and the person responsible for the vote, so you should revert me as you see fit. --Dan Polansky 09:20, 6 April 2011 (UTC) Hopefully I went even further...
unacceptably far. —RuakhTALK 04:29, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Re: #3: I admit that I have not noticed the issue when creating the vote. But I have now also realized...
suggest renaming this vote to anything more explanatory, such as from Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2010-12/CFI amendment (2) to Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2010-12/Attestation...
parlour archive/2011/October#Trademarks really old discussion: Wiktionary talk:International & national trademarks old vote: Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2007-02/Trademark...
may be more appropriate in article names); and I interpret the vote I wrote as allowing this discretion. - -sche (discuss) 01:04, 6 October 2011 (UTC)...
--Anatoli 03:53, 10 October 2011 (UTC) lol, strange! - -sche (discuss) 21:39, 10 October 2011 (UTC) I see some issues with the vote. "[...] deemed standard...
—RuakhTALK 19:46, 27 July 2011 (UTC) Please indicate whether you think this proposal has any effect on the outcome of Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2009-12/Treatment of...
create another vote. (Vidēte how many votes have been held on attestation in extinct languages.) - -sche (discuss) 17:17, 21 August 2011 (UTC) Here is...
one uses, such as Joyce's "bababadalgharagh...". In Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2011-04/CFI: Removing usage in a well-known work, there was the objection that...
this vote isn't starting too soon as we need to look for evidence and not 'jump the gun' and just vote on it. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:10, 11 December 2011 (UTC)...