Wiktionary:Votes/2011-07/Redirecting single-character digraphs

• Voting on: These individual Unicode characters that depicts digraphs should, as a 0th-namespace page titles, be redirects to their two-character versions.
  1. IJ → IJ
  2. ij → ij
  3. DŽ → DŽ
  4. Dž → Dž
  5. dž → dž
  6. LJ → LJ
  7. Lj → Lj
  8. lj → lj
  9. NJ → NJ
  10. Nj → Nj
  11. nj → nj
  12. DZ → DZ
  13. Dz → Dz
  14. dz → dz

• Vote starts: 00:01, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
• Vote ends: 23.59, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

• Vote created: --Daniel 10:52, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
• Discussion:

  WT:BP#Redirecting single-character digraphs

  Wiktionary talk:Votes/2011-07/Redirecting single-character digraphs

1. Support --Daniel 00:04, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
2. Support at least those are the least controversial of the bunch. -- Liliana • 00:12, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
3. Support, though I don't think we need a VOTE for just fourteen redirects; I think an RFM would have been enough. —Ruakh_TALK 00:50, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
4. Support Bequw → τ 06:49, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
5. Support not only for these specific pages, but as resolution for any page titles that have these digraphs. DAVilla 07:25, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

   I hope someone can use JavaScript to make (say) džoker redirect to džoker. --Daniel 08:11, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

   Given that there are only fourteen — yes, that would be pretty easy. Especially since we'd want that redirect to happen even if džoker didn't already have an entry. —Ruakh_TALK 11:34, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

6. Support —Stephen ^(Talk) 23:07, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
7. Support Kaldari 20:47, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
9. Support Tempodivalse 17:48, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

1. Abstain per Ruakh (when voting in support) -- Gauss 21:39, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
2. Abstain Equinox ◑ 21:41, 17 July 2011 (UTC) I just don't understand enough about it. I thought the difference between the two ijs was significant in Dutch, at least for sorting and processing purposes...? Perhaps nothing that affects dictionary words. Equinox ◑ 21:41, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

   I don't think anyone online ever uses the single-character form <ij>, so any difference is mostly theoretical. At ], for example, it doesn't appear once, whereas the two-character form <ij> occurs more than seven hundred times. (If we were distinguishing the two versions, then all but a few of those would use the one-character form.) Our entry and the Wikipedia article both state that dictionaries collate <ij> like the two letters I-J; some other works (we mention phone books, Wikipedia mentions encyclopedias) do differently — but I seem to recall that Britannica collates "Mc-" names under "Mac-", and we never use a digraph for that, so . . . —Ruakh_TALK 23:47, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

3. Incidentally, I agree that RFM suffices for fourteen entries.​—msh210℠ (talk) 15:40, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

• What does "as a 0th-namespace page titles" mean? Ƿidsiþ 19:45, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

  I assume it means "in the Main namespace". --EncycloPetey 19:49, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

  You assumed correctly. The big page Wiktionary:Namespace says that the main namespace is "0", the Talk: namespace is "1", the User: namespace is "2", and so on. --Daniel 00:59, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

8-0-3 Passes. --Daniel 15:32, 10 August 2011 (UTC)