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."