Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2022-01/RFD voting policies

Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2022-01/RFD voting policies. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2022-01/RFD voting policies, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2022-01/RFD voting policies in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2022-01/RFD voting policies you have here. The definition of the word Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2022-01/RFD voting policies will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofWiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2022-01/RFD voting policies, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.

For proposal 1, can we make it clear that IP editors are still welcome to contribute to RFD discussions? It's conceivable that the RFD banner on the entry may invite useful opinions from drive-by readers on rare occasions, and such a contribution could be very valuable for a language with no active editors. This, that and the other (talk) 13:06, 10 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

@This, that and the other Fixed —Svārtava 15:04, 10 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Backwards

The burden of proof/persuasion should be on the editors wanting to keep an entry, the same as it is in RFV. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 14:58, 11 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Vox Sciurorum This vote does not change anything apart from what is mentioned. All are free to persuade and make points in their direction. —Svārtava 15:22, 11 January 2022 (UTC)Reply
I think the burden of proof will remain on the editors wanting to keep an entry. The third policy, for example, announces that an entry will be deleted (not kept) if no one participates. That's a presumption in favor of deletion. Imetsia (talk) 17:30, 11 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Redirect & T-Hub Votes

Latest comment: 2 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

@Imetsia Sorry for bringing this up so late, but for the consensus votes, how would redirect & t-hub votes fall into the consensus decision? Sometimes it's a bit confusing how to sort of determine what best to do with an entry when there's like 4 redirect votes, 2 delete votes, 3 keep votes, and maybe some stray t-hub votes, especially when folks (including myself from time to time) will vote like "keep or t-hub", so maybe there could be some clarity on that? AG202 (talk) 03:54, 12 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

@AG202: Because the vote doesn't mention anything about it, the status quo would remain the same with respect to that: It's at the discretion of the closer. And because the vote has already started, I can't really edit it to iron out how to count redirect/t-hub votes.
If it were me, redirects would be counted as keep votes. If the entry is kept, then I'd look for whether, among the group of keep + redirect votes, there are more keeps or redirects. And I'd decide on that basis. Imetsia (talk) 20:37, 12 January 2022 (UTC)Reply
Got it, thanks! AG202 (talk) 21:22, 12 January 2022 (UTC)Reply
Wikious
Boobota
Sagapedia