Ubuntu QA:
BlogBrainstormPackage status
Log in
Ubuntu QA
The Ubuntu community has contributed 15804 ideas, 78175 comments, 1425990 votes

Idea #4970: Integrate Wikipedia into Dictionary



up
303
down
Written by Eldmannen the 18 Mar 08 at 00:36. Category: Others.
Related to: Nothing/Others. Status: New
Description
Integrate Wikipedia and Wiktionary into Dictionary, so if I lookup "Car", then I can goto Car article on Wikipedia.

Attachments
No attachments.


Duplicates


Comments
mrbeardy wrote on the 18 Mar 08 at 13:18
Or perhaps just for non-dictionary words, ie noob, clusterfuck...

Vadim P. wrote on the 18 Mar 08 at 14:29
Just to let you know, bugzilla.gnome.org is for reporting ideas for gnome apps.

This idea has already been filed also: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=471362

ubunteando wrote on the 18 Mar 08 at 23:28
Actually I think an offline dictionary nowadays its completely worthless... I would take it out of Ubuntu. Definitely.

Eldmannen wrote on the 19 Mar 08 at 02:15
ubunteando,
Nobody proposed an offline dictionary.

rouge568 wrote on the 1 Apr 08 at 19:50
This would be a good extension to idea #364.

LC всадник cbet wrote on the 17 May 08 at 04:07
I think that this idea is a very good one especially `cause we would be supporting another great GNU initiative, well done mate!

The off-line dictionary should still be used because as in many less fortunate parts of the world internet is not that easy as most of us in "richer" countries just take it for granted and forget about other people that sometimes cannot afford it.

Darin wrote on the 19 May 08 at 09:23
This is already on the Gnome 2.24 Roadmap. Both Wikipedia and Local File support. If accomplished, it should make it into Ubuntu 8.10.

- Darin

michaelUbuntu wrote on the 27 Nov 08 at 00:44
I had to vote this down, Wikipedia, though being web based, is too easy to post things on, for instance, I could post an entry saying that there is proof that a person was from another planent and was here to take over earth. It would be accepted, and circulated as fact, even though it was competly fake.

Since there is no research given on that site to tell rather or not the information is correct, or fake, it would not be good to impliment into an dictionary of any kind.



Post your comment