Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2012-08/Citations from WebCite

Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2012-08/Citations from WebCite. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2012-08/Citations from WebCite, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2012-08/Citations from WebCite in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2012-08/Citations from WebCite you have here. The definition of the word Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2012-08/Citations from WebCite will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofWiktionary:Votes/pl-2012-08/Citations from WebCite, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.

Citations from WebCite

Proposed addition to Number of citations section:

Two citations from WebCite (and other archives the community may deem of similar status) count as one durably archived citation. For instance, an entry which requires three citations and already has two from book sources would need a further two from WebCite to meet the attestation requirement.

  • Rationale: WebCite archive is now well established and widely used by academics and publishers. The site has only ever taken down a handful of pages ("around 20 out of several million records" according to Dr. Eysenbach, founder of WebCite) and even those are still available for inspection on an individual basis. The site can now be considered "durably archived", but nevertheless, it is proposed that a greater number of citations be required, for safety's sake.
  • Vote starts: 00:01, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Vote ends: 23:59, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Support

  1. Support with serious reservations --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:15, 10 September 2012 (UTC) - see Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2012-08/Citations from WebCite#WebCite's outages. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:15, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
  2. Support. Using WebCite as a source of citations has some disadvantages, but I believe it will do much more good than harm. — Ungoliant (Falai) 01:43, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
  3. Support --BB12 (talk) 06:22, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
  4. Support --as nom SpinningSpark 17:28, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
  5. Support. Privileging paper media over digital media is untenable in an era when many things that were once released in a physical format are now being released digitally. Usenet usage has declined steadily over the past decade, and will continue to decline in years to come. How do we continue to attest new terms as they emerge if the only acceptable online source is, for all intents and purposes, defunct? This proposal would be a much-needed step toward enabling Wiktionary to adapt to the changing realities of the digital era. Astral (talk) 07:35, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
    Will internet-meme-ogenic terms need the ilk of Usenet? For example, I attested /b/tard with books and newspapers only. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 07:47, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
    Internet-based sources would certainly allow us to cite things like /b/tard sooner, as it can take a while for such terms to filter down to print sources, if they filter down at all. Online gaming slang probably shows up in articles on gaming sites like GameSpot or Kotaku before it shows up in any book, newspaper, or magazine. Astral (talk) 14:21, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
  6. Support Ivan Štambuk (talk) 18:38, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
  7. Support --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 00:19, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Oppose

  1. Oppose Equinox ◑ 01:11, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
  2. Oppose - -sche (discuss) 01:26, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
  3. Oppose for now. WT:CFI doesn't acknowledge any notion of quality control for cites; the closest it comes is in the section on spellings, which strongly implies that not all attested misspellings merit inclusion. Before we open the door to arbitrary Web-sites, we should incorporate such a notion. —RuakhTALK 15:26, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
    Also, rather than, or in addition to, doubling the number of required cites, we might want to increase the time-period that they must span. A term that's used on dozens of web-pages, but that disappears after a few years, probably is not worth including. (Complication: it's often not so easy to date text on an arbitrary web-page. Fortunately, the text-heavier web-sites now tend to be blogs, news sites, forums, and so on, which usually include date information, but there are still lots of exceptions.) —RuakhTALK 18:05, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
  4. Oppose Yair rand (talk) 18:10, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
  5. Oppose Mglovesfun (talk) 18:11, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
  6. Oppose per Ruakh (15:26, 10 September 2012 (UTC)). I've commented further on this topic on the talkpage.​—msh210℠ (talk) 05:16, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
  7. Oppose Dan Polansky (talk) 07:41, 15 September 2012 (UTC). Per Wiktionary_talk:Votes/pl-2012-08/Citations_from_WebCite#Opposition. --Dan Polansky (talk) 07:41, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Abstain

Decision

Wikious
Boobota
Sagapedia