Wiktionary:Votes/2016-12/Division of Church Slavonic languages

Division of Church Slavonic languages
Voting on: Separation of Old Church Slavonic and Russian Church Slavonic.

Rationale: English Wiktionary recognizes only one Church Slavonic language — Old Church Slavonic (OCS), but it’s incorrect because there exists a lot of CS languages, and all of them are extremely different. They have different letters, different paradigms, different vocabulary. OCS disintegrated in about XI century.

Schedule:
 * Vote starts: 00:00, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Vote ends: 23:59, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Vote created: Γρηγόριος (talk) 11:47, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Discussions:
 * [[Image:Wikt rei-artur3.svg|20px]] User talk:Chuck Entz
 * [[Image:Wikt rei-artur3.svg|20px]] Wiktionary talk:Votes/2016-12/Division of Church Slavonic languages

Support

 * 1)  Γρηγόριος (talk) 08:12, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1)  until I hear further. Not discussed and editors who have worked on OCS have not shown interest in splitting these in the past. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 08:39, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
 * 2)  the vote itself. This issue needs to be discussed first. --WikiTiki89 17:49, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
 * 3)  for now; it needs more discussion first. Certainly RCS is different from OCS, but I don't know whether it's different enough to warrant being a separate language as opposed to a regional/temporal dialect; in other words, that tagging Russianisms with cu or the like isn't sufficient. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:35, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Abstain

 * 1)  I'm pretty sure we can use WT:RFM to suggest splitting languages. I feel RFM implies discussing and possibly changing a proposal based on other's ideas, while votes are to implement something "set on stone" and already revised/discussed. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 12:39, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
 * 2)  I know nothing about Church Slavonic languages, and I don't recall there being a discussion about this prior to the vote. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 17:42, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
 * 3)  -Xbony2 (talk) 22:09, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Decision

 * This clearly failed. --Quadcont (talk) 18:51, 25 January 2017 (UTC)