Wiktionary:Votes/2016-07/Request categories

Voting on:

• Renaming the request categories in all languages, according to the table below.

Rationale:

1. Using consistent names in all categories, with proper grammar/syntax.
2. Using the word "requests" instead of "needing". These categories track where something was requested, not where something is needed.
3. Using the word "review" instead of "needing attention" or "to be checked". Arguably, if we are requesting something to be done, it is for people to review the entries.

Proposed names:

Schedule:

• Vote starts: 00:00, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
• Vote ends: 23:59, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

• Vote created: --Daniel Carrero (talk) 01:49, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Discussion:

• Wiktionary:Votes/2015-11/Language-specific rfi categories (see the discussion in the vote page)
• WT:RFM#Categories for requests and needs
• Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/July#Vote: Request categories
• Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/August#Proposal: Request categories with longer names
• Wiktionary talk:Votes/2016-07/Request categories

1. Support --Daniel Carrero (talk) 01:16, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
2. Support – The names are definite improvements, though it is unfortunate that the language name gets shoved to the end. That just has to be lived with, I guess. You can at least find all the categories under Category:English entry maintenance. — Eru·tuon 06:46, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

   On second thought, I prefer @Wikitiki89's category names that use "English entries" in place of "English terms". — Eru·tuon 21:32, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

   Support - User:Bcent1234 I strongly support consistent cross-language names for categories Bcent1234 (talk) 19:39, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

   I appreciate the support for my proposal, but to be eligible for voting, you need at least 50 edits in entries or some related namespaces before the vote starts, per Wiktionary:Voting policy. I'm striking your vote now. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 19:55, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

   Do my creating information about Pronunciation and Syllables count? I certainly have done more than 50 edits now. Bcent1234 (talk) 13:44, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

   Per Wiktionary:Voting policy, your first edit must predate the start time of the vote by at least 1 week. Your first edit was in 25 August and this vote started on 28 August. For this reason, you aren't eligible to participate in this vote.

   There's a chance that this vote will fail. If this happens, I'll probably suggest revising the names and restarting the vote, because someone else proposed minor variations that I'd like to discuss later. Feel free to participate in the next vote. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 13:53, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

3. Support — A definite improvement, even if not absolutely perfect. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 17:02, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
4. Support, although this did not need to be a vote. Imperfections such as ISMETA speaks of can be improved via RFM. I agree (with comments on the talk page) that "English requests", "Latin requests" sound like categories for {{attn|I request...}} vs {{attn|Quaerō...}}. - -sche (discuss) 17:39, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

   @-sche: This proposal started in RFM (see WT:RFM#Categories for requests and needs). In that discussion, when I proposed renaming all request categories at once, @Dan Polansky suggested doing it by vote, and I agreed. My opinion is this: renaming a huge number of categories should need a vote, especially if the idea is proposing a new naming scheme for all categories of a certain type. This has been done before, for examples see: Wiktionary:Votes/2011-04/Derivations categories, Wiktionary:Votes/2011-04/Lexical categories, Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2011-05/Add en: to English topical categories, part 2. I'm fine with using RFM for future changes that affect only one or few categories in all languages. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 17:52, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

5. Support —Enosh (talk) 09:32, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

   Also fine with Wikitiki's naming scheme. —Enosh (talk) 10:58, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

6. Support, although with a slight hesitation. The getting rid of "needing" is great but I guess I prefer the original names before they were changed via RFM some time ago with very few participants; I can't quickly find that RFM but I do not mean the recent one. --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:21, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

   I believe you mean this discussion: Category talk:English entries needing definition#RFM discussion: August–September 2014. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 20:02, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

   Right, thanks. --Dan Polansky (talk) 20:05, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

   I also found the previous "English requests for definitions", etc. names quite ok, despite certain ambiguity in the names. These are in this revision of the vote. --Dan Polansky (talk) 20:20, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

7. Support, although "Category:Requests for terms in English" could be better. This, that and the other (talk) 01:39, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
8. Support One thing I like is that they are shorter. Equinox ◑ 14:27, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

   Thanks for the support, but actually, I think that all of the proposed names are at least a little longer:

   • "Category:English entries needing etymology" = 42 characters
   • "Category:Requests for etymologies of English terms" = 50 characters

   --Daniel Carrero (talk) 14:57, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

1. (weak) Oppose. I like being able to type "Category:English _" and viewing all of the English categories. Maybe it's a silly reason to vote against, but it's what I would prefer. I'd like language-specific date categories though -Xbony2 (talk) 12:38, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

   These aren't actually English categories, but cleanup categories regarding English. When Wiktionary is "done" (at T+infinity) these categories no longer need to exist. --WikiTiki89 11:47, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

   Are there any possible grammatically correct and meaningful names for the request categories, beginning with the language name? --Daniel Carrero (talk) 04:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

   What is grammatically correct is somewhat subjective. -Xbony2 (talk) 23:15, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

   Is there any specific name starting with "Category:English ..." that you would choose, regardless of it being grammatically correct? --Daniel Carrero (talk) 23:41, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

   The current ones? :P I would like Category:Requests for date to be specific to each language though (like "English requests for quotation date"). -Xbony2 (talk) 14:13, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

   Sure, but to quote @-sche, "'English requests', 'Latin requests' sound like categories for {{attn|I request...}} vs {{attn|Quaerō...}}" I mean, we already know what a category like Category:English requests for audio pronunciation means, but the syntax of that phrase is a bit weird. Maybe there are possible good category names starting with "English", but at least in my opinion, it sounds like we are forcing a little the idea of using that specific naming system while there are better options.

   Suppose I want to quickly explain what is the purpose of the English category populated by {{rfap}}.

   I could probably say this in a normal conversation: "That category contains requests for audio pronunciations in English entries."

   On the other hand, saying this would be a bit weird: "That category contains English requests for audio pronunciations."

   --Daniel Carrero (talk) 14:25, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

2. Oppose. I also prefer the language name to be the first part of the category name. SemperBlotto (talk) 20:06, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

   Are there any possible grammatically correct and meaningful names for the request categories, beginning with the language name? --Daniel Carrero (talk) 04:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

3. Oppose Many of the names don't make sense. --WikiTiki89 17:39, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

   Could you please mention maybe one or two proposed names that don't make sense? --Daniel Carrero (talk) 14:01, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

   Never mind. I confused the "current" and "proposed" columns. --WikiTiki89 17:30, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

   Actually, I'm reinstating my oppose vote because I think the following makes much more sense:

   • Category:Requests for etymologies in English entries (instead of Category:Requests for etymologies of English terms)
   • Category:Requests for expansion of etymologies in English entries (instead of Category:Requests for expansion of etymologies of English terms)
   • Category:Requests for attention in etymologies in Latin entries (instead of Category:Requests for review of etymologies of Latin terms)
   • Category:Requests for pronunciation in English entries (instead of Category:Requests for pronunciation of English terms)
   • Category:Requests for audio pronunciation in English entries (instead of Category:Requests for audio pronunciation of English terms)
   • Category:Requests for translations into Sanskrit (instead of Category:Requests for translations in Sanskrit)
   • Category:Requests for review of Sanskrit translations (instead of Category:Requests for review of translations in Sanskrit)
   • Category:Requests for English terms (instead of Category:Requests for terms in English)
   • Category:Requests for native script of Sanskrit (instead of Category:Requests for native script of Sanskrit terms), because whole quotations might need this
   • Category:Requests for transliterations of Sanskrit (instead of Category:Requests for transliterations of Sanskrit terms), because whole quotations might need this
   • Category:Requests for definitions in English entries (instead of Category:Requests for definitions of English terms)
   • Category:Requests for inflections in English entries (instead of Category:Requests for inflections of English terms)
   • Category:Requests for attention in English entries (instead of Category:Requests for review of English entries)
   • Category:Requests for images in English entries (instead of Category:Requests for images representing English terms)
   • Category:Requests for references for English terms (instead of Category:Requests for references about English terms)

   --WikiTiki89 17:49, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

   I support using these names instead. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 02:53, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

   Many of these sound fine to me as well, though I did support the current proposal. I am not yet sure whether I like them better than the current proposal or not. — Eru·tuon 05:11, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

   I am fine with these as well, but I don't see the difference being all that much of a deal. It would be a pity if this minor difference makes this vote lose. It seems there are multiple proposals with minor differences all of which get us rid of "needing", and I am fine with all these proposals; their differences seem pretty minor compared to the problem that is the use of "needing". --Dan Polansky (talk) 14:06, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

   In my opinion, we need a vote for the project of changing, entirely, the naming system of a certain group of categories. This vote introduces the naming system "Requests for ... English ...", which I believe can't (or shouldn't) be done through RFM alone. But if this vote passes and people prefer other names using the same naming format, we can use RFM to do it.

   As such, I have a message for all voters: please consider supporting this vote; it does not matter if you consider the voted proposal as a perfect naming system to be used until the end of time, or merely as a step toward better names that can be discussed eventually. Either way, the voted proposal is consistent and correct in both grammar and syntax, rather than random and weird, like what we have now. I agree with what Dan Polansky said now, concerning one point that is worth repeating: the voted proposal uses "requests" rather than "needing"; the word "needing" is incorrect, so we have incorrect categories right now, and this vote intends to fix it.

   In other words, the least we can say is that the voted proposal is far better than what we have now, I believe. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 14:21, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

4. Oppose While I like the new naming system, I really would rather have the language name at the front. DerekWinters (talk) 14:00, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

   Are there any possible grammatically correct and meaningful names for the request categories, beginning with the language name? --Daniel Carrero (talk) 04:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

5. Oppose I prefer the Language name up front to speed access without requiring thirty characters of typing. I also believe that Wikitiki is right that many of the categories do not refer to the headword (in any language), but rather to something appearing somewhere in the entry. I don't see how adopting a half-baked proposal is any progress at all. DCDuring TALK 20:51, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

   Hmm, what you say about the categories often not referring to the headword makes sense. I hadn't thought of it that way. I therefore prefer @Wikitiki89's category names to the ones proposed in the vote. — Eru·tuon 21:31, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

   Are there any possible grammatically correct and meaningful names for the request categories, beginning with the language name? --Daniel Carrero (talk) 04:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

6. Oppose Like others, I think the category name should begin with the language name. --Droigheann (talk) 23:15, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

   Are there any possible grammatically correct and meaningful names for the request categories, beginning with the language name? --Daniel Carrero (talk) 04:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

   English entries with requests for XYZ? --Droigheann (talk) 20:27, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

   If this vote fails, I'll remember to include that name in a future discussion, thanks. (my personal preference is towards names that begin with "Requests", but others might have a different opinion) --Daniel Carrero (talk) 20:32, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

   That doesn't sound bad at all. I might support it if it were up for vote. (So far, there are three proposals that sound good to me.) — Eru·tuon 20:35, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

   That doesn't work for most of the categories. For example, "Requests for Sanskrit terms" are most often not even in Sanskrit entries, but in etymology sections of other languages' entries. --WikiTiki89 20:40, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

   You could have something like "Sanskrit terms requested", but I don't particularly like it. In fact, there is really no need to have the language at the beginning if we have categories such as "English request categories" that would contain all these request categories relating to English and people could browse through that to find what they need. --WikiTiki89 20:45, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

1. Abstain. I don't really care which way this vote goes. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 02:23, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
2. Abstain. I'm not really sure. We might as well also rename the part of speech categories from, for example, Category:Spanish nouns to Category:Nouns in Spanish, but they basically mean the same thing either way. PseudoSkull (talk) 22:41, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

   Personally, I prefer "Category:English nouns" and not "Category:Nouns in English". The former is fine and is a bit shorter. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 00:03, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

3. Abstain. Anyway, I just keep an eye on modules in case if it changes. --Octahedron80 (talk) 14:04, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Currently, 3 people who opposed the vote stated that they prefer "English" at the front and 1 supporter specifically said: "it is unfortunate that the language name gets shoved to the end". Are there any ideas for naming systems to be used by request categories, that start with "English" and look good? Most of the individual "English"-starting names that were mentioned until now have some flaws as discussed with other people, so I know it's not just my opinion.

• Category:English entries needing audio pronunciation -- the category tracks where something was requested, not where something is needed
• Category:Latin requests for audio pronunciation -- it looks like requests written in Latin: "Quaerō..."
• Category:English terms for which audio pronunciation is requested -- this is not serious, just an unfunny joke I mentioned here, the word order looks a bit weird
• any other ideas?

Personally, I don't support any of these, but if anyone does or has a new idea, please let me know. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 14:41, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Question: if this passes, could the old names be left as redirects? That might be more agreable to some of the opposers, and would also make the transition less confusing for those who don't keep track of votes. I'm with those who like having the language name first, but I like the clarity of the proposed names (though I think Wikitiki's are slightly better). Andrew Sheedy (talk) 23:21, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Fine with me, but personally I'd like the redirects to be deleted eventually. Maybe in 1 year or so. I wouldn't like to keep an old category name like Category:Slang as a redirect to Category:English slang nowadays, but maybe others would disagree with me. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 23:33, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

No consensus: 8-6-3 (57.14%-42.86%) --Daniel Carrero (talk) 00:05, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

See also the second vote: Wiktionary:Votes/2017-03/Request categories 2. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 14:18, 2 May 2017 (UTC)