Wiktionary:Votes

Shortcuts:
WT:VOTE
WT:VOTES
WT:V

Votes formalize and document the consensus-building process and the decisions that the community makes. This page displays the full contents of recent, current and planned votes. Edit Wiktionary:Votes/Active to add new votes to the “active” list and remove old ones. Finished votes are added to Wiktionary:Votes/Timeline, an organized archive of previous votes and their results, sorted by the vote end date.

Policy and help pages, respectively: Wiktionary:Voting policy (including who is eligible to vote) and Help:Creating a vote.

See also Wiktionary:Votes/ for an automatically generated, less organized list of votes.

Before clicking the “Start a new vote!” button below, change “Title of vote” in the field just above the button to a short descriptive title. Once you have created your vote, add it to the list at Wiktionary:Votes/Active.


Note: add to this page and WT:A. {{Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2024-11/User: for admin}}	Note: add to this page and WT:B. {{Wiktionary:Votes/bc-2024-11/User: for bureaucrat}}
Note: add to this page and WT:C. {{Wiktionary:Votes/cu-2024-11/User: for checkuser}}

Other

Admins, please periodically check for orphan votes at Wiktionary:Votes/.

Look for votes and voting templates, including templates for creation of new votes:

Main sections of this page: Current and new votes and Proposed votes. See also /Timeline.

Current and new votes

Planned, running, and recent votes [edit this list]

(see also: timeline, policy)

Ends	Title	Status/Votes
Nov 11	User:Svartava for admin	passed
Nov 27	Excluding trivial present participial adjectives	0 4 1
(=2)	[Wiktionary:Table of votes]	(=22)

User:Svartava for admin

Nomination: I hereby nominate Svartava (talk • contribs) as a local English Wiktionary Administrator. Svartava has been with us for four years now and has definitely grown during those years. He is an integral part of the Indo-Aryan editing community and has made many contributions across languages. Svartava has matured into a responsible editor over the years and is a suitable candidate for passing on the torch to, given the fact that the other administrators in the Indo-Aryan editing community are sporadically active.

Schedule:

Vote starts: 04:29, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
Vote ends: 23:59, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
Vote created: 𝘗𝘶𝘭𝘪 𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘺𝘪^{(𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘬)} 04:29, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Acceptance: I accept with thanks.

Languages: en, hi, sa-2, inc-pra-1, gu-0
Timezone: UTC+5:30

Svartava (talk) 04:38, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2022-04/User:Svartava for temporary admin for previous vote.

Support

Support, as nominator -- 𝘗𝘶𝘭𝘪 𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘺𝘪^{(𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘬)} 05:13, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I have known Svartava since he joined four years ago. Like most users, there were a few issues when he first joined. One of his previous accounts was temporarily blocked after calling another user an inappropriate name. The extended mover right was taken away from him for creating new pages by moving candidates for speedy deletion without a redirect. He has been characterised as impulsive by other users. However, now he has matured to the point that it would be appropriate to make him an admin. And, the previous issues can be forgotten about. There are already three admins that specialise in Indo-Aryan with fluctuating levels of activity (including myself). There is another account Svartava2 that is used for automated tasks. Kutchkutch (talk) 10:28, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. For the record, I was re-made an extended mover later and have hopefully been using it fine (unless someone finds any overlooked mistakes). Svartava (talk) 10:52, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Although I was already aware of being re-made an extended mover, thanks for the clarification. According to,
https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&logid=50765434

Romanophile obliged to your private request. Bringing up past issues for the sake of full disclosure is disheartening since it takes away from the positivity. Just like نعم البدل mentioned below, my interactions with you
have been helpful and respectful. [Your] feedback has enabled me to be a better contributor on this site … This is also backed by [your] immense contributions and knowledge on Indo-Aryan languages.

I certainly agree with AryamanA’s sentiment that
[we] need experienced Indian-language admins like Svartava who can patrol recent changes and clean up all the new entries being made, since the presence of these languages on Wiktionary is rapidly scaling up.

And you have certainly been an important factor in this scaling up. Kutchkutch (talk) 04:22, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support User frequently makes helpful edits. Limited misconduct. User expressed remorse and lessons learned. Flame, not lame 💔 (Don't talk to me.) 16:07, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support There was a time when Svartava was a little too eager for the mop but I think that time has passed. I see Svartava patrolling recent changes quite often, he makes good entries, and overall is great to work with. So I'm very happy to support. —Aryaman^A ^{(मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 21:39, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support During my interactions with Svartava, I have found them to be very helpful and respectful. His feedback has enabled me to be a better contributor on this site, and I would be very happy in supporting his nomination for admin-ship. This is also backed by his immense contributions and knowledge on Indo-Aryan languages. نعم البدل (talk) 07:39, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Binarystep (talk) 03:00, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Svartava pointed out to me proper-noun CFI I'd overlooked and gave me guidance on whether to add a proper noun to the Wiktionary, not to mention all his contributions to the wiki, knowledge of Indo-Aryan languages, and ability to make complex templates. --Davi6596 (talk) 15:32, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Svartava is a very active editor with high-quality contributions, and he clearly has a need for administrative tools. He also has the sound judgment and temperament needed for the role. Imetsia (talk (more)) 16:03, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support LunaEatsTuna (talk) 22:19, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Juwan (talk) 18:59, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:56, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Oppose I only see them abusing admin tools, given their temperament. --{{victar|talk}} 00:27, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the uninformed reader: I don't trust Victar's judgement in this admin vote given occasional unnecessary disagreements with Svartava, particularly the Prakrit merger vote which was a piece of pointless bureaucracy should have never happened if not at Victar's behest (and was resolved very peacefully). Additionally, I don't recall any recent cases (in the past 2 years) of Svartava engaging in serious conflict with any users, so I believe this concern is unfounded.

Meanwhile, Victar has managed to use up almost all the goodwill among the Indian language admins by engaging in random conflicts and has not been subject to admin tool abuse yet, so I expect things will continue to be fine. Overall, I strongly believe we need more admins that are knowledgeable in Indian languages since their presence on Wiktionary is scaling up rapidly, and Svartava is the obvious candidate. —Aryaman^A ^{(मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 05:59, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While the Prakrit merger vote may have seemed bureaucratic to you, major restructures of language families should always be brought to the wider community for discussion, even if only to keep everyone informed. Unfortunately, too many decisions are still being made privately on Discord without sufficient open discussion, which is something that needs addressing.

As for Svartava, while it's true there haven't been major conflicts in the past two years, that alone doesn’t guarantee similar issues won’t arise in the future -- especially if they gain admin tools. Temperament and decision-making under pressure are essential for any admin, and even minor disagreements can reveal deeper concerns about leadership style. Let's not forget that their previous admin vote was a resounding failure for a reason.

Your reference to my standing with other Indian language admins is an irrelevant ad hominem. Though, I agree we need more admins with expertise in Indian languages, it's equally crucial that those admins demonstrate sound judgment, fairness, and the ability to minimize conflict. Experience should not overshadow concerns about temperament when it comes to positions of authority.

--{{victar|talk}} 17:33, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Prakrit merger, I am not aware of the Discord discussion behind that since I was quite inactive then but I still remember chiming in the BP discussion at some point, it's not something that happened in secrecy. It shouldn't have been a community-wide vote but rather in Wiktionary:Language treatment requests at most. Finally, you yourself were an early evangeliser of the Discord and I remember making a lot of editing choices from discussion with you on there in c. 2018. I guess you left the server during the time I was inactive. AFAIK no major decisions on Indian language treatement have been made on the Discord server, so this point is moot.
Re: Potential future conflicts, the admin vote he made for himself was 2 years ago (and I agree premature). We have current admins who have edited for less than that amount of time, so I believe 2 years is plenty of time to mature and become ready for it. Additionally, there is nothing else we can go off of rather than track record; admins can go crazy and e.g. delete the main page any time, and if they do we simply de-admin them. However, Svartava has not engaged in very bad or consistent conflicts that would disqualify them from adminship, and certainly nothing in recent history (and in fact, in your conflicts with him you got what you wanted!). As a Bayesian, I am pretty convinced by now that their temperament is good for adminship.
Finally, I raised the point about your conflicts because I believe it biases your thinking about whether Svartava is ready to be an admin. It's not an ad hominem (do you disagree that you have had unneeded conflicts with Svartava or me or Pulimaiyi lol?); I merely want potential voters to be aware about the context of your vote. We need experienced Indian-language admins who can patrol recent changes and clean up all the new entries being made, and Svartava is a great choice. —Aryaman^A ^{(मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 23:36, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"admins can go crazy... if they do we simply de-admin them." I wish it were that simple. While deleting the main page would be a clear and easy way to de-admin someone, in practice it's far from that simple. Part of why I've become more wary of new admin is because I've seen multiple admin participate in questionable behavior, with one notably making racist and anti-LGBT comments before he left on his own accord. However, because of the almost god-like treatment that admin get, a lack of proper conflict resolution channels, and a lack of rule enforcement currently, it's frankly almost impossible to get anything done in reference to those problems. And so, while I don't really agree with victar on the other points, I do think there needs to be more thought into why someone should be made an admin and what they actually need the tools for, because once they become an admin, it's much much harder to do anything if they go on a power trip and treat users unfairly. AG202 (talk) 19:56, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Any relevant diffs? I recall having one conversation with him that was productive and don't see anyone else pointing out poor judgement, conflict, etc. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:25, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did have some unpleasant edit wars with Victar over the use of complete etymological wording using the templates {{inh+}} and {{bor+}} in Indo-Aryan entries. However, they were later on standardized by Benwing2 with the agreement of all other Indo-Aryan editors so the issue was eventually sorted out at least in this area. Svartava (talk) 19:35, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, too many decisions are still being made privately on Discord without sufficient open discussion
There was no advance notification that this was vote going to happen. As far I know, there has been no private persuasion to vote a particular way or any sort of predetermination. The observation that Svartava has become more mature seems to be organic. If I wanted to oppose or abstain from it, then I would have done so. Kutchkutch (talk) 15:27, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose. I'm a bit conflicted between oppose and abstain, but I've regretted voting abstain in the past, so I feel like taking a stronger stance now. I really do believe that one of the most important parts of being an admin is conflict management (including blocks), and I'm unsure if I fully trust the nominee to handle them appropriately. AG202 (talk) 12:53, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to me that your vote is primarily founded on the basis of your concerns about the powers of adminship grants on the whole, rather than specific issues about this particular nominee (at least based on my reading of your previous comment: "while I don't really agree with victar on the other points"). Obviously you don't owe any explanation for your vote, but would be great if you could elaborate what leads you to believe Svartava won't handle conflicts appropriately. —Aryaman^A ^{(मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 21:08, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AryamanA: Prior arguments that I've seen from Svartava and other users, though they were a while ago, give me pause about conflict resolution. I'm also rather unsure why this user needs all the powers of adminship. Yes, I do have concerns about the powers of adminship as a whole as well, and in my opinion, we should be looking for more admin who are well-versed in conflict resolution and rule enforcement, rather than just users that we find are active and popular. (I am aware of the lack of admin in the Indo-Aryan editing community, though) AG202 (talk) 21:23, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose for now. Whalespotcha (talk) 00:23, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abstain

Abstain Temperament may be there, but this is what motivates people and can be channelled. I found little evidence of disagreeable interactions but so neither for judgement, though linguistic one he applies and verbalizes to new users, so quality standards I expect to be upheld, quite not admin tools abused. Others may have understood more. I don’t have a way with misdecisions in the sphere of India by her own editors. What is appropriate for man differs by the corner of the world one is socialized in and is then but vaguely fathomable, so it is easy to have externals misled in their recognition of abuse. Fay Freak (talk) 13:58, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain: Much less "noisy" than a few years ago, which I believe is a good sign, but I'm undecided. P U C – 20:08, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain On the fence. Megathonic (talk) 03:21, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain Also on the fence, leaning towards support. I think this user has really shown a lot of growth and maturation and also shown to be more responsible with tools than in the past. Vininn126 (talk) 09:49, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain. DonnanZ (talk) 09:04, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decision

Passed: 11-2-5. – Svārtava (tɕ) 00:09, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It’s really not a good look to close your own admin vote and say “congratulations!” in the edit summary. But alas, we’re here now. @Benwing2, or another bureaucrat, can we please grant admin rights to @Svartava. And then Svartava, please add yourself to Wiktionary:Administrators/List of administrators once that has been completed, thanks. AG202 (talk) 03:11, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AG202 I changed @Svartava's groups to include admin and took away a bunch of other user groups that I don't *think* are needed any more because they're subsumed into the admin group (autopatroller, extended mover, patroller, rollbacker, template editor). I left IP block exempt because I don't know if this is an automatic part of admin rights (indeed it includes two rights sfsblock-bypass "Bypass IP restrictions issued by the StopForumSpam extension" and torunblocked "Bypass automatic blocks of Tor exit nodes" not part of admin rights; I don't know if these are at all important though). Benwing2 (talk) 04:41, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! (For the record, I myself removed IBPE now since I don't use Tor and just occasionally use VPN.) – Svārtava (t ɕ) 05:10, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't agree that [i]t’s really not a good look to close your own admin vote and say “congratulations!”. Along with there being a few other sysop votes where the nominee participated in the closure, this can help normalizing this. – Svārtava (t ɕ) 05:10, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Just for record-keeping, the last admin vote where the nominee closed it was Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2018-01/User:Koavf for admin which was almost 20 votes prior. I'd hope that this isn't something that becomes normalized. AG202 (talk) 15:18, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Typical Koavf, not the best admin. DonnanZ (talk) 16:51, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Excluding trivial present participial adjectives

Voting on:

For an English adjective sense to be included, at least one of the following conditions has to be met (for it is otherwise trivial):

The adjective sense does not coincide with a present participle in pronunciation (i.e. is not a homophone).
The adjective sense does not coincide with a present participle in orthography (i.e. is not a homograph).
The adjective sense does not coincide with a present participle in etymology.
The adjective sense does not have a 100% transparent meaning based on our definition of the corresponding verb (i.e. it does not mean "which VERBs" for any one of the verb's senses). The corresponding verb is understood as the verb whose present participle coincides with the adjective sense regarding criteria 1-3.

Rationale:

By precedent: In the deletion discussion of spiring, the community has established a precedent of not including these kinds of adjectives. Judging from the currently ongoing RFD discussions, it is clear that it is merely a matter of time until one or the other RFD of such an adjective entry is going to fail, leaving the dictionary in an internally inconsistent state. The vote serves to remedy this.
Of marginal use: Once somebody knows the grammar rule that present participles can be used adjectivally, all of these entries become self-evident.
Bloat: These transparent adjective entries make navigating the existing articles harder, especially on mobile, not least because, unlike the true present participle entry, these adjectives are actually allowed to come with translation boxes (as is the case in growing). They also make it look like there's more than there actually is—when all there is is just duplication with no new semantics—increase editors' workloads, make them waste time, and can lead to errors, or entries gradually falling out of sync.
Suppressing true information: Their inclusion makes looking up actually interesting information harder, an example of which is finding a list of all present participles that have acquired additional, unpredictable semantics in their adjectival sense (e.g. eating or becoming).
A categorical mistake: Although each individual present participle has the property of being able to be used adjectivally, it is in fact the category of present participles that intrinsically possesses this quality. We shouldn't include this trivial information about the category of present participles within each present participle entry. The information of how to use present participles in general belongs to a grammar section.
By analogy: To provide another point of reference, in German and Romanian, almost all adjectives (bar a few exceptions) can be used adverbially with no orthographic or phonetic alteration. Including every transparent adjective sense in all English present participles is tantamount to including adverb senses in all Category:German adjectives and Category:Romanian adjectives, which is, of course, patently absurd.

Schedule:

~~Vote starts: 00:00, 15 January 2022 (UTC)~~

~~Vote ends: 23:59, 13 February 2022 (UTC)~~

~~Vote created: — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 13:32, 12 January 2022 (UTC)~~[reply]
Vote starts: 00:00, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
Vote ends: 23:59, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
Vote created: --Davi6596 (talk) 19:39, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion: