[WikiEN-l] Lists of words

[Steve Bennett]

On 7/31/06, Guettarda <guettarda at gmail.com> 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 spent quite a while trying to make sense of that guideline,
particularly the contradictory "not a list of dictionary definitions"
and "glossaries are ok" (I struggle to see any difference between the
two).

The best I can come up with is:
Wikipedia should *not* have articles describing some simple concept in
some complicated language. Like "ultrak00l people say freblejobjuice
to mean coca cola".

However, Wikipedia *should* have articles describing complicated
concepts in simple language: In the mythical sport of fishwrestling, a
bloobloop is when the wrestler takes the fish, wraps it twice around
his neck and proceeds to pin its gills to the nearest railing. This
concept was introduced in 1936 when....

The current "Wikipedia is not a dictionary" is almost meaningless and
doesn't help resolve any disputes whatsoever. I can't believe I voted
to delete "List of fighting game terms" under "No lists of such
definitions" when it was totally valid under "glossary pages".

Of course, can anyone actually demonstrate harm caused by dictionary
definitions in Wikipedia?

Steve