Talk:Wiktionary and dicologos

Hi :-) please do not forget that even on wiktionaries there are professionals ;-) around. Well then it comes to "what are professionals" .... hmmmm .... professionals in translation are people who are doing their job transporting written contents from one language into the other enabling the message to be understood. Professionals in editing wiktionary are all responsible contributors that add contents they know or that, if they are not sure about something, ask others who know to have a look. This means that when it comes to translations in the complex meaning of the word we are talking about people that have a certain culture and maybe also study to do their job. When it comes to the dictionary instead: we have also very young contributors that still go to school and that add really good content. Such as translations into their mother tognue, definitions searched for school, creating glossaries concerning their hobby etc. Very often the contributions of these young people concern a more basic kind of words, like music, film, reading but also the solar system etc. And what I noted: they are very responsible in doing this.

So when it comes to who may edit a dictionary: we should not talk about professionals, but about responsible people. Well within wiktionary finding out who is responsible is quite easy: you have a look at what people do, if you cannot be sure if it is correct you ask someone who can judge this to do it. If there is something that needs to be corrected you tell it. Normally this way you have wonderful people contributing relevant contents. I don't see a difference between the two groups - everyone has its own points of force and everyone is important. I would not like to miss any of our contributors - and btw.: also vandals sooner or later can become contributors ... as strange as it might sound ... ;-) Ciao!!! --Sabine 23:12, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The thought of integrating the content of Logos into the Ultimate Wiktionary is certainly exciting. However, I think that at the moment the focus should be on the new database and merging the existing wiktionaries. This will probably be difficult enough: scripts for data import must be written for each wiktionary since they all use different entry layouts and approaches. People must be convinced (at the moment many people know next to nothing about the UW!) and they must become familiar with the new software. So, in my opinion these internal things should be solved first, before bringing an external force into play. Or maybe you're already doing exactly that. Frankly, I have no idea where the project is at the moment. There isn't much information out there. About the licensing issue... does the Wikimedia Foundation have a lawyer? Sorry for coming off a little negative, but this definitely should be examined thoroughly. We don't want a company "taking over" Wiktionary. --84.163.105.3 00:47, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There are several scenario's possible. Many of these scenario's may happen side by side.

The focus is at present very much on the Ultimate Wiktionary.
Merging the content of the wiktionaries will be difficult. It will need attention and the existing scripts need to be improved to make this conversion happen.
We are slowly but surely getting to the point where we can "out" functionality. This is the time when many people will start to get interested. We will improve the functionality at least to the point where we can include first the GEMET data and then the Logos data. This will leave out some the functionality that we need and, we are seeking for funding / programming capacity to make this happen.
As to licensing, both dicologos and wiktionary are GFDL so legally there are no issues.
We do not want anyone to take over what is in essence a free community project, we want to grow our community and there is ample place for more people and even organisations. GerardM 12:49, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for you answers, that's indeed very helpful. Can you estimate a date when the Ultimate Wiktionary will be "ready", that is when the normal user will be able to work with it? I'm looking forward to it very much, so I'm curious about that. --84.163.91.116 13:31, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]