Wiktionary:Votes/2020-04/New reconstruction headers

• Proposal: Allow for the following L4 headers on reconstructed entries below definitions:
  • Item #1: ==== Alternative reconstructions ====
  • Item #2: ==== Reconstruction notes ====

• Rationale Currently, this formatting has become inconsistent and there is a lack of consensus.

Schedule:

• Vote starts: 00:00, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
• Vote ends: 23:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
• Vote created: {{victar|talk}} 00:19, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Discussion:

• Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2015/August#Recreating_Proto-Baltic_(and_other_"deprecated"_languages)_with_a_different_status?
• Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2017/March#"Alternative_reconstructions"_or_"Reconstruction"_header?
• Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2019/November#Include_"Reconstruction_notes"_and_"Alternative_reconstructions"_in_WT:EL?
• Wiktionary talk:Votes/2020-04/New reconstruction headers

1. Support, though I don't have much of a stake in this, so if this vote doesn't attract more interest from those who work on reconstructions, it should be stricken. Andrew Sheedy (talk)

   I also support what This, that and the other mentions below. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 17:54, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

2. Support. PUC – 19:08, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
3. Support. Jonashtand (talk) 12:43, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
4. Support --Numberguy6 (talk) 04:29, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
5. Support For the record, I endorse what was said in the recent BP discussion about "Alternative forms" being used for alternative forms which appear to have existed in parallel in the proto-language, while "Alternative reconstructions" is used for alternative reconstructions of the same form. In general, I would imagine that "Alternative forms" would become quite rare in the Reconstruction namespace. This, that and the other (talk) 09:37, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
6. Support per This, that and the other, namely that "Alternative reconstructions" should be used in addition to "Alternative forms", not instead of it. —Mahāgaja · talk 13:10, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
7. Support NativeNames (talk) 01:37, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
8. Support Imetsia (talk) 17:19, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

1. Oppose: The proposal for this made on Include "Reconstruction notes" and "Alternative reconstructions" in WT:EL? is too vague. The line between ===Alternative reconstructions==== and ==Alternative forms=== poorly delineated and fodder for edit wars. --{{victar|talk}} 19:31, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

1. Support, but see my vote above. Andrew Sheedy (talk)
2. Support. PUC – 19:08, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
3. Support: Easy support and only makes sense we have reconstruction notes next to Usage notes. --{{victar|talk}} 19:31, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
4. Support. Jonashtand (talk) 12:43, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
5. Support --Numberguy6 (talk) 04:29, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
6. Support — Eru·tuon 05:55, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
7. Support —Mahāgaja · talk 13:11, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
8. Support NativeNames (talk) 01:37, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
9. Support Imetsia (talk) 17:19, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
10. Support embryomystic (talk) 06:44, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Both items pass. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 16:34, 19 May 2020 (UTC)