Guillaume Blanchard wrote:
Mark Williamson wrote:
If an encyclopedia were really a compendium of all human knowledge, we wouldn't need Wiktionary.
Mark
Exactly! If Wikipedia was a compendium of human knowledge, we wouldn't need Wiktionary because Wiktionary excluded some linguistic knowledge from the main encyclopedia. Now, some wikipadians would like to exclude some cooking knowledge. What next? What is the argument to say what is encyclopedic or not? Actually, Wikipedians are not representative at all of human diversity (sex, age, culture, etc.) so, imho, majority's opinion is not relevant to answer this question. So I ask again to Jimbo, "What kind of encyclopedia is Wikipedia?"
Aoineko
When you look outside the "wikipedia" box, still being in the "wikimedia" box, you will find your dictionary information. When we finally have our "interproject links" it will even be obvious that there IS information within our projects about the lexicological information for a word. Like with the pictures and recordings in Commons, there is a technical reason why there is merit in having the lexicological information seperate from the encyclopedic information. This will become even more obvious when we get the hoped for "ultimate wiktionary".
So to answer Aoineko, we are inclusive, it is all in the projects. We want to present the whole spectrum of human knowledge and make it available to all who can absorb it.
Thanks, GerardM