[WikiEN-l] Wikipedia is not a dictionary (was: Re: Old Wikipedia backups discovered)

[Anthony]

On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 7:42 PM, David Levy <lifeisunfair at gmail.com> wrote:
> Do you advocate that we redirect "Nigger" to "Black people"?

No, I don't.

> A "Petrol (word)" or "Gasoline (word)" article would be fine, provided
> that reliable sources and Wikipedia consensus back the assertion that
> the word itself possesses cultural/historical significance warranting
> an encyclopedia article.  This probably isn't the case.

What about having both?  Would that be fine?  It's quite explicitly
banned by [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary]], which doesn't
mention anything about cultural/historical significance, isn't it?

>> > Of course, for most words, nothing beyond a dictionary entry is
>> > appropriate.
>
>> What counts as "beyond a dictionary entry".  Are you talking about
>> length, or content?
>
> The latter.  The aforementioned "Nigger" article contains a great deal
> of material that one would not find in any dictionary with which I'm
> familiar.

It also contains a great deal of material that one would not find in
any encyclopedia with which I'm familiar.

>> > As I noted, a dictionary indiscriminately lists and defines terms
>> > from the language in which it's written.
>
>> Not all dictionaries.  In fact, most dictionaries are selective, not
>> comprehensive or random.
>
> My point is that a dictionary typically lists and defines terms with
> little regard for their societal impact.  "Door" is included because
> the object that it describes is a common, everyday thing, *not*
> because of any special attributes on the part of the word itself.

And this differs from Wikipedia how?

Yes, you stated a rule that articles about words (and only words?)
have to have "cultural/historical significance", but as far as I can
tell there's nothing about that rule in [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a
dictionary]].

You seem to go back and forth on whether [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not
a dictionary]] is stating that articles should not be formatted as
dictionary entries, or whether it imposes notability requirements of
its own.  I've mostly snipped that part of our discussion, because it
was getting far too circular.