Open main menu

Wiktionary:Votes

(Redirected from Wiktionary:VOTE)

Wiktionary > Votes

Votes formalize and document the consensus-building process and the decisions that the community makes. This page displays the full contents of recent, current and planned votes. Edit Wiktionary:Votes/Active to add new votes and remove old ones. Finished votes are added to Wiktionary:Votes/Timeline, an organized archive of previous votes and their results, sorted by the vote end date.

Policy and help pages, respectively: Wiktionary:Voting policy (including who is eligible to vote) and Help:Creating a vote.

See also Wiktionary:Votes/ for an automatically generated, less organized list of votes.


{{Wiktionary:Votes/2018-10/Title of vote}}


{{Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2018-10/Title of vote}}


Note: add to this page and WT:A.
{{Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2018-10/User: for admin}}


Note: add to this page and WT:B.
{{Wiktionary:Votes/bc-2018-10/User: for bureaucrat}}


Note: add to this page and WT:C.
{{Wiktionary:Votes/cu-2018-10/User: for checkuser}}


{{Wiktionary:Votes/bt-2018-10/User: for bot status}}

Other

Admins, please periodically check for orphan votes at Wiktionary:Votes/

Look for votes and voting templates, including templates for creation of new votes:

Main sections of this page: #Current and new votes and #Proposed votes. See also /Timeline.

Current and new votes

Planned, running, and recent votes [edit this list]
(see also: timeline, policy)
EndsTitleStatus/Votes
Sep 21User:EmausBot for bot statusfailed
(=1)[Wiktionary:Table of votes](=11)

User:EmausBot for bot status

Nomination: I hereby request the Bot flag for User:EmausBot for the following purposes:

Fixing double and broken redirects

Bot uses standard script redirect.py and works on many projects. --Emaus (talk) 22:51, 7 September 2018 (UTC)


Schedule:

  • Vote starts: 22:51, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Vote ends: 23:59, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Vote created: Emaus (talk) 22:51, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Discussion:

Support

  1.   Support although it seems somewhat pointless since we have very few broken or double redirects (66 and 10 at the time of this vote). DTLHS (talk) 23:38, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
  2.   Support, now that my concerns have been met. I agree with DTLHS, but if it really is true that nobody else wants to do it, we should let this bot operate. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:02, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Oppose

  Oppose. Creating this vote was Emaus's first edit here; I would like some reason to trust a bot operator first. Also, we have multiple bots that remove double redirects; I will not support adding another one unless presented with evidence that those bots are not being run any more. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:04, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Hello! My bot has global bot flag and processes redirects on many projects. As I see, now there is only bot that processes double redirects on Wiktionary. And broken redirects are not maintained at least a half of year (for example, see Appendix:Proto-Central Malayo-Polynesian/asu). --Emaus (talk) 23:23, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
@Emaus, thanks for replying. That's a helpful start. Could you please do a test run (~20 edits)? I've looked at your bot's account on other wikis, so if the edits here are fine, I will switch my vote to support. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:31, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
  Done. --Emaus (talk) 13:26, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
"Also, we have multiple bots that remove double redirects" Such as? DTLHS (talk) 23:34, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
Well, User:タチコマ robot for one, and another bot that is long inactive. I also thought that you were checking for double redirects every so often! —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:45, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
Doesn't User:JackBot fix them too? Per utramque cavernam 08:29, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
  1.   Oppose per Metaknowledge. --SanctMinimalicen (talk) 23:11, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
  2.   Oppose as above SemperBlotto (talk) 18:12, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Abstain

Decision

  • failed --XY3999 (talk) 13:50, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Huh? Does this user have any authority?? I doubt it. DonnanZ (talk) 22:58, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
    Well, he's been an admin many more times than you have. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:03, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Which is nil. Surprise, surprise. DonnanZ (talk) 23:29, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Then he's been an admin infinitely more times than you have, to be mathematically precise about it. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:26, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
The authority lies in the mathematics, Donnanz, not in the user. --WF110 (talk) 08:45, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
Another sock puppet. Then I assume it's de facto, not official. DonnanZ (talk) 09:07, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm the only user allowed to have sockpuppets. --WF110 (talk) 09:39, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
More by default, I suspect. Anyway, I'm not disputing the decision. DonnanZ (talk) 10:48, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Proposed votes

The following are proposals for new votes, excluding nominations, such that the proposer of the vote prefers that the vote is written collaboratively, or such that the vote appears to require substantial revision. If you have not created a passing vote yet, it is recommended that you use this section and actively solicit feedback by linking to your proposal in discussion; your vote may have a better chance of passing if it is first reviewed.

Votes may linger here indefinitely. If changes in policy make a proposal irrelevant, the voting page will be requested for deletion. On the other hand, you do not have to be the creator to initiate one of the votes below. Place any votes with a live start date in the section above at least a few days before that start date arrives.

Votes intended to be written collaboratively or substantially revised: