On 30/07/06, Guettarda <guettarda(a)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_…
I don't know if all of these articles need to be deleted, or whether policy
needs to be modified to reflect reality. But I think this needs to be
determined in general, not determined piecemeal
We have many articles which define individual words (cheese,
lawnmower, carpenter, etc.), but I take the problem is to do with
articles about the words themselves. One that comes to mind is the
article [[fuck]], quite a good read.
Many articles which aren't specifically about the word have sections
concerning etymology and semantics.
I don't think this is a problem for Wikipedia. I don't think being
"encyclopaedic" is to do with what articles are about, it is to do
with how they are written and how the information is presented.
--
Oldak Quill (oldakquill(a)gmail.com)