3 ms·

Why is not reliable? The same has been said about Wikipedia for long time, but for some reason Wiktionary still does not get the same level of trust as Wikipedi

Why is not reliable? The same has been said about Wikipedia for long time, but for some reason Wiktionary still does not get the same level of trust as Wikipedia. A lot of the etymologies on Wiktionary come from reputable sources such as the mentioned OED. In some cases there might be multiple conflicting sources and theories, and such complex cases are likely misrepresented by the automatic extraction tools.

wolverine876 5y ago
> The same has been said about Wikipedia for long time, but for some reason Wiktionary still does not get the same level of trust as Wikipedia. I don't think Wikipedia is reliable at all. I can't speak for others. > A lot of the etymologies on Wiktionary come from reputable sources such as the mentioned OED. Wiktionary reuses OED content? I'm surprised the OED allows that.
- jan_Inkepa 5y ago
  >Wiktionary reuses OED content? Not reuses wholesale, but cites as a source of information. [Which is what you want, right?]
  - wolverine876 5y ago
    > Not reuses wholesale, but cites as a source of information. [Which is what you want, right?] Yes! Thanks. As an aside: I splurged on an OED subscription, which isn't cheap (they had a sale recently, maybe still going on, but usually it's something like $300/yr). If you care about concepts and ideas, I can't recommend it enough: It's a dictionary of every concept to which anyone has ever assigned a word (or term) in English, and in minutes you can see the concept from every perspective it's been seen, in every time and place, and the OED bring that together with the primary sources - the actual (brief) quotes where the person introduced the term. IME, it's also the best place to start for scientific and mathematical terms. If you look up "relativity" you get original quotes from Maxwell, Poincare, Einstein, etc., as well as several paragraphs succinctly and clearly defining the Special Theory, General Theory, etc.
    - jan_Inkepa 5y ago
      Agreed; from my time with using it in University OED's early usage sources are A+++. Definitely blows wiktionary's out of the water (in as much as you can blow something out of the water that doesn't exist to begin with).
- jberkel 5y ago
  > Wiktionary reuses OED content? I'm surprised the OED allows that. Facts (etymologies) are not copyrightable. The exact same text can't be used of course, but it can be rephrased, or to some extend quoted under "Fair use".

wolverine876 5y ago

> The same has been said about Wikipedia for long time, but for some reason Wiktionary still does not get the same level of trust as Wikipedia. I don't think Wikipedia is reliable at all. I can't speak for others. > A lot of the etymologies on Wiktionary come from reputable sources such as the mentioned OED. Wiktionary reuses OED content? I'm surprised the OED allows that.

jan_Inkepa 5y ago
>Wiktionary reuses OED content? Not reuses wholesale, but cites as a source of information. [Which is what you want, right?]
- wolverine876 5y ago
  > Not reuses wholesale, but cites as a source of information. [Which is what you want, right?] Yes! Thanks. As an aside: I splurged on an OED subscription, which isn't cheap (they had a sale recently, maybe still going on, but usually it's something like $300/yr). If you care about concepts and ideas, I can't recommend it enough: It's a dictionary of every concept to which anyone has ever assigned a word (or term) in English, and in minutes you can see the concept from every perspective it's been seen, in every time and place, and the OED bring that together with the primary sources - the actual (brief) quotes where the person introduced the term. IME, it's also the best place to start for scientific and mathematical terms. If you look up "relativity" you get original quotes from Maxwell, Poincare, Einstein, etc., as well as several paragraphs succinctly and clearly defining the Special Theory, General Theory, etc.
  - jan_Inkepa 5y ago
    Agreed; from my time with using it in University OED's early usage sources are A+++. Definitely blows wiktionary's out of the water (in as much as you can blow something out of the water that doesn't exist to begin with).
jberkel 5y ago
> Wiktionary reuses OED content? I'm surprised the OED allows that. Facts (etymologies) are not copyrightable. The exact same text can't be used of course, but it can be rephrased, or to some extend quoted under "Fair use".