Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2017-11/Restricting Thesaurus to English

Voting on: Restricting Wiktionary:Thesaurus to English, moving current content of non-English thesaurus entries to the mainspace and then deleting the non-English entries.

Rationale: see Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2017-11/Restricting Thesaurus to English#Rationale. The voters only vote on the proposed action, not on the rationale.

Schedule:

• Vote starts: 00:00, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
• Vote ends: 23:59, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
• Vote created: Dan Polansky (talk) 10:18, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Discussion:

• Thesaurus_talk:juoppo, April-June 2009
• Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/November#Vote: Restricting Thesaurus to English
• Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2017-11/Restricting Thesaurus to English

1. Support as long as there won't be a proper infrastructure for handling several languages; Oppose if/once that condition is met. I think I've been convinced 1) that this endeavour shouldn't be too redundant with the efforts of other Wiktionaries, and 2) that it's indeed a good thing to have everything in a single place. --Barytonesis (talk) 00:21, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

1. Oppose. My reasons are in (talk page)#Oppose. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 16:46, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
2. Oppose. — Ungoliant ^(falai) 16:56, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
3. Oppose per Daniel's arguments. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 15:05, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

   Also, pages in other languages with many meronyms/hyponyms can function as highly useful themed pages of vocabulary for people learning another language. For instance, příbuzný for Czech could be highly useful to someone trying to build basic vocabulary in that language. In its current state, the Thesaurus isn't overly useful, but if used this way for FL's, it could have many benefits. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 15:13, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

4. Oppose. My reasoning is laid down in (talk page)#Oppose. Palaestrator verborum (loquier) 17:03, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
5. Oppose -Xbony2 (talk) 02:58, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
6. Oppose mellohi! (僕の乖離) 03:41, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
7. Oppose --WikiTiki89 17:44, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
8. Oppose PseudoSkull (talk) 02:48, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
9. Oppose —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 14:37, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
10. OpposeMatthias Buchmeier (talk) 20:23, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
11. Oppose. I think that an organisational system is needed, but this vote (which never had any real community support) is not the proper way to bring it about. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 20:25, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
12. Oppose Jberkel 11:50, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
13. Oppose Tijmen Wil (talk) 14:53, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

1. Abstain The advantages of the restriction are considerable, as noted on the talk page; it would simplify a lot of things, including use {{ws|term}} vs., for Spanish, {{ws|es|term}}, language indication in thesaurus page name (largely no lang indication yet; examples could be Thesaurus:Hindi/water, Thesaurus:pt:autêntico, Thesaurus:Polish:złoczyńca), having search function automatically restrained to English entries, etc. However, overall, the English Wiktionary is designed to be multilingual in all its facets, including topical categories and rhymes, and keeping the thesaurus multilingual fits better into this. Moreover, thesauri in other Wiktionaries may take a slightly different approach (French one does) and therefore, a language like French can get a kind of treatment in the English Wiktionary Thesaurus that it does not get in the French Wiktionary Thesaurus and vice versa; there surely are redundancies between the thesauri in different Wiktionaries but also complementarities. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:53, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

   About {{ws|term}} vs., for Spanish, {{ws|es|term}}: even if we keep the Thesaurus in all languages, I have reason to believe there's no need to add the langcode to that template until proved otherwise. If the page is named like Thesaurus:Hindi/water, Thesaurus:pt:autêntico or Thesaurus:Polish:złoczyńca, then {{ws}} can automatically get the language name from the page title.

   Obviously, automatically getting the language from the page title is impossible if the page is named like this: Thesaurus:autêntico. But the template can still use Lua to transcribe the whole current page and look for the first L2, which is ==Portuguese==, so even still {{ws}} does not need to have a langcode.

   I support keeping {{ws}} without a langcode and use some template tricks as described above to get the code automatically. If that's proved to be impossible or if cross-language links are needed, then I completely change my mind and support making the langcode required in {{ws}}. Having the langcode would not be a disaster. We are used to having langcodes everywhere, like {{en-noun}}. (Simple Wiktionary uses {{noun}})

   Furthermore, I support eventually having some consistent Thesaurus page title with the language somewhere in the title. It works fine for Rhymes. We have Rhymes:English/ʌm, so we could have Thesaurus:English/good (replacing the current Thesaurus:good). --Daniel Carrero (talk) 10:59, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

   Elsewhere, I have explained that Thesaurus:Polish:złoczyńca (or Thesaurus:pl:złoczyńca) is preferable to Thesaurus:Polish:villain: it enables the automatic linking of further thesaurus pages via {{ws}}, like in Thesaurus:bird. I accept that {{ws}} could pick the lang code from the page title; still, I remember that on some pages even the current {{ws}} started choking because of the number of items calling it, so making {{ws}} make more things can make these problems worse. In any case, the general point that multiple languages complicate things stands. --Dan Polansky (talk) 11:17, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Fails 1–13–1. —Stephen ^(Talk) 00:00, 22 January 2018 (UTC)