Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2013-10/Removing SAMPA and X-SAMPA

Removing SAMPA and X-SAMPA edit

Support edit

  1.   Support if either (i) we can somehow confirm that nobody (statistically significant) wants to see SAMPA at all, or (ii) we introduce a process/mechanism that will automatically produce the SAMPA from the IPA (possibly requiring a further click?). I do think IPA should be the primary one, and we should not store SAMPA in a separate, unsynchronised way. Equinox 18:19, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    One can’t prove a negative. But no one is asking for SAMPA or using it. I have found only one arguable request in the history of Wiktionary, but I don’t think the requestor actually meant SAMPA. There is no demand for (X-)SAMPAMichael Z. 2013-10-27 18:39 z
  2.   Support I hate SAMPA's guts. --Vahag (talk) 18:21, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Support per Vahag. --WikiTiki89 19:14, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4.   Support --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 22:42, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5.   Support. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:48, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6.   SupportAɴɢʀ (talk) 16:55, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7.   Support No one wants this. Michael Z. 2013-10-27 18:40 z
  8.   Support. It is possible to automatically create X-SAMPA from IPA with Lua (Module:IPA), but there is no reason to do so as no one seems to need it. In the rare occasion that a user would actually want X-SAMPA, there is a gadget for that somewhere (see fr:MediaWiki:Gadget-APIversXSAMPA.js). Dakdada (talk) 10:35, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Fine as a javascript but in my opinion should not be deployed automatically but only for those who want to opt in. Per above, there's no overt demand for X-SAMPA so it should be an opt-in only thing. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:10, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Of course. That is exactly what gadgets are for :) Dakdada (talk) 12:22, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9.   Support Please, kill it. This, that and the other (talk) 06:45, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10.   Support --Z 06:41, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11.   Support, it's about time. bd2412 T 17:29, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose edit

Abstain edit

  1.   AbstainRuakhTALK 23:03, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2.   Abstain. I just don’t see the point. --Æ&Œ (talk) 12:31, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   Abstain. I never had a text-book on either transcription system before. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 23:36, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decision edit

Vote passed unanimously -- Liliana 09:28, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]