Wiktionary:Votes
Wiktionary > Votes
Votes formalize and document the consensus-building process and the decisions that the community makes. This page displays the full contents of recent, current and planned votes. Edit Wiktionary:Votes/Active to add new votes to the “active” list and remove old ones. Finished votes are added to Wiktionary:Votes/Timeline, an organized archive of previous votes and their results, sorted by the vote end date.
Policy and help pages, respectively: Wiktionary:Voting policy (including who is eligible to vote) and Help:Creating a vote.
See also Wiktionary:Votes/ for an automatically generated, less organized list of votes.
Before clicking the “Start a new vote!” button below, change “Title of vote” in the field just above the button to a short descriptive title. Once you have created your vote, add it to the list at Wiktionary:Votes/Active.
{{Wiktionary:Votes/2022-05/Title of vote}} |
{{Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2022-05/Title of vote}} |
Note: add to this page and WT:A. |
Note: add to this page and WT:B. |
Note: add to this page and WT:C. |
{{Wiktionary:Votes/bt-2022-05/User: for bot status}} |
- Other
Admins, please periodically check for orphan votes at Wiktionary:Votes/.
Look for votes and voting templates, including templates for creation of new votes:
Main sections of this page: Current and new votes and Proposed votes. See also /Timeline.
Current and new votes
Ends | Title | Status/Votes |
---|---|---|
May 4 | User:PUC for admin | passed |
June 10 | elfism validation | starts: May 26 |
(=2) | [Wiktionary:Table of votes] | (=21) |
User:PUC for admin
Nomination: I hereby nominate PUC (talk • contribs) as a local English Wiktionary Administrator.
Schedule:
- Vote starts: 10:06, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
- Vote ends: 23:59, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- Vote created: —Svārtava (t/u) • 10:06, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Acceptance: I accept. I regularly revert vandalism, move misspelled pages, tag pages with {{d}}
, so the admin tools would come in handy.
I know I’ve done many weird and/or reprehensible things, but I believe I can honestly say this is all in the past now. For those who aren’t acquainted with the situation, here are the pages for my previous nominations, where everything is laid bare: 1, 2. I invite you to read them before voting. Those two links will be of relevance too.
- Languages: fr, en-3, ru-2, nl-2
- Timezone: UTC+2
Support
Support, with the hope that this vote is a success. ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 13:19, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Support as nominator, following the nominee's acceptance; I also strongly think that the abovementioned incident(s) like the sockpuppet-nomination, trivial alt accounts, a few partly objectionable usernames, etc. are too old and irrelevant to even be mentioned, let alone being grounds for opposition. —Svārtava (t/u) • 13:54, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Support — [ זכריה קהת ] Zack. — 14:47, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Support, very support ‑‑Sarri.greek ♫ I 15:50, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Support Roger.M.Williams (talk) 16:08, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Support strongly. I've nominated them before, after all! Imetsia (talk) 17:26, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Support Fay Freak (talk) 01:45, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Support Kutchkutch (talk) 02:04, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Support, always. --Robbie SWE (talk) 07:23, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Support The tools seem like they'd come in handy, I've only had positive interactions with this user, and they really seem to have grown over time. Vininn126 (talk) 09:40, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Support I heard all the best users need 3 admin votes. Equinox ◑ 12:30, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Support — Fenakhay (حيطي · مساهماتي) 20:36, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Support --Vahag (talk) 09:36, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Support - the level of transparency here is commendable. John Cross (talk) 16:44, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Strong support PUC has reverted me without giving any reason sometimes (I personally think that such reverts should only be used for obvious vandalism), but they seem to have done it in good faith and their work is commendable. I also appreciate that they are transparent about what they have done in the past. They would make excellent use of the tools. Prahlad balaji (talk) 04:55, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Support, apologies for the late vote :) Thadh (talk) 21:17, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Oppose
Oppose. DonnanZ (talk) 17:21, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Donnanz: Why? By the way, I also want to see you as an admin. ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 17:46, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Oppose (Keep up the good work etc., however) Allahverdi Verdizade (talk) 11:39, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Oppose Way too many https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/User:PUC/Socks sock accounts, 7 of which have inappropiate usernames. Updated he has used a sockpuppet to ask his old main account to boost his support for his administrator rights!ADDSamuels (talk) 19:09, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- @ADDSamuels Forgive me for asking but why does he even do that in the first place? --98.179.127.59 01:17, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's pretty bizarre. Reminds me of Wonderfool. (Although I'm not saying it's sufficient reason to think granting them admin rights would be negative, especially given how long ago it was.) 70.172.194.25 02:51, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
- Fair see the update, though he has given it, and I guess it's a question on how lenient one must be on forgiving. ADDSamuels (talk) 10:44, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's pretty bizarre. Reminds me of Wonderfool. (Although I'm not saying it's sufficient reason to think granting them admin rights would be negative, especially given how long ago it was.) 70.172.194.25 02:51, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
- @ADDSamuels Forgive me for asking but why does he even do that in the first place? --98.179.127.59 01:17, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
Abstain
Abstain Despite the amount of time that has passed since the transgressions discussed in the links above, they still rest heavy on my mind. For that reason I cannot bring myself to support the nomination. I admit that I do not have much, if any, interactions with PUC and so therefore cannot easily judge how good of an editor they are today (though the testimonials are positive!) and so don't see myself as in a position to oppose the nomination. —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 20:37, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
Abstain for the same reasons as above. AG202 (talk) 14:07, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Decision
- Passes, Congratulations! —Svārtava (t/u) • 01:07, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Done Chuck Entz (talk) 04:55, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
elfism validation
Voting on: Do we accept the provided citations as sufficient validation for the term elfism?
This vote has not yet started. It has been created to solicit advice on wording and fitness to purpose. Feedback and new ideas are highly encouraged! If you have not done so, please follow the discussion links for a better understanding of the topic. However, do not vote for any options at this time, as any premature votes may be struck. On the other hand, if the discussion is stagnant and there are no recent changes, anyone may choose to start this vote by properly listing it. Once the starting date has arrived, this banner may be ignored or removed.
Schedule:
- Vote starts: 00:00, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Vote ends: 23:59, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Vote created: Kiwima (talk) 02:33, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Support
Oppose
Abstain
Decision
Proposed votes
The following are proposals for new votes, excluding nominations, in cases where the proposer of the vote prefers that the vote is written collaboratively, or where the vote appears to require substantial revision. If you have not created a passing vote yet, it is recommended that you use this section and actively solicit feedback by linking to your proposal in discussion; your vote may have a better chance of passing if it is first reviewed.
Votes may linger here indefinitely. If changes in policy make a proposal irrelevant, the voting page will be requested for deletion. On the other hand, you do not have to be the creator to initiate one of the votes below. Place any votes with a live start date in the section above at least a few days before that start date arrives.
Votes intended to be written collaboratively or substantially revised: