User:Daniel Carrero/Entry layout

First intro

• Remove "claims of bestness are invalid", per Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-12/EL introduction.

Flexibility

• Was discussed here. Two votes failed, so it needs more discussion.

The essentials

• Propose removing the whole section. We already have separate "Language", "Parts of speech", "References".

About "References":

• Nuke it all:

  "References are becoming more important as we strive to improve the reliability of Wiktionary." -- Comment, not regulation.

  "While we may be lax in demanding references for words that are easily found in most paper dictionaries, references for more obscure words are essential." -- You mean quotations?

  "References may be added in a separate header of adequately chosen level or added directly to specific senses." -- What is the "adequately chosen level"? Directly to specific senses probably mean "<ref></ref>". The actual references section should cover this.

A very simple example

• Probably expand or something. Low priority.

Variations for languages other than English

• Propose killing this section after WT:EL#Definitions properly mentions that all romanization entries must have a definition.
• "However, a translation into English should normally be given instead of a definition, including a gloss to indicate which meaning of the English translation is intended." is controversial.
• "Also, the translations section should be omitted." -- this is incorrect. Translingual sections are allowed to have translations. This was approved by vote.
• "Some languages do have characteristics that require variation from the standard format. For links to these variations see Wiktionary:Language considerations." -- Probably could be moved upwards and rewritten.

The entry core

• I don't like the name "The entry core".

Entry name

• "When multiple capitalizations, punctuation, diacritics, ligatures, scripts and combinations with numbers and other symbols exist ... use the template {{also}}" should probably be moved to a section "Contents before the entry". This is related to the entry name, but is not about how to name entries.
• There was a discussion about new rules for matched-pairs. Keep some, redirect others.
• Morse code entries have an interesting choice of entry names. Create WT:About Morse code and link it from WT:EL#Entry name somehow.

Language

• Looks good.

Part of speech

• Looks good. But maybe "Definitions" could be discussed as an addition for Chinese, apparently.

Headword line

• Looks good.

Definitions

• Needs a full rewrite. It certainly can be made shorter. I don't think this section needs explicit subsections like "Context labels".
• Add the rule that was discussed a few years ago: Don't use boldface for the initials of abbreviations. Don't type "LOL = Laughing Out Loud."

Usage examples

• The text indicates that a sense with quotations does not need an usage example. I feel this is wrong.
• The text could probably be made shorter. Either way, I'll consider it low priority.

Additional headings

• I don't like the name. "Additional" as opposed to "POS" and "Language", which are part of "The entry core"?
• EL should have a simple "Headings" section, with an actual list of accepted headings and levels, but...
• Most of heading levels are unvoted. Create votes for heading levels and placements.
• I don't like the subsections "before the definitions" and "after the definitions". A single "Headings" section should be able to deal with that.

Images

• WT:EL says nothing about images. It might be nice to say; they are usually right-aligned thumbnails. Usually you'll want to use the default size, apparently.
• Add a rule of one image per sense at most?
• Add a rule that you shouldn't use literal images for figurative senses, like adding an image of a stack of bibles in swear on a stack of Bibles.
• Mention that, for example, every section of pizza should have their own image, as opposing to having a single image of a pizza for the whole entry.

Etymology

• I'm not sure. The section could be expanded.

Pronunciation

• Remove "Ideally, every entry should have a pronunciation section", per Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2016-07/Pronunciation 2.
• Is this true? -- "Languages with no native speakers shouldn't have audio files." (said in the vote above) This could be mentioned here.

Synonyms / Further semantic relations

• Too long!
• Vote on the specific list of semantic relations. Add "Classes".

Derived terms

• Say that derived terms are usually in collapsible tables.
• At least create a vote proposing to make the current version official.

Related terms

• Minor edits, like "wikified" -> "linked".

Descendants

• Maybe propose disallowing linking to language names in the list.
• Explain the actual descendants layout rules, such as "use bullet points with different levels", and so on.

Translations

• Don't get me started... Remove some "tr=" from the translation example.
• Show code and result of the translation example.
• Mention that all the layout stuff is usually done by JavaScript, provided the table is created first.
• Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2016-01/Literal translations in translation tables ended as no consensus... So, should we mention literal translations of SOP terms back to English in translation tables?
• Mention {{trans-see}}.

Trivia

• At least vote on "Because of the unlimited range of possibilities, no formatting details can be provided." Or just vote on removing it, it's redundant.

External links / References

• Mention that "External links" should be used for links to other dictionaries, not "References". The fact that another dictionary has a word does not automatically serve as proof that we should have that word, or as a "reference" proving that the word exists. We use quotations for attestation purposes.
• Add info from "References" in "The essentials", like actual placement of references and use of "<ref></ref>" tags from senses.

Category links

• Figure out the actual rules for categories, then edit WT:EL.

Interwiki links

• Remove "left hand side of the entry" per comments in Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2016-02/Interwiki links.