Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2017-06/Wikidata precautionary principle

Wikidata precautionary principle

Voting on:

Implementing this rule concerning the use of Wikidata. The ellipsis (...) shall be replaced by any of the proposals below:

Any and all edits using Wikidata must (...), otherwise they shall be reverted on sight. This applies to the use of Wikidata in entries, templates, categories, appendices and any other pages.

Some exceptions apply, which may freely use Wikidata for tests and proposals:

1. sandbox pages (such as Wiktionary:Sandbox, Template:sandbox and Module:sandbox, and subpages such as Template:en-noun/sandbox)
2. user pages and subpages
3. discussion pages
4. new templates and modules, if they are not transcluded anywhere (other than transclusions in the exceptional pages mentioned here)

Proposal 1:

"...have been previously approved by vote..."

Proposal 2:

"...have been previously approved in a discussion or vote..."

Procedural note:

If both proposals pass, then the proposal 1 takes precedence, because it's the stricter one.

Schedule:

• Vote starts: 00:00, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
• Vote ends: 23:59, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
• Vote created: --Daniel Carrero (talk) 00:27, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Discussion:

• Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/June#Wikidata precautionary principle
• Wiktionary talk:Votes/pl-2017-06/Wikidata precautionary principle

Support — proposal 1

1. Support per my rationale at the talk page. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 19:36, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
2. Support. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 23:01, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
3. Support —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 00:27, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
4. Support --WikiTiki89 14:41, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
5. Support DTLHS (talk) 17:14, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
6. Support Requiring votes seems very reasonable given the potential for harm resulting from the use of Wikidata that I see. --Dan Polansky (talk) 07:55, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Oppose — proposal 1

1. Oppose. Overly legalistic. We can build and achieve consensus for at least some uses of Wikidata via discussion rather than vote. - [The]DaveRoss 13:15, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
2. Oppose -Xbony2 (talk) 21:17, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
3. Oppose. Raises the bar too high, overly reactionary. —CodeCat 12:40, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
4. Oppose. --Yair rand (talk) 01:28, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Support — proposal 2

1. Support. While I am sensitive to the concerns of those who think Wikidata as a whole is a negative addition, I think that there are benign enough uses that a simple discussion can be adequate (just like small changes in other areas). Let's have some faith in one another. - [The]DaveRoss 13:14, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
2. Support. Discussion is enough, I hope. -- Andrew Krizhanovsky (talk) 17:13, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
3. Support -Xbony2 (talk) 21:17, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
4. Support —CodeCat 12:40, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
5. Support. Let’s see how it turns out. — Ungoliant ^(falai) 16:28, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
6. Support. --Yair rand (talk) 01:28, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Oppose — proposal 2

1. Oppose per my rationale at the talk page. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 19:36, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

   Further comment: I hope the proposal 1 passes, requiring a vote seems the best course of action because we are starting to use Wikidata right now and I'm not sure what we're going to do with it.

   Let's assume for a second that the proposal 1 will pass. Then, maybe after a few years, when we have a few accepted and rejected Wikidata use cases, we may revisit this and decide whether we can lower that restriction and simply requiring discussions to use Wikidata, or if requiring votes is still a good idea. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 13:27, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Decision

Proposal 2 passed.

Vote count:

• Proposal 1: 6-4-0 (60%)
• Proposal 2: 6-1-0 (85.71%)

--Daniel Carrero (talk) 09:16, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

I published the result of this vote in this new policy: Wiktionary:Wikidata policy (WT:WDP). --Daniel Carrero (talk) 09:19, 18 July 2017 (UTC)