Wiktionary:Votes/2007-02/Renaming AHD

From Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Renaming AHD

[edit]
  • Voting on: Changing the name of our {{AHD}} pronunciation system. The term AHD was originally an initialism for American Heritage Dictionary, but as this is the propietary name of a particular dictionary, it may be inappropriate for use here. Note that this vote concerns only the name of the system, not its use or content. Vote for as many options below as you like, though do not vote for Option 0 if you vote for a change, and vice versa. If there is no single clear winner, we will have a run-off vote between the two most popular options.

Option 0

[edit]
Retain the name AHD.
  1. Support Connel MacKenzie 05:12, 4 February 2007 (UTC) Despite the misnomerhood of it, it is the only instantly recognizable name proposed.[reply]
    Is AHD "instantly recognizable" for people who don't use the American Heritage Dictionary on a daily basis? Cynewulf 17:45, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, absoutely. You instantly understand that it is intended as an American dictionary-style pronunciation. (Don't ask me to explain/try to figure out why that doesn't work for "MW" or "M-W". But it doesn't...only AHD.) --Connel MacKenzie 21:56, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support --Williamsayers79 12:58, 4 February 2007 (UTC) I agree with Connel on this one.[reply]
  3. Support —Stephen 17:40, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Oppose Speaking for myself, when I saw AHD I believe that I did instantly recognise this initialism. However, I have used the American Heritage Dictionary (not daily but often enough). The problem is the misnomerhood. I instantly recognised it but thought is was the very same system as used at AHD. It wasn't until after a few weeks at Wiktionary that I realised that it wasn't the AHD system but simply a system similar to those used in AMerican dictionaries. In the mean time I'd even put a couple of external links to AHD's pronunciation guide (note the Wikipedia article that {{AHD}} links to does not have such a guide). Jimp 00:09, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Option 1

[edit]
Change name to EPR, for English Phonemic Representation.
  2. Support EncycloPetey 18:57, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support \Mike 19:16, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support Connel MacKenzie 05:43, 4 February 2007 (UTC) with grave reservations[reply]
  6. Oppose I can't help but think "Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen" when I see this. Jimp 00:19, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Option 2

[edit]
Change name to enPR, for English Phonemic Representation.
  2. Support EncycloPetey 18:57, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support Cerealkiller13 22:42, 3 February 2007 (UTC) This seems the most versatile of the options, should we want to create similar systems for other languages.[reply]
    Sorry, but how on earth would we be explaining to Spanish readers an American pronunciation, on en.wikt: instead of es.wikt? --Connel MacKenzie 21:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Maybe I'm misunderstanding one or both of you, but I think the thought is that the English Wiktionary might want to have (say) an {{frPR}} for French that reflects the distinctions in various forms of French without needing to give a separate transcription for each form of French. —RuakhTALK 22:22, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support † Raifʻhār Doremítzwr 06:38, 4 February 2007 (UTC) As per Cerealkiller13. Pity about the awkward mix of lower and upper case letters in the initialism, though. Struckthrough as per Saltmarsh’s point hereunder.[reply]
  5. Support Saltmarsh 07:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC) (the mixture of cases draws attention to the meaning of en — that’s good)[reply]
  6. Support Paul G I agree with the points made above. — Paul G 17:21, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Support Cynewulf 17:43, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support. I just like this one. bd2412 T 20:57, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Oppose Connel MacKenzie 21:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC) Looks too goofy/inconsistent.[reply]
  10. Support —RuakhTALK 22:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Oppose as per Connel MacKenzie. Jimp 00:23, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Option 3

[edit]
Change name to PREL, for Phonemic Representation in Extended Latin.
  1. Support Keffy 16:42, 4 February 2007 (UTC) -- Yeah, it's hideous and unintelligible, but I very reluctantly pick it for three reasons: I don't want to keep "AHD" inaccurately; it's the only one of the alternatives that expresses the difference between AHD and our other two transcription systems (all are equally phonemic [see rants elsewhere or feel free to ask for a new one :-)], equally of English, and equally adapted to/by Wiktionary policy); it doesn't sound like it's the approved "Wiktionary" format; and I'm a sucker for the poor guy who doesn't have any votes yet. (Is that four? Never said I could count.)[reply]
  2. Oppose Connel MacKenzie 22:00, 4 February 2007 (UTC) "Latin" too misleading.[reply]

Option 4

[edit]
Change name to WPR, for Wiktionary Phonemic Representation.
  1. Support EncycloPetey 18:57, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support \Mike 19:16, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support Tohru 03:20, 4 February 2007 (UTC) Assuming this as a generic term for our proprietary phonemic representation systems of various languages.[reply]
  4. Support Jimp 00:19, 5 February 2007 (UTC) This is the best option in my opinion. It describes what this is in clear terms without risk of ambiguity. It's good having Wiktionary in the title so as to dispell any notion that this system has any official status or recognition outside of this dictionary. How about an option 5 i.e. option 1+4 i.e. WEPR? Jimp 00:19, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Good idea: it *is* after all only a representation valid for English... \Mike 19:15, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support Jeffqyzt 16:22, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Oppose † Raifʻhār Doremítzwr 20:09, 5 February 2007 (UTC) It implies that it is the only system used on Wiktionary (a minor point).[reply]
    Good point. Of course, this misimpression would be dispelled by a quick look at a few entries. However, might we give the impression that this is the system recommended (over IPA/SAMPA) at Wiktionary? How about OOTEPRUAW ... one of the English phonemic representations used at Wiktionary? Jimp 00:21, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Support henne 14:15, 8 February 2007 (UTC) I’m not a fan of the phonemic representation anyway, but this is the most correct name.[reply]

Abstain

[edit]
  1. Abstain DAVilla 03:22, 8 February 2007 (UTC) I don't think we should be inventing acronyms that aren't understood outside of this small community. I'm all for change, but not to something indecipherable.[reply]

Decision

[edit]
Don’t you mean eight and six votes in support? † Raifʻhār Doremítzwr 18:46, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thanks. --EncycloPetey 04:54, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The two most prefered options: Option 2 & Option 4. 2+4=6. Combine them and get an Option 6 i.e. WenPR (which doesn't even look as goofy). Jimp 00:33, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Wiktionary:Votes/2007-02/Renaming_AHD&oldid=75275021"