Re:Leading with Wikipedia: A brand proposal for 2030
by hug on Tuesday February 26, 2019 @07:46PM
(#19259896)
Granted, the etymology section on Wiktionary is useful (although I personally have a tendency to hit etymonline.com for etymology).
I really didn't intend for this to come across as a broadside against all of the Wikimedia properties. A projects by themselves, I would say they're all okay, I guess, but they're none of them projects I would siphon money from Wikipedia to fund.
Wiktionary already covers a large number of languages where other online dictionaries have noticeably poorer content, or there may be no other real online dictionary at all. Wiktionary’s entry template puts a lot of emphasis on etymologies, for instance, and these etymologies are often not easy to find on the web (as opposed to dusty print dictionaries one might not have ready access to).