Wiktionary:Votes/2016-07/CFI - letting terms be linked to pertinent sections

Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Wiktionary:Votes/2016-07/CFI - letting terms be linked to pertinent sections. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Wiktionary:Votes/2016-07/CFI - letting terms be linked to pertinent sections, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Wiktionary:Votes/2016-07/CFI - letting terms be linked to pertinent sections in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Wiktionary:Votes/2016-07/CFI - letting terms be linked to pertinent sections you have here. The definition of the word Wiktionary:Votes/2016-07/CFI - letting terms be linked to pertinent sections will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofWiktionary:Votes/2016-07/CFI - letting terms be linked to pertinent sections, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.

CFI - letting terms be linked to pertinent sections

  • Voting on: Updating WT:CFI to let terms be linked to pertinent sections where they are defined for CFI purposes. In particular:
    1. In section General rules, linking the word "term" in "including a term if it is attested and idiomatic" to CFI section Terms.
    2. In section General rules, linking the words "attested" and "idiomatic" to CFI sections Attestation and Idiomaticity rather than to mainspace entries.
    3. In section Attestation, linking the phrase "conveying meaning" to CFI section Conveying meaning.
    4. In section Attestation, linking the word "independent" to CFI section Independent.
    5. In section Attestation, linking the phrase "different requirements" to CFI section Number of citations.
  • Rationale: See Wiktionary talk:Votes/2016-07/CFI - letting terms be linked to pertinent sections#Rationale. The voters only vote on the proposed action, not on the rationale.
  • Vote starts: 00:00, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Vote ends: 23:59, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Support

  1. Support --Daniel Carrero (talk) 05:41, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
    But we could have just edited CFI without a vote, in my opinion. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 05:41, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
    In the future, I support editing CFI and EL without a vote, when the edit simply links a term to a section in the policy. This does not change the regulations in any way. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 11:52, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
  2. Support -Xbony2 (talk) 11:46, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
  3. Support and, for the record, I don't think this kind of change requires a vote. --WikiTiki89 15:44, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
  4. Support and add my voice to saying that this type of non-substantive change should not require a vote. This, that and the other (talk) 11:38, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
  5. Support per my rationale linked above. --Dan Polansky (talk) 17:10, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  6. Support, and yes, not worth a vote. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 03:49, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
  7. Support: seems quite commonsense. — Eru·tuon 08:04, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Oppose

Abstain

Decision

Passes unanimously. 7-0-0 (100%-0%) --Daniel Carrero (talk) 19:28, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Edited WT:CFI accordingly. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 19:33, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
Wikious
Boobota
Sagapedia