2020: Talk:बद्ध
• September 2020: Template_talk:inc-extension
• September 2020: Module_talk:inc-ash/dial
• September 2020: Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2020/September#Northwestern_Indo-Aryan
• September 2020: Talk:তুমি
• October 2020: Talk:शेप#Descendants_(Sauraseni_Prakrit)
• October 2020: Reconstruction_talk:Ashokan_Prakrit/𑀕𑀼𑀧𑁆𑀨𑀸#Language
• November 2020: Talk:𑀦𑀸𑀫#Moving_the_page
• November 2020: Talk:घोट
• January 2021: Talk:𑀨𑀼𑀮𑁆𑀮
• January 2021: User:SodhakSH/पुराचर्चापृष्ठम्#Prakrit_entries_(प्राकृत_लेख)
• January 2021: Category_talk:Prakrit_languages#Prakrit_entries_(contd.)
• January 2021: Talk:قنبيل
• February 2021: Talk:𑘖𑘲𑘕𑘜𑘹
• February 2021: Talk:खादन
• March 2021: User_talk:Benwing2#Help_with_merging_Prakrits
• March 2021: Wiktionary_talk:Votes/2021-03/Merging_Prakrit_lects_into_one

Support

1. Support Kutchkutch (talk) 00:07, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
2. Support This would greatly help in the coverage of MIA on Wiktionary. I prompt all Indo-Aryan editors to support. 🔥शब्दशोधक🔥 01:01, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
3. Support Whatever I have to say on the subject matter can be found in the relevant links posted above. I do agree with Metaknowledge that this did not have to be a vote but the others insisted that a vote be created for this purpose so here we are. -- 𝓑𝓱𝓪𝓰𝓪𝓭𝓪𝓽𝓽𝓪^{(𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴)} 10:11, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
4. Support I have made my arguments very clear in the big discussion and the many many discussions that have taken place before. And yeah, this is pointless bureaucracy. BTW, sorry for my inactivity--swamped at university. I'll be happy to write the script for the merger once it is approved. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 18:45, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

   @AryamanA: Great to know, and thanks for supporting! 🔥शब्दशोधक🔥 02:38, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

5. Support I remember researching about these languages, and I always thought that these all are basically different dialects of a language called Prakrit. Of course they should be one language. ॥ ☼ সূর্যমান ☽ ॥ 21:56, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
6. Support I am pleased to see such a thorough discussion and strong support from the editors. I think this is definitely better than the current situation since it will allow much greater flexibility. —*i̯óh₁n̥C^[5] 06:04, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
7. Support unified Prākṛta, as one of the proposers. @SodhakSH & @Kutchkutch, thanks for your hard work of making and building this vote. By the way, Victar is being too overbearing. -_⸘- inqilābī ^{‹inqilāb·zinda·bād›} 21:53, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

   All credit to @Kutchkutch for the wording and discussions. I just made a default-like vote with one discussion and little description. 🔥शब्दशोधक🔥 02:38, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Abstain

1. Abstain. This shouldn't have been a vote. With rare, high-profile exceptions, the fate of language codes should be decided in discussions by the editors who know those languages best, not in votes where people with no relevant background (like me) get an equal say to subject-matter experts. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 06:27, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

   @Metaknowledge: I agree it shouldn't have been a vote. It was discussed between me, Kutchkutch, Bhagadatta, Inqilabi and AryamanA, who are certainly aware of the similarities and differences between these lects. We had also agreed to do this without a vote. See Category_talk:Prakrit_languages#Prakrit_entries_(contd.) (the main discussion). But because JohnC5 and Victar said that for such a major change, a vote was required (see diff and diff), this vote had to be created. 🔥शब्दशोधक🔥 08:58, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

   @JohnC5, Victar, care to explain yourselves here? It's not too late to undo this needless bit of bureaucracy for its own sake. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 18:14, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

   I'm guessing Victar has some concerns about the prospect of reconstructed Prakrit entries in the future and their relationship to CAT:Ashokan Prakrit reconstructed terms. @Victar Such concerns are understandable, and it would help if you could elaborate on those concerns. Kutchkutch (talk) 11:39, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

   @Metaknowledge: Major changes to language codes should 👏 always 👏 be 👏 voted 👏 upon. This isn't a "needless bit of bureaucracy". --{{victar|talk}} 19:54, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

   This isn't on the level of Chinese or Serbo-Croatian, and no quantity of clapping emojis will change that. In the future, I hope you respect the wishes of the editors who actually work on a language rather than imposing votes on something it seems nobody even opposes. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 20:44, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

   @Metaknowledge: And what about the other example votes? Do any of them meet your arbitrary level of what you think warrants a vote or not? I opined that this should go to vote, SodhakSH obliged, and I still think it was a good idea for several reasons: 1. it gives more eyeballs to the issue, informing people that may have missed the discussions 2. it distilled the proposal that spanned dozens of discussions to a single page, 3. it gives us an easy link in the future for people who want to know when and where this decision was made. --{{victar|talk}} 23:12, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

   @Victar: I'm actually convinced with your explanation. Why didn't you vote, though? 🔥शब्दशोधक🔥 02:38, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

   The only one of those votes that was inappropriate was the one you created. This vote is a waste of time, but I will try not to waste any more of my time discussing it. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 23:41, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

2. Abstain I have no clue. I trust those editors and hope that others without relevant background knowledge refrain from putting in their say likewise. Otherwise if someone without clue oppose I should perhaps support because the people who should know support. What Metaknowledge says is kind of right, because such votes could only invite people that should not be invited, if without a vote already everyone with recognizable interest has been proposed to. Fay Freak (talk) 11:31, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
3. Abstain, as above. Imetsia (talk) 01:12, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
4. Abstain — Dentonius 14:43, 23 March 2021 (UTC)