Wiktionary:Votes/2017-02/Glyph origin

Voting on:

Formally allowing the "Glyph origin" section in entries.

Section placement:

1. The "Glyph origin" section is to be a level 3 section.
2. The "Glyph origin" section is to be placed among the sections that exist before the POS section. More specifically: after the level 3 "Alternative forms" and/or "Description" section when they exist, and before the level 3 "Etymology" and/or "Pronunciation" sections when they exist.

Policy edit:

• Adding "Glyph origin" in the list of headings in WT:EL#Headings before the definitions.

Some entries that already have the "Glyph origin" section, as of February 2, 2017: 冫 (Translingual and Chinese), ⿱成龍 (Chinese), 水 (Chinese).

Schedule:

• Vote starts: 00:00, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
• Vote ends: 23:59, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
• Vote created: --Daniel Carrero (talk) 18:44, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion:

• Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/January#About "Glyph origin"
• Wiktionary talk:Votes/2017-02/Glyph origin

1. Support --Daniel Carrero (talk) 00:48, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
2. Support —suzukaze (t・c) 00:52, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
3. Support. Existing widespread usage that works and is agreed upon by relevant editors (here, Chinese editors) should be codified. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 01:20, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
4. Support — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 05:15, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
5. Support Wyang (talk) 07:49, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
6. Support per Μετάknowledge. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 12:42, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
   • Support Backinstadiums (talk) 14:37, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

     Inelligible to vote, must have 50 edits in the main and/or some other namespaces per Wiktionary:Voting policy. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 20:59, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

7. Support — AWESOME meeos ！ * (chōmtī hao /t͡ɕoːm˩˧.tiː˩˧ haw˦˥/) 22:51, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
8. Support -Xbony2 (talk) 02:14, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
9. Support — Eru·tuon 20:42, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

   Support: this is a helpful section, and I agree that it can be different from word etymologies. Nicole Sharp (talk) 10:54, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

   This vote ended a week ago. Sometimes, people cast "late votes" to show further consensus (or lack thereof) after the vote ended. That's OK, but they don't count for the final decision, naturally. I'm removing your vote from the numerical list now. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 17:04, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1. Better Abstain 'cause I don't edit in these languages. But proposal does not sound bad as far as I can tell. Equinox ◑ 22:17, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
2. Abstain. I'm leaning towards oppose, because I think the visual representation of a word is just as much a matter for etymology as the meaning and path of its inheritance/borrowing. However, I don't edit in the relevant languages, so I don't think it would be appropriate/fair for me to do anything other than abstain. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 00:18, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
3. Abstain. --Dan Polansky (talk) 11:43, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Passed: 9-0-3 (100%-0%) --Daniel Carrero (talk) 00:17, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edited Wiktionary:Entry layout accordingly. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 00:18, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]