On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 12:44 PM, David Levy <lifeisunf...@gmail.com> wrote: > I wrote: > >> > My point is that each of those 144 "episode guide entries" is written >> > as an encyclopedia article (despite the fact that no traditional >> > encyclopedia includes such content). > > Anthony replied: > >> That point is not relevant, though. > > Your disagreement with my point (which I expound in the text quoted > below) doesn't render it irrelevant.
I agree with your point. But it has nothing to do with whether or not the "Wikipedia is not a dictionary" guideline is being widely ignored. >> What makes something an "encyclopedia article about a word"? Sounds >> to me like another way to describe a "dictionary". > > Are you suggesting that the content presented in > http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/nigger or another dictionary's "nigger" > entry is comparable (or could be comparable, given revision/expansion > in accordance with the publication's standards) to that of > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigger ? It isn't comparable. Could it be comparable? I don't know. >> So "Wikipedia is not a dictionary" is a formatting guideline, and not an >> inclusion guideline? I didn't take it that way, but if you think that's >> what it says, maybe I should reread it. > > No, it's an inclusion guideline; it explains that Wikipedia doesn't > include dictionary entries. This is tangentially related to > formatting in the respect that Wikipedia includes articles about words > only when encyclopedia-formatted articles are justified. That begs the question. Wikipedia obviously only includes articles about anything only when encyclopedia-formatted articles are justified. But what is it that's *different* about words, which justifies the guideline, which you say is an inclusion guideline? > "This page in a nutshell: In Wikipedia, things are grouped into > articles based on what they are, not what they are called by. In a > dictionary, things are grouped by what they are called by, not what > they are." Sounds like formatting to me. >> > We use the format "Foo (word)" or similar when the word itself is not >> > the primary topic. For example, see "Man (word)". > >> I guess that could work, though it would be nice to have something >> more standard. Instead I see: >> >> *troll (gay slang) >> *faggot (slang) >> *Harry (derogatory term) >> *Oorah (Marines) >> *Uh-oh (expression) > > That's why I wrote "or similar." I wasn't disagreeing with you. >> Anyway, not that big a deal. So the next problem I have is that there >> don't seem to be any notability guidelines. Is the word "computer" >> notable? If so, why isn't there yet an encyclopedia entry for such a >> common word? There's certainly quite a lot that can be said about the >> word. > > To my knowledge, we apply our general notability guideline > [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability#General_notability_guideline] > and conduct deletion discussions when disagreements arise. If you > believe that a subject-specific notability guideline is needed, feel > free to propose one. Wait a second. If "Wikipedia is not a dictionary" is about inclusion, isn't *it* that notability guideline? What is a reliable source for a word? Do dictionaries count? If so, then wouldn't pretty much all words have reliable sources on them? On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 3:49 PM, Fred Bauder <fredb...@fairpoint.net> wrote: > >> >> Anyway, not that big a deal. So the next problem I have is that there >> don't seem to be any notability guidelines. Is the word "computer" >> notable? If so, why isn't there yet an encyclopedia entry for such a >> common word? There's certainly quite a lot that can be said about the >> word. > > Well, is there interesting or relevant material published in a reliable > source? Do dictionaries count as reliable sources? On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 4:18 PM, Stephanie Daugherty <sdaughe...@gmail.com> wrote: > For the most part, an encyclopedic article about a word is just a very > verbose dictionary > entry - there's no need to have a word defined in both Wikipedia and > Wiktionary. So Wikipedia shouldn't have articles (verbose dictionary entries) about words? _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l