Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2015-12/Etymology

Categorization of templates
The details of which categories the templates place a word into should not be part of this policy page. Instead, we should just say which circumstances the templates should be used in. --WikiTiki89 18:51, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I think even the templates themselves don't belong here. —CodeCat 18:54, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I somewhat agree, but they do need to be explained somewhere and I can't think of a better place. --WikiTiki89 18:58, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * But the main difference between, and  are the categories. If you want to omit them, that's fine, but in the end we would have basically the same information: " is for derivations,  is for borrowings and  for inheritance". --Daniel Carrero (talk) 19:01, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Those are only what the abbreviations stand for. The categories aren't the main difference, they are only a side effect; the main difference is their purpose, and their purpose would require a few sentences at least of explanation. --WikiTiki89 19:18, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I meant, what exactly is the result of using these templates: appends the text "borrowed from", but there's nothing differentiating between  and  in the resulting text (there's no "inherited from" and "derived from"), so the only thing that changes are the categories, in this case. But I'm not opposing what you said in the first message. If you'd like to rewrite the vote to explain the circumstances the templates should be used in, that would be great. If you decide not to, perhaps I'll do it later. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 19:31, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * That's currently the only visible difference, but that can change in the future. The usage of these templates, however, should always remain the same. --WikiTiki89 19:45, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I removed the categories from the proposal. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 10:01, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Other EL sections mention templates: Pronunciations =, ; Translations = , , ,. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 19:11, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Level of headings
The level of headings after "Etymology 1" is already explained a bit more in-depth in Votes/pl-2015-12/Headings, so I think the etymology section does not need to repeat it.

"Sometimes two words with different etymologies belong in the same entry because they are spelled the same (they are homographs). In such a case there will be more than one “Etymology” header, which we number. Hence for a word like lead the basic header skeleton looks like this:"

Verb
--Daniel Carrero (talk) 11:03, 18 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I removed this part, let me know if you want it back. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 11:06, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Name
This poll could maybe use a clearer name — since it does not concern our separate draft policy WT:Etymology, but only a section of EL. --Tropylium (talk) 13:30, 21 February 2016 (UTC)