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