Wiktionary:Votes/2006-12/form-of style

form-of style

• Voting on: The default style of {{form of}} and all Category:Form of templates for English and foreign entries of Roman script only. Entries in other scripts will not be affected by this vote.

  Vote for as many options as you would agree to.

  The previous vote on this matter was inconclusive, but it narrowed the choices down to two. This vote is based on the results of that vote, adding current policy. Consequently, no new options may be added, although they may of course be discussed relevant to the procedure of this and future votes.

• Vote ends: 23 December 2006
• Vote started by: DAVilla 07:48, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
• Discussion: Wiktionary:Beer Parlour#Italicize Spanish words in many, many entries

Option 0

Take no action. The current default style is plain text:

1. Plural form of word.

1. Support V-ball 16:46, 21 December 2006 (UTC) Best option.

• Comment: Connel MacKenzie 05:11, 10 December 2006 (UTC) Don't mind it, don't particularly care for it.

  [Edited DAVilla 11:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)]

Option 1

Use boldface for Roman script. The term is a headword:

1. Plural form of word.

1. Support Connel MacKenzie 05:09, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
2. Support DAVilla 11:03, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
3. Support Medellia 00:26, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
4. Support henne 11:07, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
6. Support EncycloPetey 01:27, 12 December 2006 (UTC) - though I'd like to see the non-link text in italics.
7. Support - looks at bit snazzier.--Williamsayers79 10:44, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
8. Support Cynewulf 02:44, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
9. Support Saltmarsh 06:08, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
10. Support \Mike 16:08, 21 December 2006 (UTC) In particular, as by EncycloPetey's suggestion on WT:BP.
11. Support V-ball 16:46, 21 December 2006 (UTC) Second-best option.
12. Support Kipmaster 16:19, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
13. Support Jon Harald Søby 20:59, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Option 2

Use italics for Roman script. The term should have use-mention distiction:

1. Plural form of word.

1. Support DAVilla 11:02, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
2. Support Medellia 00:26, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
3. Support henne 11:07, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
4. Support \Mike 14:15, 21 December 2006 (UTC) Though I wouldn't have complained if the opposite version was chosen, that is plural form of in italics and the word in roman, as in EncycloPetey's suggestion at WT:BP

• Comment: Connel MacKenzie 05:13, 10 December 2006 (UTC) The arguments against italics I've seen have been compelling. Whatever our style is, is what it is: as long as we are consistent within the entire dictionary, we aren't breaking tradition from other dictionaries by using a format that meets the needs of our readers (i.e. no small-and-hard-to-read italics.)

  [Edited. DAVilla 11:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)]

Abstain

1. Abstain Jeffqyzt 20:37, 12 December 2006 (UTC) (per Davilla's comments below, this is opposition to all of the above; I prefer bold italics.)

• Comment: should this section be removed? Are we allowed to add other options such as "Plural form of “word” " (or the same in bold, or the same in italics) or are the three choices the only ones? For individual styles, I thought it was approval voting (support/oppose/abstain) for each? --Connel MacKenzie 05:15, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

  Approval voting means you vote support or no support for each. There are some voting systems that allow you to also oppose choices, casting a negative vote, or a particular number, or to weigh your support among various options. Approval voting is binary and much simpler than that.

  Abstaining is an indication that you do not agree with any of the choices. If you agree with all of the choices then you could vote for all of them, but your vote would not sway the decision.

  The last time we had a vote on the stylistic matter it came down to these options. In fact I do not believe the current default had as much support as either of the other two, but it was left that way because of no clear consensus on style and because the issue of the output of TheCheatBot had been resolved.

  I am not allowing other choices to be added because I want consensus to be reached on this vote and I believe other options would complicate it. The results of the last vote are the grounds for these choices. If you disagree then you may vocalize your opposition of course. Anyways, all choices should be present at the start of the vote, so if there were enough support for other options, the vote would have to be restarted. I would highly recommend however that the penultimate cheat-bot vote be reviewed first, if that's your opinion. DAVilla 10:59, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Well, to me, your interpretation of "approval voting" is not the same as mine. Thanks for clarification. BTW, I had sucessfully forgotten most of the TheCheatBot voting fiasco...those nightmares had finally subsided. --Connel MacKenzie 22:35, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Decision

• Options 0 (plain), 1 (bold), and 2 (italics) received 1, 11, and 4 votes respectively, with 1 abstention. The tally for the winning option, option 1 (bold), was 11 in favor and 1 opposed. The change takes place in some CSS file somewhere, not in the templates themselves. DAVilla 21:37, 29 December 2006 (UTC)