Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2009-08/Clarify names of specific entities

Clarify names of specific entities

 * Voting on amended wording of WT:CFI:


 * A name should be included if it is used attributively, with a widely understood meaning, independent of its referent . For example: New York is included because “New York” is used attributively in phrases like “New York delicatessen”, to describe refer to a particular sort of delicatessen. A person or place name that is not used attributively (and that is not a word that otherwise should be included) should not be included. Lower Hampton, Sears Tower, and George Walker Bush thus should not be included. Similarly, whilst Jefferson (an attested family name word with an etymology that Wiktionary can discuss) and Jeffersonian (an adjective) should be included, Thomas Jefferson (which isn’t used attributively) should not.


 * Vote starts: 00:00, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Vote ends: 24:00, 2 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Vote created: —Michael Z. 2009-08-27 04:53 z  04:53, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Discussion:
 * [[Image:Wikt rei-artur3.svg|20px]] WT:BP
 * [[Image:Wikt rei-artur3.svg|20px]] Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2009-08/Clarify names of specific entities

Support

 * 1) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support  —Michael Z. 2009-08-30 23:44 z  23:44, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support Equinox ◑ 02:11, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support DCDuring TALK 14:14, 8 September 2009 (UTC) I'd like us to become a great dictionary before trying to become a gazetteer or biographical dictionary or a specialized nymic dictionary. I'd also like clarification of the meaning of "attributive use" as it applies to WT:CFI. DCDuring TALK 14:14, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 4) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support  Acknowledging that it's still English-oriented, it's still an improvement. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 20:36, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 5) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support Yair rand 17:30, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support Yair rand 17:30, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|20px]] Oppose Anatoli 02:07, 31 August 2009 (UTC) Oppose to the proposal in its current form, still limiting place names to the attributive usage in English. --Anatoli 02:07, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * This proposal doesn't seek to change the meaning of the guideline, it only seeks to improve inadequate wording. You are effectively voting to confuse the readers of our current guidelines. --Michael Z. 2009-09-08 05:21 z 
 * 1) [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|20px]] Oppose EncycloPetey 00:19, 7 September 2009 (UTC) Note that the "classic" example of New York delicatessen relies on definitions of New York: that all explicitly mention the city or state of New York.  So, New York would fail under the revised policy, despite being the example of an allowed entry. --EncycloPetey 00:19, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * As I mentioned to Anatoli above, this is about improved wording, and explicitly seeks to not change the substance of the guideline. It wouldn't effect your proposal for an improvement in the substance or examples.  You're voting against the proposal by citing problems with something that's not part of the proposal. --Michael Z. 2009-09-08 05:21 z 
 * The proposal may not seek to change the guideline, but it does change the guideline quite significantly. --EncycloPetey 05:26, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought it was true to both the intent of the guideline, as well as how we usually apply it. —Michael Z. 2009-09-25 04:05 z 
 * Clearly not, since it would exclude the one central example we cite for inclusion from the guideline itself. --EncycloPetey 04:40, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The current proposal doesn't matter to me, not supporting minor change because I advocate a bigger change to the inclusion rules. Both the current rules and the new rules are restricting the inclusion of proper names, which I am opposing. I don't think I am confusing anyone. Anatoli 03:48, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * So you'd prevent us from improving the wording until you can get your way? May as well vote against every proposal until your favourite bigger change is accepted by everyone. —Michael Z. 2009-09-25 04:05 z 
 * The same way you are getting your way by imposing limitations and your views, Michael. But this is an ongoing discussion about the same thing. Like other voters I AM for a change (otherwise why bother voting) but this review does too little to be in favour of it. If it may makes entries illegal that were allowed before (as per EncycloPetey), it's a strong oppose, not just oppose. Please don't bother answering me, I am not changing the vote. If I am not mistaken, another vote re: CFI may be coming soon. Anatoli 04:53, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|20px]] Oppose This proposal means something for English, not for other languages (e.g. French). And the underlying idea is that proper nouns are excluded, except in some cases (same idea as Webster's). I disagree. All proper nouns should be accepted if they are words. Lmaltier 06:06, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|20px]] Oppose Neskaya  kanetsv?  19:08, 8 September 2009 (UTC) I cant support something which changes the guideline in place this much.  I do NOT want to exclude proper nouns from the wiktionary, and I don't think we should be doing that. —Neskaya  kanetsv?  19:08, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|20px]] Oppose, we should be expanding, not contracting, our inclusion of place names. In response to DCDuring's comment above, I'd like us to become a great dictionary and gazetteer all at the same time, and since this is an all-volunteer effort, we ought not dissuade people who wish to come here for the purpose of adding widely used place names. bd2412 T 18:36, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Abstain

 * 1) [[Image:Symbol abstain vote.svg|20px]] Abstain Vahagn Petrosyan 21:53, 5 September 2009 (UTC) This is beating around the bush. I want to allow all (ALL) place names unequivocally, from god-forsaken village in Mozambique to the United States of America.
 * 2) [[Image:Symbol abstain vote.svg|20px]] Abstain < class="latinx">Ƿidsiþ 14:56, 8 September 2009 (UTC) As above.
 * 3) [[Image:Symbol abstain vote.svg|20px]] Abstain —Stephen 10:57, 15 September 2009 (UTC) I’m not going to vote yet because I don’t think my vote will count for anything. I may vote at the last minute when I am certain that the ballot-box stuffers have not brought in outside votes from the other projects.
 * 4) [[Image:Symbol abstain vote.svg|20px]] Abstain L&#9786;g&#9786;maniac chat? 15:15, 26 September 2009 (UTC) for the same reason as Vahagn. L&#9786;g&#9786;maniac chat? 15:15, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Decision

 * Fails 5–5–4. —Ruakh TALK 20:46, 3 October 2009 (UTC)