Wiktionary:Votes

	This is an information page.
	It is not an dictionary entry, nor one of Wiktionary's policies or guidelines; rather, its purpose is to explain certain aspects of Wiktionary's norms, customs, technicalities, or practices. It may reflect differing levels of consensus and vetting.

Shortcuts:
WT:VOTE
WT:VOTES
WT:V

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.

See 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.

Creating a new vote

	Before starting a new vote
	Change “Title of vote” in associated the field to add a short description, or add the user to after “User:”. Once the vote is created, add it to the list of active votes.


Note: Update the vote list at WT:A.	Note: Update the vote list at WT:B.
Note: Update the vote list at WT:C.

Routine clean-up

For admins, periodically check for orphan votes at Wiktionary:Votes/ for votes and voting templates, including templates for creation of new votes:

Current and new votes

Planned, running and recent votes [edit this list]

(see also: timeline, policy)

Ends	Title	Status/Votes
May 14	Updating voting eligibility	starts: Apr 15
(=1)	Wiktionary:Table of votes	(=0)

Updating voting eligibility

Voting on: updating our voting eligibility policy in Wiktionary:Voting policy § Voting eligibility.

Schedule:

Vote starts: 00:00, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
Vote ends: 23:59, 14 May 2026 (UTC)
Vote created: — Polomo ⟨⁠ ⁠oi!⁠ ⁠⟩ · 20:39, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion(s):

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.

Issue 1

Ending the locality restriction in the first voting eligibility requirement by removing the struck out text:

Their account’s first edit to English Wiktionary ~~(made locally rather than transwikied from another project)~~ [...]

Rationale

Transwiki has not been used on Wiktionary for around a decade. The only transwiki edits currently performed are when Stewards move user pages, and this already falls into other exclusions, which makes those brackets unnecessary.

Support

Oppose

Abstain

Decision

Issue 2

Changing this part of the first voting eligibility requirement:

[...] must predate the start time of the vote by at least 1 week.

to read as follows:

[...] must predate the start time of the vote by at least 30 days.

Rationale

The Wiktionary community makes and alters its site-wide policy by votes. This differs from how consensus is determined in our “Requests for” discussions or on Wikipedia, where policy-making is determined by discussion and the strength of arguments matters, rather than simply the number of people with a given opinion. Just like Wikipedia, we have no reason to restrict newbies from our WT:Request pages, as their opinion should be heard; however, policy-making by polling, as done on Wiktionary, requires more considerations.

Since a vote with little to no justification is worth the same as a well-argued vote, we need to set higher standards for voters: a week-old account has very little, if any, experience with the project. If a user’s subjective opinion is reason for changing policy, we need the user to have a higher degree of familiarity with the community’s practices before voting.

As such, we should employ a 'bare minimum' expectation of 30 days of editing so that our voters are not completely unexperienced with Wiktionary.

Support

Oppose

Abstain

Decision

Issue 3

Changing the second voting eligibility requirement:

[...]
Their account must have at least 50 edits in total to the main, Citations, Appendix, Rhymes, Thesaurus or Reconstruction namespaces on English Wiktionary by the start time of the vote.

Rationale

For the same reasons as given under Issue 2, Wiktionary’s policy-making needs to require a higher standard from voters. Just as someone who has only recently joined the project cannot know enough to be able to weigh in on policy, having a very small number of edits strongly indicates that a user is similarly unfamiliar with the community. As such, we should increase the minimum-edit requirement from the current threshold of 50 edits, which can be obtained extremely quickly on Wiktionary.

Option 1 proposes increasing this requirement to 500 edits (this is the same as Wikipedia’s baseline for “extended confirmed” status), while option 2 proposes a lower requirement of 250 edits. If you support the stricter option 1, you are encouraged to support option 2 as well; in the event both options pass with 2/3 support, option 1 will take precedence.

Option 1

Making it read as follows:

[...]
Their account must have at least 500 edits in total to the main, Citations, Appendix, Rhymes, Thesaurus or Reconstruction namespaces on English Wiktionary by the start time of the vote.

Support

Oppose

Abstain

Decision

Option 2

Making it read as follows:

[...]
Their account must have at least 250 edits in total to the main, Citations, Appendix, Rhymes, Thesaurus or Reconstruction namespaces on English Wiktionary by the start time of the vote.

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.