[Wikipedia-l] Wiktionary

[Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz]

On 17-04-2001, lcrocker at nupedia.com wrote thusly :
> I can see three major advantages of a Wiktionary over a traditional 
> online dictionary, and several disadvantages.  On the positive side, 
> (1) it would not be constrained by space limitations, so it could be 
> completely unabridged, contain many examples and citations, and be 
> more clearly written with fewer abbreviations etc., (2) it could take 
> advantage of the specialized knowledge of readers beyond what 
> lexicographers would be interested in, especially useful for 
> technical terms that many dictionaries, frankly, get just plain 
> wrong, and (3) it would be open content.
> The major disadvantage, as Rose points out, is that Wikification puts 
> at risk a lot of good research by lexicographers, and would sacrifice 
> the their credibility.  It would also suffer Wikipedia's depth-versus-
> breadth problems, and probably encourage production of lots of 
> frivolous content for slang-of-the-moment and such.
> Perhaps something like a user-annotated but not directly editable 
> version?  The dictionary could be seeded from a credible paper 
> dictionary source and the main entries protected from editing; 
> then "discussion" pages attached to each entry (and free-form new 
> entries) could be added to by users, and some formal editing process 
> could be used to update the formal entries when appropriate from the 
> information gathered.
I second that proposal. But wouldn't it slow down the creation process ?

On a slightly different subject. Over several months I have gathered
some 500 medical abbreviations. Where would they fit ? In wikipedia ?
In the Wiktionary ? Or in a stand-alone abbreviation Wiktionary ? 

Best regards,
kpj. 
-- 
Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz, M.D | Jeżeli coś się może nie udać, to się nie uda.
Czestochowa, Poland ...       | Murphy  
Więcej cytatów : http://www.cytaty.phg.pl