I don't
see good technical reasons (= technical solution that couldn't
be done on WP) to move lexicological information outside of Wikipedia
but it's not the point. Move cooking information (or a day sport, tv,
celebrities, etc.) outside of the encyclopedia is not legitimate as far
as you don't give reason why is not encyclopedic (witch is impossible if
we don't all us the same definition of what a encyclopedia is). "Present
the whole spectrum of human knowledge" is close to my own definition,
but I'm not sure everybody where have the same definition and it's
clearly not the way we are following removing recipes. I agree the fact
we need some limit to the "whole spectrum", but I'd like to have a
definition of this limit. "Things that didn't interfere life of wide
human group" ?
In my opinion, an encyclopedia is in the first place a work of
reference, and from that I get my idea of what should be in Wikipedia:
All that normally would be found in some reference work (some
"encyclopedia of such-and-such"). That also makes me more deletionist
than people like you, probably.
Andre Engels
Does that mean all recipes we can found into cooking encyclopedias are
legitimate on Wikipedia?
I can't imagine a consensus about an exhaustive list of references, so
your definition moves the debate to "what a reference is?". Personally,
I think the "reference" concept is not relevant outside of science
domain. In science, the pertinence criteria are concrete: accuracy of
formula and reproducibility of experience. What are the pertinence
criteria for culture?
Aoineko