From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

How is this different from Wiktionary?[edit]

Wiktionary (link) already exists as a Wikimedia project. How would this be different? -- Ypnypn (talk) 05:20, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Per above, Wiktionary has existed almost as long as Wikipedia (2002). George.Edward.C (talk) 18:29, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I do not see any difference with Wiktionary. Skorovs (talk) 22:52, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Wiktionary doesn't give off definitions of words, in my opinion. DLindsley Need something? 16:06, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Then what does it do? DiscantX (talk) 09:35, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This project would be an exact duplicate of Wiktionary. --Biblioworm (talk) 20:55, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Is this project supposed to include something which is not included in wiktionary?--Doostdar (talk) 07:54, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If nobody opposes, I'm going to reject this proposal as duplicate in a week. --Ricordisamoa 12:26, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea. The only slight difference from Wiktionary might be that it'd be more like Urban Dictionary or something, but then that's out of scope anyway. — Sam Wilson ( TalkContribs ) … 06:54, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree entirely, for it seems as if that would just add a wasted duplicate of an already existing project, so we need not to have a clone of it. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 03:37, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]