[Wikipedia-l] Re: A parallel World Wide Web?

Thu Jun 3 15:23:08 UTC 2004

>>>>> "T" == Timwi  <timwi at gmx.net> writes:

    T> Oh, OK. It's an encyclopedia -- so let's take a look at
    T> Wiktionary to find out what an encyclopedia is:
       ^^^^^^^^^^

    T> [...]

    T> What parts of human knowledge should in your view not be
    T> covered in an encyclopedia, and why?

Aren't you answering your own question, there? I mean, we have
Wiktionary because Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Ipso fatso, some
knowledge doesn't go in an encyclopedia.

There are a lot of things that don't go into Wikipedia, established by
precedent over these several years of its existence.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not

If you're interested in my _personal_ ideas on what those restrictions
should be, I'm willing to discuss that. But if you want to challenge
the idea that there could possibly be any limit to what belongs in
Wikipedia, I believe that horse has already left the barn.

~ESP

-- 
Evan Prodromou <evan at wikitravel.org>
Wikitravel - http://wikitravel.org/en/
The free, complete, up-to-date and reliable world-wide travel guide