[Wikipedia-l] Re: [Wiktionary-l] Article on LISA

[Andrew Venier]

Mark Williamson wrote:

>A stupid question, probably, but...
>
>Am I right that UW is to supplement rather than replace existing Wiktionary?
>  
>
That's not clear to me, at least.  I think the whole discussion got off 
on the wrong foot because of the strident tone in the article.  e.g.:

   "The current Wiktionaries will be converted to the Ultimate Wiktionary."

This can easily be understood to mean "Ultimate Wiktionary will replace 
the current Wiktionaries."

I didn't know in any detail of UW plans before reading this article.  
The way many such declarations were made, the message I got from the 
article (and some of the follow-up discussion) was: "The relevant 
decisions have already been made by those who matter.  This is a _fait 
accompli_.  Now if everyone else would kindly step out of the way and 
comply with what we have decided."