Wiktionary talk:Votes/2020-06/Citation formatting guidelines

Exceptions and collapsibility
While looking over the Beer Parlour discussion that started this vote, I noticed that a lot of people supported these changes, but recognized that there were definitely circumstances where including information counter to the proposed guidelines would be important. The current text of the vote does not include a note about such exceptions and I think it should be changed to do so. I also noticed that many of the voters supported a compromise solution which involved the default citation being shorter, but the detailed version still being easily accessible, possibly through some type of collapsibility. I think there should should be an additional option up for vote regarding the creation of a collapsing functionality or something similar. Finally, the current vote has only one section for voting on all of the changes simultaneously. I believe it is unfair to force voters to either support or oppose all of the changes since, as is clear from the Beer Parlour discussion, there are people who support some changes, but not others. I think it would be beneficial to format the vote in a way similar to Votes/2020-04/New reconstruction headers or Votes/pl-2020-04/Attestation of comparatives and superlatives. &mdash;The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 19:21, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I think that ‘guidelines’ in general do not exclude the existence of exceptions. As for splitting up the votes, I usually prefer votes that are simpler to those that are more complicated. Most commentators seemed to agree with the proposals, although there were reservations about one of the options, which I did not include (for this reason) in the vote. But it could be done as several modular votes of course, if people want that. Ƿidsiþ 14:07, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree with your assessment of what guidelines are in general, but I think it's generally beneficial to be explicit rather than implicit, especially for the aid of newer users. Additionally the page which should contain information on what a "guideline" is, Policies and guidelines, has been inactive for many years. Entry_layout also contains a similar disclaimer: "An order for these headings is recommended, but variations in that order are also allowable." With regard to splitting up the options, I looked over the Beer Parlour discussion in some more detail and concur that most of the reservations were about the point you removed, so it is probably fine to group them together. I'm additionally curious, as I state in my first post, how you think the vote should relfect the fact that the majority of editors favoured the changes being implemented along side the use of a tooltip or some other method for viewing full citations. Thanks. &mdash;The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 18:16, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Well that's beyond my technical expertise, so if editors want to implement that the vote would have to come from someone else with the ability to put it into action. But adding further information in mouseovers could always come from subsequent votes if necessary. Ƿidsiþ 05:25, 10 June 2020 (UTC)