[WikiEN-l] Lists of words

[Ray Saintonge]

Guettarda wrote:

>It would appear that lists of words violate the provision that Wikipedia
>should not have articles which define individual words, nor should it
>include Lists of such definitions. However, we have
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Lists_of_words ,
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Lists_of_slang and
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Lists_of_phrases , among others.
>Policy is descriptive, not prescriptive. Is this policy still being applied
>(in which case, *all* of these articles must be deleted), or not (in which
>case the wording of the policy needs to be changed). I have raised the issue
>at
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Lists_of_Words
>
>I don't know if all of these articles need to be deleted, or whether policy
>needs to be modified to reflect reality.  But I think this needs to be
>determined in general, not determined piecemeal
>
When Wiktionary was formed it was intended to be complementary to 
Wikipedia in this direction.  Nevertheless, it was inevitable that there 
would be some degree of overlap.  When I randomly view some of these 
lists I find that there is no one solution to determmining which belong 
on which project.  There are some that clearly belong on Wiktionary like 
the [[List of idioms in the Portuguese language 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_idioms_in_the_Portuguese_language>]], 
but there are many others that are specialized glossaries that could do 
well in either project as long as there is proper linkage. 

Perhaps the most significant factor would be whether there is something 
about the items on the list that would not be found in an ordinary 
advanced dictionary.  Defining words is perfectly acceptable in 
Wikipedia, and stubs which have a future beyond the definition should 
also be acceptable. 

It's in the nature of policy to be prescriptive as long as people treat 
it as something to be enforced.  A purely descriptive policy is a 
guideline that reflects what is actually happening, and suggests what 
people might do.  The best approach would be to consider each of these 
articles one-by-one.

Ec