Wiktionary:Votes/2017-03/Request categories 2

Context:

• This is the same as Wiktionary:Votes/2016-07/Request categories (which ended in October 2016), except with some different category names as proposed by @Wikitiki89 in that vote.

Voting on:

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

Rationale:

1. Using consistent names for 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.

Procedural note:

• Maybe WT:RFM can be used when we want to propose only a few category moves, but some people may think that a vote is needed to change the whole naming system of a large group of categories. (hence this vote)

Schedule:

• Vote starts: 00:00, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
• Vote ends: 23:59, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
• Vote created: --Daniel Carrero (talk) 10:14, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Discussion:

(discussions from before the previous vote ended)

• 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:Votes/2016-07/Request categories (older vote)
  • Wiktionary talk:Votes/2016-07/Request categories

(discussions from after the previous vote ended)

• Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/October#"Request categories" vote -- no consensus
• Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/March#Request category vote -- future 2nd vote
• Wiktionary talk:Votes/2017-03/Request categories 2

1. Support --Daniel Carrero (talk) 22:28, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

   Per @This, that and the other's comment and my reply, I support all except "Category:Requests for English terms", "Category:Requests for native script of Sanskrit" and "Category:Requests for transliterations of Sanskrit". (they are "missing" categories rather than "request" categories) --Daniel Carrero (talk) 05:26, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

2. Support, but make the current names permanent redirects for those who prefer them. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 20:57, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

   We don't do redirects for categories. --WikiTiki89 17:49, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

3. Support. --WikiTiki89 17:49, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
4. Support all except "Category:Requests for English terms". This name is still terribly opaque. To avoid churn, let's keep it at the existing name until we can figure out something better to name it to, like "Category:Requests for English terms in etymologies" or "Category:Requests for English etymons". Hopefully the inconsistency will act as a thorn in the side of those who like things to be consistent, reminding them of the need to figure out a better name :) This, that and the other (talk) 03:44, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

   Now that I think about it, arguably the "requests for terms", "requests for native script" and "requests for transliterations" are not "requests" at all. Nobody "requested" that information. That category is for all the instances of templates lacking the information. It's like populating a category with all entries that don't have the etymology, or images, or the gender in the headword templates (Category:Spanish terms with incomplete gender), or the language code in the IPA template (Category:Language code missing/IPA).

   I think it would be accurate to rename them like this, or something along these lines:

   • Category:English links with the term missing
   • Category:Sanskrit links with the native script missing
   • Category:Sanskrit links with the transliteration missing

   --Daniel Carrero (talk) 05:48, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

   But a more natural way to word it would be "English links missing the term", "Sanskrit links missing the native script", etc. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 04:36, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

   Sure, your names look good to me. I'm thinking about opening a new BP discussion later, about renaming all the "missing" categories too, like using Category:Spanish terms with the gender missing instead of Category:Spanish terms with incomplete gender. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 04:45, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

5. Support I guess, though this isn't something that I care strongly about. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:28, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
6. Support — Eru·tuon 07:39, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

   I agree with others who have said that several of the categories are not for requests but rather for missing information. Those category names need further work. — Eru·tuon 19:00, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

7. Support per Daniel Carrero, This, that and the other, and Erutuon (i.e., except for the “missing” categories). — I.S.M.E.T.A. 22:02, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

1. Oppose for the same reason I (and others) opposed it last time. -Xbony2 (talk) 10:56, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
2. Oppose Ditto. --Droigheann (talk) 09:10, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
3. Oppose I'm not sure what's wrong with the existing names. DonnanZ (talk) 13:51, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

   Some of them are just plain incorrect. But also there is the lack of consistency. --WikiTiki89 14:03, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

1. Abstain Victar (talk) 02:18, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
2. Abstain Daniel asked me to vote. This vote is long and looks like an old one and I don't care. Equinox ◑ 02:20, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

   For the record, I didn't ask Equinox specifically because that would be canvassing. I just asked generally on the BP for more people to vote. Thanks for the votes. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 06:11, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

3. Abstain Not the sort of thing I'm interested in. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:52, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
4. Abstain Don't care. Ƿidsiþ 07:46, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

• Passed. Congratulations. --G23r0f0i (talk) 10:03, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

  It's not "23:59, 21 April 2017 (UTC)" yet. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 11:04, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Passed, except three four categories.

(No consensus for these: "Category:Requests for English terms", "Category:Requests for native script of Sanskrit" and "Category:Requests for transliterations of Sanskrit".)

All results:

• "Category:Requests for English terms"

  3-3-4 (50%-50%)

• "Category:Requests for native script of Sanskrit", "Category:Requests for transliterations of Sanskrit" and "Category:Requests for date"

  4-3-4 (57.14%-42.86%)

• All other categories:

  7-3-4 (70%-30%)

--Daniel Carrero (talk) 00:11, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

• I started creating the first few categories as voted and approved here. I'm happy to be able to use names that make sense and have correct grammar. I believe this is especially important for a dictionary — it sets a good example of language use and looks more professional. I've been using categories named like Category:Requests concerning English entries (edit: renamed below) to contain all the requests of a single language, a subcategory of Category:English entry maintenance. (discussion: User talk:Wikitiki89#Umbrella category for request categories) I realize this is not part of the vote, so let me know if I should undo this or do something different. I think it's a good idea to organize the categories this way. Rationale: 1) There are relatively many request and non-request entry maintenance categories, so it makes sense to create groups, I believe. 2) A minor point is that the request categories are going to look nice and organized, while the non-request entry maintenance categories are still going to look ugly and untended (for now). One more thing: If there's no problem, I think it's a good idea to use Category:Requests for dates of quotations by language instead of Category:Requests for quotation dates by language. The later was voted and approved, but I think the former is better, to be consistent with other uses of "of" in the category names (including Category:Requests for dates of English quotations, which is not Category:Requests for English quotation dates). --Daniel Carrero (talk) 21:30, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

  @Daniel Carrero: I agree with both Category:Requests concerning English entries and Category:Requests for dates of quotations by language. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 22:08, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

  Thanks for the support. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 13:12, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

• One more thing: I added Category:Requests for date in my "results" message above. Turns out this category is not for "requests" either, it's just a category for {{quote-book}} with the date missing. Maybe it should be eventually renamed to Category:English quotations with the date missing or something. Anyway, it's a "missing" category, so it failed this vote too. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 13:12, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
• For the record, I'm moving some random maintenance categories (like: entries missing a certain parameter, entries with a syntax error, terms with manual transliterations different from the automated ones, etc.) that were inside the old "needing attention" categories (Category:English terms needing attention), and placing them directly in the "entry maintenance" categories (Category:English entry maintenance). Granted, all random entry maintenance categories "need attention" in some sense, but it meant that both "needing attention" and "entry maintenance" were basically two categories for the same thing in different places. It's much better to have the new "attention" categories (Category:Requests for attention in English entries) just with the explicit requests for attention. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 14:17, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
• Also, because of {{rfv-etymology}} and {{rfv-pronunciation}}, I created Category:Requests for references for etymologies in English entries and Category:Requests for references for pronunciations in English entries, subcategories of Category:Requests for references for English terms. If the category names are not good, let me know and I'll change them. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 08:57, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
• When a person typed an usage example like {{ux|pt|Aqui está um exemplo!}} without the translation to English, the template placed the entry in Category:Translation requests (Portuguese). This was weird, because the old category was meant to contain English-to-Portuguese translation requests, not Portuguese-to-English. So, these days, I edited {{ux}} and made the template populate categories like Category:Portuguese usage examples with the translation missing. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 18:10, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
  • I've added that category in Module:category tree/poscatboiler/data/entry maintenance, so it can now be created with {{auto cat}}. — Eru·tuon 04:52, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
    • Thanks! --Daniel Carrero (talk) 05:14, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
• {{rfc-sense}} was categorizing terms in both Category:Requests for cleanup and, for example, Category:English terms needing attention. Now it cateogrizes only in Category:Requests for cleanup in English entries. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 17:48, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
• Similar to the above, {{rfc-inflection}} was categorizing entries in only, for example, Category:Neapolitan terms needing attention. I changed that too to Category:Requests for cleanup in Neapolitan entries. (I guess I could have used an inflection-specific category name like Category:Requests for cleanup of inflections in Neapolitan entries, but I'm not sure that's actually needed.) --Daniel Carrero (talk) 23:00, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
• I'm not sure if that's the best option, but I also moved Category:English entries needing audio pronunciation (US) to Category:Requests for audio pronunciation from US in English entries, and did the same with UK and Canada. These categories are very small, with 3, 1 and 4 members respectively. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 02:21, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
• {{gloss-stub}} was categorizing entries into say, Category:Translations to be checked (Hadza). Again, this was weird because the old "Translations to be checked" were for translation sections, and this template is used in definitions. I renamed the template to {{sense stub}}, because it doesn't have to be a gloss. IN ADDITION, only when the language code was "en", it also placed entries in the old Category:English entries needing attention. Naturally, I changed these categories too. I dislike how "needing attention" has been sometimes used a catch-all for lots or categories for separate purposes. I renamed the template to {{sense stub}} because it doesn't have to be a gloss. I made the template categorize entries in Category:Requests for clarification of definitions in English entries now. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 02:55, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
• I'm afraid I don't have a complete list of templates edited, but I've been generally stopping templates from directly adding entries to "(language) terms needing attention" when a parameter (like gender or plural) is missing. The "request for attention" categories should be for requests only. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 00:34, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
• I started to (re-)rename all the attention categories using this format: Category:Requests for attention concerning Swedish. (Instead of Category:Requests for attention in Swedish entries.) Reason: as per Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/May#Category:Requests for attention in Proto-Indo-European entries, requests for attention are often added in etymologies and definitely need not be about the current language section. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 01:31, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
• Turns out Category:Entries needing inflection by language was a random mix-up: it contained actual requests and also automated lists of templates missing inflection parameters. I left it only with the latter. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 20:09, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

All done! The categories were all moved. (except there are some categories to delete at Category:Old request categories to be deleted when they are empty)

TL;DR about the wall of text above: basically, some templates were about "missing" parameters instead of actual requests, and some categories were being used for multiple templates with different purposes; in addition, some BP discussions changed further the names of a few categories. Let me know if something else needs to be changed. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 00:01, 26 May 2017 (UTC)