Wiktionary:Votes/2016-08/Making usex the primary name in the wiki markup

From Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Making usex the primary name in the wiki markup

[edit]
  • Voting on: Making {{usex}} the primary template name to be used in the wiki markup of entries rather than {{ux}}. This proposal is about template name, that is, "usex" vs. "ux"; it is not about template parameters or syntax.
  • Rationale: See Wiktionary talk:Votes/2016-08/Making usex the primary name in the wiki markup#Rationale. The voters only vote on the proposed action, not on the rationale.
  • Vote starts: 00:00, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Vote ends: 23:59, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Support

[edit]
  1. Support Superior to {{ux}} in initial intelligibility; more obviously pronounceable, ergo more memorable for low-frequency contributors. {{ux}} can be kept as a redirect, but a bot should be charged with converting it to {{usex}}. Using "usage example" would better serve all the objectives, but at the cost of more typing, more non-content cruft in edit windows, and a bit more bulk for storage and download. {{usex}} is an effort to balance the various considerations. DCDuring TALK 03:26, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    As a clarification: In RFM, I proposed to use {{usage-example}} because I misunderstood the RFM. I thought the RFM was to establish a situation like we have for {{lb}}, which is that {{lb}} is the main form in the mainspace while {{label}} is the actual template name. But it turned out that multiple people understood the RFM to be about the predominant markup in the mainspace, and I obviously do not support that such a long name is in the mainspace. --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:42, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support -Xbony2 (talk) 00:48, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support --Vahag (talk) 17:00, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support per DCDuring. And because UX means something very different. —RuakhTALK 06:19, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support per Ruakh.​—msh210℠ (talk) 18:21, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Support – Jberkel (talk) 19:51, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

[edit]
  1. Oppose --Daniel Carrero (talk) 00:41, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    According to Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:ux, this change would affect 26,622 (main namespace) entries.
    The name {{ux}} recently passed per Wiktionary:Votes/2015-11/term → m; context → label; usex → ux. I'm uncomfortable with changing the name of the same template twice in short succession.
    In my opinion, we could focus on other template name changes: I'd like to propose renaming all instances of {{non-gloss definition}} into {{n-g}} eventually, if people support this idea.
    Besides, in my opinion, neither {{usex}} nor {{ux}} is that great of a name. I've been using {{eg}} for new usage examples. It is an unvoted template that redirects to {{ux}}. (Before anyone asks, I oppose using a bot to convert all entries to {{eg}} without a vote; doing this would require a vote.) --Daniel Carrero (talk) 00:41, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose. I don't think either one is better than the other, so there's no point. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 03:53, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose. "usex" is not really easier to understand than "ux" if you are a newbie. ux is shorter to read and type. I opposed the templatization of user examples but if we are to have it, let it be really succinct. My position seems in keeping with Wiktionary:Votes/2016-06/label → lb, which passed 11-4-5, and would be 11-5-5 with the late vote there. --Dan Polansky (talk) 23:15, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Oppose --AtalinaDove (talk) 14:12, 3 September 2016 (UTC) Echoing what Dan Polansky said about it being shorter and there being no difference for newbies in understanding "usex" vs "ux".[reply]
  5. Oppose Shorter is better. Understanding should be facilitated with a dictionary for high frequency templates. Korn [kʰũːɘ̃n] (talk) 11:54, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose having this vote

[edit]
  1. As in the past, I oppose the suggestion that maintenance like updates to template names must be subjected to votes; one of our more colourful editors in the past called it bureaucratic masturbation. And the tendency of certain users to hold votes when discussion in discussion fora is moving towards a result they don't like is an effort to move the goalposts and subject changes, which may have majority support, to higher-than-usual, higher-than-majority thresholds in an effort not dissimilar to the way a filibuster works. (Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2013-03/Japanese Romaji romanization - format and content is a previous vote with an "Oppose having this vote" section.) - -sche (discuss) 17:16, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    This vote started as a result of Wiktionary:Requests for moves, mergers and splits#Template:ux to Template:usex. The RFM discussion presents some different points of view and arguments. This vote is an opportunity for me to vote Oppose. I said my reasons in the Oppose section.
    I agree with having this vote because I believe that an RFM discussion should not be able to override a high-profile recent vote: Wiktionary:Votes/2015-11/term → m; context → label; usex → ux, which passed in January 2016. Specifically, the proposal "usex → ux" passed with 19 participants. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 18:11, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Late comment: I don't see why 6:5 majority should be enough for us to be changing template names used in the mainspace. While I admit that, for certain types of action, 2/3 is too high a threshold, a majority by one vote is too fragile anyway, IMHO; the principle of accepting bare majority (> 50%) too easily leads to unnecessary back-and-forths, with no added value to the users of the dictionary. This vote is good to have. This vote means that the issue has been brought to the attentation of a broader audience than the RFM would allow, which is good. Beyond that, what Daniel said above applies. --Dan Polansky (talk) 18:06, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ironically, this vote completely misses the mark on dealing with the RFM, so as far as I am concerned the RFM still passed. The RFM was about making {{usex}} a redirect, or alias, to {{ux}} rather than a separate template. The outcome of this vote neither supports nor opposes that move, so the original RFM's consensus remains valid. The redirect should be reinstated. —CodeCat 18:19, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • For the record, I find the above "bureaucratic masturbation" language objectionable, containing no argument substance. My preference would be to no longer read that sort of inflammatory language, but obviously, taste varies. --Dan Polansky (talk) 18:10, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Abstain

[edit]
  1. Abstain I don't really like either of 'em anyway. Equinox ◑ 22:00, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Abstain As long as the syntax is the same—i.e., as long as {{usex|aa|Text|Translation}} works just like {{ux|aa|Text|Translation}} works—then I don't really care which one is the primary name and which one is the redirect. I just don't want to use the old, clumsy {{usex|Text|lang=aa|t=Translation}} syntax anymore. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:54, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    {{usex}} is a redirect, so the syntax is the same. -Xbony2 (talk) 20:14, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Or not, but the syntax would be the same anyway I guess. -Xbony2 (talk) 21:13, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Abstain I don't care and I would just like consistency and for people to stop moving them back and forth. DTLHS (talk) 21:17, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Abstain —CodeCat 21:35, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Abstain - I tend to agree with Equinox. DonnanZ (talk) 18:32, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Abstain —Enosh (talk) 09:24, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Abstain. I have mixed feelings. --WikiTiki89 18:47, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decision

[edit]

No consensus

  • Counting "Oppose having this vote" as having the same weight an oppose vote: 6-6-7 (50%-50%).
  • If, for whatever reason, we chose not to count "Oppose having this vote", the result would be: 6-5-7 (54.54%-45.45%). --Daniel Carrero (talk) 00:56, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Wiktionary:Votes/2016-08/Making_usex_the_primary_name_in_the_wiki_markup&oldid=41046519"