When I'm looking for a translation or explanation of a terms such as "Sub-Lieutenant" (a military rank), "jackdaw" (a bird) or "zucchini" (a vegetable), it makes a lot of sense to see them in contrast to what they are not, for example a list of other military degrees, or a group of similar but different birds or vegetables. But I think Wikipedia today is too much focused on describing each item on its own, and not enough on connecting or contrasting concepts to each other. The current (English Wikipedia) article on [[zucchini]], even though it has fine pictures, doesn't really help me to tell it apart from a cucumber or an eggplant. The "higher level" article [[vegetable]] doesn't group vegetables into those of similar kinds. There is such a grouping in [[list of vegetables]], though, where the group is named [[squash (fruit)]]. There is actually a link from [[zucchini]] to [[squash (fruit)]], but that link is hidden in the middle of the text and doesn't stand out as the next-higher-level concept. If I didn't already know what a zucchini is, I might get quite confused. This is not a critique of these particular articles or even of the English Wikipedia. The same pattern appears everywhere, more or less. The article [[jackdaw]] doesn't immediately help me to tell this bird apart from other black species of the genus Corvus, such as rooks or ravens. The article [[Crow (animal)]] lists these other species, and each of them has descriptions and photos (which is excellent, of course), but I don't get the overview picture that most modern printed encyclopedias would give me. Note that the German, Netherlands, and Polish jackdaw articles have other photos of the same bird. This must be one of the most commonly seen birds of these countries, and apparently everybody already had a picture of them laying around. All are fine photos, but all are pictures of this species alone. The Japanese picture actually has a jackdaw and another bird, the very different looking European magpie (of the same family corvidae, but of the genus pica, not corvus). The picture doesn't help me tell the jackdaw from other black crows. [[Sub-Lieutenant]] (the Canadian rank) redirects to the article [[Lieutenant]] and [[Sub Lieutenant]] (the British rank) redirects to the article [[Lieutenant, junior grade]], which both contain the explanation in the text. The fact box at the bottom of these articles and the page [[comparative military ranks]] actually provide the context that I'm looking for, but they don't describe which extra authorities the next higher rank has. How does a Sub-Lieutenant earn his promotion and what does that give him or her? An army corporal is not an officer rank, not expected to become promoted, but exactly what is expected from a Sub-Lieutenant? What does it mean if a character in a novel was "an old Sub-Lieutenant"? Should the reader expect that he would normally have been promoted before the age of 27 and does the fact, that he did not, provide a clue about something? Terms such as sub-lieutentant should be described in contrast to other ranks, or else we will understand very little. Again, this is not a criticism of these particular articles. I know nothing about the navy, and I'm learning tons already. I know where Wikipedia was three years ago, and I'm impressed every day. But there is still more work we can do. Now to one particular solution. One idea applied within the "LEXIN" project (dictionaries for immigrants) of the immigration authorities of Sweden, Norway, and some other small countries is a common set of picture themes to which words are connected. A good online example (in English) is found at http://decentius.hit.uib.no/lexin.html?ui-lang=eng&dict=eng If you look at "5. groceries and purchasing", you will find groups of groceries, vegetables being one of them, where a zucchini is painted next to an eggplant and a cucumber. You can click either in the picture or in the dictionary to your left (if the Javascript works for you). Theme 26 is birds and the jackdaw is near the center of that picture theme. Then go to Kurdish (kurmanji) and learn that "26. birds" is "26. balinde" and jackdaw is "qira zeytûnê, qira helezî". Of course, the purpose here is for Kurdish immigrants to learn Norwegian, but you get the idea. That is why only typical Swedish and Norwegian birds are depicted in the first place (there are no balded eagles or ostriches around here). I don't know if or where such picture themes could be a good idea for Wikipedia or Wiktionary, but the example is there for anybody to get inspiration from. You don't have to be a painter, of course. You could just take a photo of a zucchini, a cucumber, and an eggplant in a way that shows the difference between them. Perhaps the entire vegetable desk of some grocery store? And once the picture is there in Wikimedia Commons, it can be reused for any language, just like the LEXIN pictures are. Has this been tried in any Wikimedia project? Should we make a list of which picture themes we need? At first, it might seem that picture themes would be of little use in explaining the concept of sub-lieutenant, except perhaps for the insignia. But imagine a picture of a battle ship having a organization chart next to it populated with small figures, showing one admiral (?) at the top, and in the 4th row showing twelve sub-lieutenants each managing their own division of sailors. I have no idea of the actual numbers, but I think the concept could be a lift to Wikipedia. We'll need a hundred people that can draw really good and who are willing to put their artwork under a free license. And if they aren't experts on navy ranks themselves, they'll need to be able to read instructions for what to draw, or interview experts by chat. The LEXIN dictionary project is described at http://decentius.hit.uib.no/lexin.html?ui-lang=eng -- Lars Aronsson (lars(a)aronsson.se) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l