Wiktionary talk:Votes/2016-07/Adding PIE root box

Rationale
No idea. To be provided by supporters. --Dan Polansky (talk) 18:24, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * So I take it this is another vote for something the nominator doesn't support? The box doesn't bother me either way. Perhaps you could give some background on why you've brought attention to it? Pengo (talk) 11:15, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * A rationale for change should come from those who want to change status quo ante. As for me, I find the PIE box annoying, and find PIE to be something to be tolerated in the etymology sections rather than advertised in this conspicuous way. --Dan Polansky (talk) 11:59, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

How would the bot know what the root is?
An important question. If it's taken from the entry, what if the root in the entry is wrong? How are homonymic roots, where the template needs the   parameter to categorise correctly, handled? I think this is a job only humans can do, in particular humans with good knowledge and experience in PIE. —CodeCat 18:35, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I think Dan is referring to the semi-automatic (or seemingly semi-automatic) adding of roots that is already going on. --WikiTiki89 18:39, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * One thing is semi-automatic or volume addition, as WikiTiki points out. The other thing is, etymology sections seem to provide this information already, don't they? Can't a bot extract the information from there, and create the box accordingly? --Dan Polansky (talk) 18:51, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * If the etymology is correct, yes. A lot of our etymologies are outdated, have pre-laryngeal roots, or have stuff that's just plain bad. Using that as the input of a bot would not be a good idea. —CodeCat 19:02, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the clarification. If that's the case, the voters will be able to say "support semi-automatic, oppose automatic", or something of the sort. --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:06, 15 July 2016 (UTC)