Wiktionary:Votes/2011-03/Category:Time

Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Wiktionary:Votes/2011-03/Category:Time. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Wiktionary:Votes/2011-03/Category:Time, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Wiktionary:Votes/2011-03/Category:Time in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Wiktionary:Votes/2011-03/Category:Time you have here. The definition of the word Wiktionary:Votes/2011-03/Category:Time will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofWiktionary:Votes/2011-03/Category:Time, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.

Category:Time

To fulfill that objective, the current category tree (as of 28 March 2011) will be replaced by the proposed category tree. These category trees are of English terms. The category trees of other languages should follow suit.


Current category tree
This is the category in question, as it is currently set up.

An asterisk between parentheses (*) means that a certain category has subcategories outside the scope of this vote. (Namely, a work of fiction of Christmas, and activities of winter.)


Proposed category tree
This is the category tree in question, as it is going to be be set up according to this vote.

All members of this list contain few examples of members in English or, sometimes, in other languages. These examples were chosen based on the assumption that they are attestable. If any of these examples is not attestable, then it should simply be disregarded.


Rationale
This is a list of reasons to justify the aforementioned proposed organization of categories. When a person supports or opposes the proposal, they are not necessarily supporting or opposing these reasons.
  • The choice of members of the category tree in question is currently often obscure. As major examples, it is not clear what goes into Category:Time and what goes into Category:Calendar terms.
  • A set of subcategories is necessary. In other words, one single, abrangent Category:Time (or even, less reasonably, Category:Physics or Category:Everything) to contain all these terms together without subcategories would probably not be very useful. A person interested in navigating through categories by starting from the entry Sunday is likely to want to see as quickly as possible Monday, Tuesday, etc., not daily, Father Time or Bronze Age. The proposed set of subcategories includes Category:Units of time for units of measurement of time. And, Category:References of time, for static references such as January; either a point in time is January or it isn't. In addition, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday are all related to the term week, but it does not have to be a member of Category:Days of the week; it can simply be linked from the introduction of that category, at least in English, but not necessarily only in that language.
  • Currently, there is a redundant smaller category tree: Category:Easter is a member of both Category:Calendar terms and Category:Holidays, while the latter is also a member of the former. The proposed category tree is simpler than the current one.
  • The categories of sets of months are inconsistent with each other. We currently have Category:Islamic months, Category:Persian months, Category:Gregorian calendar months and Category:Hebrew calendar months. The proposed category tree includes the word "calendar" in all of them, for consistency.
  • Category:English temporal location adverbs has characteristics of lexical and topical categories. Despite adverbs being commonly described in grammar books by their uses, including time, location, etc., keeping this category apparently is a precedent for possibly creating Category:English adjectives of time, Category:English nouns of time, and so on. The proposed category tree excludes this category, but it is probably out of scope anyway. The category in question is replaced by Category:Patterns of time (repetitive references, such as daily or monthly) and Category:References of time.
  • It is particularly helpful to delete Category:Months while having categories for each set of months. Months of different calendars commonly virtually only share the fact that they label certain repetitive sets of periods. Days of the week also do that, so Category:Days of the week occupies a privileged space among sets of months in the proposed category tree. Moreover, it has been mentioned at WT:BP#Category:Time that Swedish doesn't have words for Persian calendar months. If, hypothetically, that language only has words for Gregorian calendar months, then it would still be helpful to have a Category:sv:Gregorian calendar months instead of simply a Category:sv:Months, because the former would fit the category tree of Category:fr:Gregorian calendar months, Category:pt:Gregorian calendar months, Category:es:Gregorian calendar months, etc., thus allowing navigation between Gregorian calendar months of various languages. "Syrian Christian calendar" and "Westernized calendar" are varieties of the Gregorian calendar, so they're placed as subcategories of Category:Gregorian calendar months in the proposed category tree. In addition, there are various other categories of days and months together. Notably, Category:Day signs is replaced by Category:Aztec calendar days, which is more explanatory.
  • The set of topical categories as a whole is messy, and Category:Time is no exception. This fact may be traced back to the overall lack of rules and the unspoken rule of create any topical category first, discuss it later. The need to clean up topical categories has been mentioned various times. A wise way to do that would be analyzing and organizing one category tree at a time. Presumably, reasons to support this proposal would include either approving 100% the new choice of categories, or merely approving the effort of organizing categories. If the latter is true, then any additional improvement may be done after the vote ends. Which leads us to the next point.
  • The discussion WT:BP#Category:Time was very helpful to gather feedback and shape the current proposal. Similarly, if anyone has any reason to oppose this vote, or simply any way or improving the proposal, it would be better to explain them at the discussion page before the vote starts, rather than opposing it or abstaining from it without warning.


  • Vote starts: 00:01, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Vote ends: 23.59, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Support the current category tree

Support the proposed category tree

  1. Support Daniel. 06:41, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
  2. Support, though I think this could have been done through RFM. --Yair rand 09:22, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Collapse all the subcategories into Category:Time

  1. Support.​—msh210℠ (talk) 14:40, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Oppose Dan Polansky 15:43, 8 April 2011 (UTC) I oppose above all the proposed category tree, if only because the term "references of time" seems rare and I do not quite understand it. I am not too enthusiastic about the current category tree, but that is the status quo. --Dan Polansky 15:43, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
  2. Oppose Ƿidsiþ 06:33, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
  3. Oppose Prince Kassad 15:33, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Abstain

  1. Abstain —Internoob (Disc•Cont) 21:12, 10 April 2011 (UTC) tl;dr

Decision

The current category tree gets 0 voters' (0% of voters') support; the proposed one gets 2 (33%); collapsing into Time gets 1 (17%); opposing all those gets 3 (50%). Thus, all options fail, so no change is effected.​—msh210℠ (talk) 19:29, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Any subset of the changes (or all of them) can be proposed at RFDO/RFM, of course.​—msh210℠ (talk) 19:29, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Wikious
Boobota
Sagapedia