User talk:UBX/bisexual

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Requested move

To standardize Wikipedia:Babel (which does prefer two-letter ISO 639-1 language codes, if available) for speakers of Bislama. —BorgHunter (talk) 00:55, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Voting

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~
  • Support as the one who brought this up. —BorgHunter (talk) 04:32, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose — It being at Template:User bis should be perfectly acceptable. There's no reason why languages should have a higher priority to be at their "proper" name than any other template.
Language templates are also largely irrelevant anyway, except on Meta - this is the English Wikipedia, and those who speak other languages aren't always active on their equivalent language Wikipedias anyway: And if they are, they often have different usernames too.):
{{User bi}} has just as much right to be here. It's the most common term for bisexuality, and should not have to be moved just in the name of code pedantry.. --Mistress Selina Kyle (Α⇔Ω ¦ ⇒✉) 02:43, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Support Babel was here first. In retrospect, maybe the better pattern for naming Babel would have been something like User lang bi, but nobody knew that userboxes would grow out of the Babel template. I think WikiProject Userboxes should set the standard to avoid naming user templates with 2 letters to avoid running into Babel. --Tetraminoe 06:14, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Support, per Tetraminoe. However, moving to something like User lang bi or User lang en should be conducted only by concensus.--Hello World! 06:47, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Support The template bi relates to the language Bislama, which should be two characters in line with other languages. I don't see anyone suggesting changing English to eng. Ringbark 08:57, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Support, the babel infoboxes were the first userboxes to be used at Wikipedia; the others came later. Also, the move of the Bislama userbox from bi to bis was done out of process without seeking consensus, and should be undone for that reason alone. --Angr (t·c) 09:27, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Support, language codes have a practical reason for being 2 letters, they have to be recognisable to others who mightn't even use the latin alphabet. Gronky 13:08, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong support. Userboxes are fine, but I consider it a secondary application. Babel was here first and I consider it far more important to our work building an encyclopedia. Furthermore, it's especially important to standardize the langauge codes across Wikipedias so that users won't have to hunt for their specific language. No userbox should be two letters. Finally, I would also like to express my disapproval of moving Bislama from bi to bis without comment and as Angr mentions, it should be moved back even for that reason alone. — Knowledge Seeker দ 17:52, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Support, At first I thought my user page was vandalized. I second BorgHunter's comments below. --jonsafari 22:47, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Support: Gronky gives one good reason why, most everyone has given another. Jonathunder 18:36, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comments

May I remind you that the Bislama template was originally at Template:User bi. Perhaps the question is not why should these by moved, but was the move in the first place correct? Why does bisexuality have a higher priority to be at this name than Bislama? The move was not made with consensus. In fact, you moved the template without editing people's user pages to point to the proper userbox (or even notifying them about the change), which was horribly thoughtless. I am of the opinion that everything should be moved back to where it was and the move discussion start from there, but I think that might be a violation of WP:POINT so I'm not going to go there. However, because of the circumstances regarding this, I assert that the burden of proof to provide consensus belongs to the oppose side here. Even if the move back is shot down, Mistress, in the future, you should strive to be more thoughtful when doing something like moving a template which people do use (just check "What links here"). At least notify them; preferably change the template to the one they were using for them. It's all common courtesy. —BorgHunter (talk) 04:32, 31 December 2005 (UTC)