Voting on: Add the en: prefix to topical categories such as Latin derivations and Sexuality.
Justification: The English Wiktionary seems to be the only one that does not put any language indicator on its categories in the local language. This messes up interwikis, with categories requiring two or three interwikis per language. Categories like Latin derivations are obviously not deleted, just kept as macro-categories to house all the others. Modifying {{context}} and {{etyl}} shouldn't be too difficult, although it will be a strain on the server. Creating the new categories will be time consuming but once it is done, it will be done forever. Advantages include (a) clearing up interwikis on here and on other Wiktionaries where they wrongly get imported from here, because Category:Vulgarities and Category:en:Vulgarities are all in one, as well as (b) being more consistent with other Wiktionaries.
Support - Adding 'en:' is not necessarily the only solution but it's one of them. Basically I support the separation into 2 categories. Malafaya14:10, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, weakly. I don't see the huge advantage in this, but the reasons noted above seem to show that there is some advantage.—msh210℠17:45, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
SupportDan Polansky 20:00, 10 September 2009 (UTC) I support above all uncluttering English topical categories by removing from them non-English topical subcategories. Whether the language of a topical category should be indicated using an ISO-prefix or using other naming convention is a separate topic. Some naming schemes: (a) "en:Trees", (b) "Trees in English", (c) "English: Trees", (d) "English – Trees" and for a uncountable name (a) "en:Chemistry", (b) "Chemistry in English", (c) "English: Chemistry", (d) "English – Chemistry". --Dan Polansky20:00, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose — Carolina wrendiscussió 03:54, 9 September 2009 (UTC) While a distinction does need to be made, it should be done in a way that is user friendly to monolingual English speakers, and this is not it. Indeed, the whole scheme for using ISO codes in Category names isn't user friendly. There are several alternatives that could accomplish the goal is a user friendly fashion. — Carolina wrendiscussió03:54, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think having (English) words right in the topical categories helps reinforce the category tree structure for readers and editors. And why would we restructure the category tree this way only for subject fields, but not for other usage categories (like regionalisms, dated, or offensive terminology)? —MichaelZ. 2009-09-29 05:11 z
OpposeDCDuringTALK 14:48, 2 October 2009 (UTC) Insufficient attention to user consequences. It seems to me peculiar to not have the language of each wiktionary distinguished from other languages by default. To have uniformity for the sake of bot authors seems backwards. DCDuringTALK14:48, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]