[WikiEN-l] Wikipedia is not a dictionary (was: Re: Old Wikipedia backups discovered)

[Stephanie Daugherty]

On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 8:26 PM, Anthony <wikimail at inbox.org> wrote:

> >>> What counts as "beyond a dictionary entry".  Are you talking about
> >>> length, or content?
> >>
> >> The latter.  The aforementioned "Nigger" article contains a great deal
> >> of material that one would not find in any dictionary with which I'm
> >> familiar.
> >
> > It also contains a great deal of material that one would not find in
> > any encyclopedia with which I'm familiar.
>
> And most of the material I think would be *more likely* to be in a
> dictionary than an encyclopedia.  Meaning, etymology, usage,
> derivatives.  These are all things more likely to be found in a
> dictionary than an encyclopedia.
>
> Basically, if you took a dictionary, and removed the space
> requirements, and then took an encyclopedia, and removed the space
> requirements, the content of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigger would
> likely be in the former, and not the latter.
>

Well stated, and I think that clearly states the purpose of "not a
dictionary". It's not anything to do with notability, it's what belongs
where.

>
>