Talk:Wikimedia: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Removed claims that [[Wikipedia]] is an encyclopedia - it isn't. A "serious encyclopedia" has no visible "stubs", certainly does not let [[ad hominem]] rule over content in selection of articles, doesn't permit massive holes in key areas to persist for years, and doesn't let the [[community point of view]] of its employees overrule the good sense of historians, mathematicians, and etc. | Removed claims that [[Wikipedia]] is an encyclopedia - it isn't. A "serious encyclopedia" has no visible "stubs", certainly does not let [[ad hominem]] rule over content in selection of articles, doesn't permit massive holes in key areas to persist for years, and doesn't let the [[community point of view]] of its employees overrule the good sense of historians, mathematicians, and etc. | ||
Removed claims that [[Wiktionary]] is a dictionary - it isn't. A dictionary must define the simplest words in terms of other simple words, and it must define complex words in terms of the simpler words. Wiktionary has no such discipline. | Removed claims that [[Wiktionary]] is a dictionary - it isn't. A dictionary must define the simplest words in terms of other simple words, and it must define complex words in terms of the simpler words. Wiktionary has no such discipline. It has no [[w:defining vocabulary]] even for [[w:idiom dictionary]] purposes. | ||
Failing to actually BE an encyclopedia and dictionary are two of the biggest issues anyone could reasonably raise with [[Wikimedia]]'s projects, which are at this point simply [[pilot project]]s. | Failing to actually BE an encyclopedia and dictionary are two of the biggest issues anyone could reasonably raise with [[Wikimedia]]'s projects, which are at this point simply [[pilot project]]s. | ||