[Wikipedia-l] [WikiEN-l] Re: www.wixpression.org?

[Daniel Mayer]

Timwi wrote on Wikien-l:
>OK, here are my major problems with Wiktionary:
>
>* English-centric (as has already been said)

Uh, it is the English Wiktionary. I guess that makes the English Wikipedia 
English-centric as well. 

>* not automated enough. Linking from [[biscuit]] (an English word) to
>   [[Keks]] (a German word) should automatically add a link from [[Keks]]
>   back to [[biscuit]]. 

That is not Wiktionary's fault! Add a feature request for MediaWiki. 

>  A lot of identical formatting/layout should be 
>  automated (perhaps have a template automatically show up in the edit
> window when you try to edit a not-yet-existing page?).

That would be a neat thing to have for highly structured projects like 
Wiktionary and Wikiquote. 

>* too crowded in places. [[e]] should not contain all its meanings in
>   hundreds of different languages on a single page.

That is what jump to TOC links are for. 

>* make one major change of policy/aim/goal. I think it is completely
>   redundant and futile to try to define (explain the meaning of) all
>   words of all languages *in* all languages. 

Kinda like having articles on all encyclopedia-worthy topics? Have you ever 
heard of translating dictionaries? That is a big part of what Wiktionary is. 

>My suggestions for major improvement would be:
>
>* wait for MediaWiki to support multi-language projects within a single
>   Wiki. This is already in the plans for Wikipedia. Once that is done,
>   you can have one page [[e]] in Spanish, another [[e]] in Italian, etc.

It will probably be a long time before projects like Wikipedia become one 
wiki, one database, all languages. Too many naming conflicts to deal with. 
Meta, Wikibooks, and Wikisource can be much more easily internationalized. 

>   I think a word should only 
>   be defined in its own language, and if you want its meaning explained
>   in another language, then you should really look up its translation in
>   that other language. 

That makes about as much sense as only having an English version of an 
encyclopedia article on the United Kingdom. 

>   There are just so many things on Wiktionary that 
>   are language-independent (e.g. the translations for each word, or
>   pronunciation written in IPA) that duplicating it hundreds of times
>   seems really dumb.

That is a valid issue, but since Wiktionary isn't internationalized yet it is 
not a pressing one. IMO, a separate project is not at all needed. What /is/ 
needed, is for Wiktionary to finally get internationalized. 

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)