Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2006-12/Change style standard to use new trans-top style templates

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Change style standard to use new trans-top style templates[edit]

  • Voting on: This vote is to establish use of the templates trans-top, trans-mid, and trans-bottom as the new standard for translation tables. These templates allow translations to be collapsible for users with modern browsers, and degrade gracefully for older browsers. See orange for an example in use. This vote is *not* for automated replacement of the tables, but merely to update WT:ELE to reflect the newly established standard.


  1. Symbol support vote.svg Support Jeffqyzt 18:21, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
  2. Symbol support vote.svg Support Connel MacKenzie 18:25, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
  3. Symbol support vote.svg Support --Williamsayers79 16:45, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  4. Symbol support vote.svg Support \Mike 14:22, 21 December 2006 (UTC) I presume this is about whether collapsible boxes should be used, not the template name... There can be redirects when that has become appropriate.
    Not by my reading. Something has to be said in the ELE, and trans-top, trans-mid, and trans-bottom are specifically named in the vote. DAVilla 21:42, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
    I see the word "style" in the title...allowing for plenty of wiggle-room. --Connel MacKenzie 21:47, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
  5. Symbol support vote.svg Support DAVilla 09:42, 3 January 2007 (UTC) as per the comment immediately above. I wouldn't be voting support if Connel didn't carry so much weight here.
  6. Symbol support vote.svg Support Kipmaster 16:31, 22 December 2006 (UTC) I will probably propose the same stuff on fr.wikt soon.
  7. Symbol support vote.svg SupportSaltmarsh 10:18, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
  8. Symbol support vote.svg Support henne 14:24, 30 December 2006 (UTC) They are kewl.
  9. Symbol support vote.svg Support. Can we rename "trans-bottom" into "trans-bot" and replace all existing translation tables by bot, please? Ncik 21:08, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
    I'm sure we can do that, but that may need another vote as there has been some objection to the templates so far.--Williamsayers79 14:42, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  10. Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tohru 04:18, 3 January 2007 (UTC) It seems better for me to set the default as "expanded" rather than "collapsed" as discussed below, at least until the control via preferences is implemented.
  11. Symbol support vote.svg Support Widsith 09:35, 21 January 2007 (UTC).


  1. Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose V-ball 16:45, 21 December 2006 (UTC) I don't like them at all.  They work fine and look fine, but it's an extra click to find some of the most useful (if not the most useful) information in Wiktionary (it's arguably the only stuff you can't get elsewhere in the given format). V-ball 16:45, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
    I believe the intent is to control the per-user behavior via WT:PREFS. E.g., hide completely, vs. minimize, vs. expand always, vs. random, vs. 3rd level only, etc. --Connel MacKenzie 21:50, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
    OK, I like the idea of making things more controllable through prefs.  Of course, it'd be even better if new users could easily see how to set preferences, but that's a different story. — V-ball 13:06, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
    Yes Connel, this is the impression that I had also, the prefs option is something I would be very much in favour of and would satisfy both camps and those on the fence too.--Williamsayers79 14:35, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
    Oppose DAVilla 18:37, 19 December 2006 (UTC) I like the templates (color aside) but I don't like the names. We never did determine if it's possible to merge with {bottom} and with {mid} or even replace {mid#}. I would prefer to use {trans|...} or {translations|...} or even just substitute the code in at {top}. DAVilla 18:37, 19 December 2006 (UTC)


  1. Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain Beobach972 22:41, 24 December 2006 (UTC). I abstain from this vote at this time (Beobach972 22:41, 24 December 2006 (UTC)).
  2. Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain EncycloPetey 22:55, 26 December 2006 (UTC) I do like the idea of these new templates, but have problems with their execution at this time.
  3. Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain —Stephen 05:52, 31 December 2006 (UTC) I like the way these look, but they are inconvenient for checking and editing. I can imagine that having the translations hidden may also put a damper on new contributions. —Stephen 05:52, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
    My general impression is that it's dampened the contributions on WOTD. --EncycloPetey 06:19, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
    I think it might just be a cse of people getting familiar with the new style, alternatively we can have them expanded by default?--Williamsayers79 14:33, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
    Expanded sounds like a potentially very good idea. What about basing the default on language preferences? Anonymous = unknown language ability = expanded. New user signs up in English = probably not interested = initially hidden, but can be changed in preferences. Is this feasible? DAVilla 09:47, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  4. Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain Cynewulf 21:16, 9 January 2007 (UTC) Address technical issues, prefs, and naming first.
    They seem stable enough to me, and while I agree that the prefs and naming should be addressed first, it appears that they will be anyways. DAVilla 17:27, 15 January 2007 (UTC)


  • Approved: 10 for (plus one in favor post closure), 1 opposed, 4 abstentions.
  • Some concerns have been raised regarding the implementation. Therefore, I have created a new topic in the Grease Pit here (please voice any technical concerns there.) If no technical objections are voiced in the next few days, I'll go ahead and edit WT:ELE to reflect use of the current {{trans-top}} etc. --Jeffqyzt 16:41, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
  • No unanswered objections were raised; WT:ELE has been modified to reflect use of {{trans-top}}, etc. as standard. --Jeffqyzt 14:44, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
    • I haven't seen the bot request to start switching these from top/mid/bottom yet. Is there some other delay that I'm not guessing? --Connel MacKenzie 03:37, 1 February 2007 (UTC)