Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2012-02/Patronymics and stylistic edits of CFI

Patronymics and stylistic edits of CFI

 * Voting on: Making the changes to Criteria for inclusion that are represented in this diff; that is, tidying WT:CFI in several places, and removing the line about the status of patronymics being unsettled. These small changes received broad support in the straw poll. The changes are:


 * Change: This in turn leads to the somewhat more formal guideline of including a term if it is attested and idiomatic.    To this:  This in turn leads to the somewhat more formal guideline of including a term if it is attested and idiomatic.


 * Change the header “Terms” to be broadly interpreted to Terms.


 * Change * Proverbs to * Proverbs. (with a dot) to match the punctuation of the items around it.


 * Remove the hidden comment &lt;!-- removed: blogs and --&gt;.


 * Change to merit its own page the formatting of such a page to to merit its own page, the formatting of such a page (with a comma).


 * Remove one of the two lines of whitespace after "These languages include Quenya, Sindarin, Klingon, and Orcish (the first three do have ISO 639-3 codes)."


 * Standardise the use of spaces in subject headers by removing the spaces between the subject header text and the equals-signs in the minority of headers which currently have such spaces (Names, <tt>Company names</tt>, <tt>Brand names</tt>, <tt>Given and family names</tt>, <tt>Names of specific entities</tt>, <tt>Issues to consider</tt>, Attestation vs. the slippery slope</tt>).


 * Change <tt>=== Genealogic content ===</tt> to <tt>===Genealogical content===</tt> (i.e. remove whitespace and change to a more common word).


 * Remove the horizontal rules before the <tt>Names</tt> and <tt>Issues to consider</tt> sections. (These are the only horizontal rules in the document.)


 * Remove: The status of patronymics has not been settled.


 * Remove the "See also" section and move "* Votes/2011-04/Sourced policies" into the References section.


 * Technical note: if Votes/pl-2012-02/CFI and company names passes, that vote shall supersede this vote with respect to the section(s) Votes/pl-2012-02/CFI and company names changes.


 * Vote starts: 00:01, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Vote ends: 23.59, 22 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Vote created: - -sche (discuss) 22:49, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Discussion:
 * [[Image:Wikt rei-artur3.svg|20px]] Beer_parlour_archive/2011/October
 * [[Image:Wikt rei-artur3.svg|20px]] Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2012-02/Patronymics and stylistic edits of CFI

Support

 * 1) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support Liliana • 05:00, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:11, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support Dan Polansky 08:13, 22 February 2012 (UTC) Above all, I support that patronymics are included when attested. --Dan Polansky 08:29, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 4) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support — I also support changing WT:CFI so that it consistently uses typographic apostrophes and quotation marks, which was suggested by -sche on the talk page. — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 14:43, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 5) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support EncycloPetey 21:33, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 6) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support - -sche (discuss) 21:38, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 7) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support. &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 21:59, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 8) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support, though I think it says something bad about this project that even such minor changes are considered to require a vote. —Ruakh <i >TALK</i > 06:27, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Voting on minor changes is good. It is much better to vote on minor changes than to argue about and define what is and what is not a minor change. A vote that contains minor changes can run only for 14 days, or even for 7 days. --Dan Polansky (talk)
 * That isn't even the worst. People even argued that correcting a blatantly wrong figure requires a month-long vote. -- Liliana • 12:27, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * No one argued that "correcting a blatantly wrong figure requires a month-long vote" (italics mine), only that it requires some vote. --Dan Polansky (talk) 16:22, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 17:55, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support &mdash;Internoob 03:18, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support -- Cirt (talk) 07:22, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Abstain

 * 1) [[Image:Symbol abstain vote.svg|20px]] Abstain DAVilla 03:39, 26 February 2012 (UTC) Far too tedious for consideration.
 * 2) [[Image:Symbol abstain vote.svg|20px]] Abstain --Daniel 16:49, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure about Remove the "See also" section and move "* Wiktionary:Votes/2011-04/Sourced policies" into the References section.
 * Why would we do that? Why is the References section better than the See also section, especially for a vote that applies to the whole policy? Would the same section be removed from WT:ELE as well, I suppose? If Votes/2011-04/Sourced policies is moved to the References section, would it refer to which sentence, if any? Please don't tell me we would have these meta-references at the bottom, for example. --Daniel 16:49, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * My reason for moving it to the References section is that "See also" suggests it's another policy of ours (putting a link to WT:ELE in the See also section might not be a bad idea), when it fact it is merely the vote that established that we should have link our policy-bits to the votes that effected them. The references section seemed to me like an appropriate place to put it. - -sche (discuss) 03:17, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Decision
11-0-2 (100%) - Passes. --Daniel 12:01, 23 March 2012 (UTC)