While there may be cases where the guideline's been taken too literally, or some cases not literally enough, the point of "not a dictionary" to me in our current state is to avoid overlaps with our sister project - if we didn't have that, we'd have tremendous duplication of content. For the most part, an encyclopedic article about a word is just a very verbose dictionary entry - there's no need to have a word defined in both Wikipedia and Wiktionary. If it's a definition, regardless of how much fluff we can put behind it, it belongs on Wiktionary. If it's more than just "a word" then it might have a place on Wikipedia. It's usually not all that hard.
-Steph
Extensive information on the development of a concept is inappropriate in a dictionary. For example the word "robot".
Fred Bauder