Is this question on topic?

Question

How much should I trust Wiktionary?

The first thought that came to my mind after watching this question was how can this question be on topic. I was so sure about it being closed that I did not even bother to cast any close vote as this might accelerate the question's being closed without getting any answer at all. But to my surprise, I discovered instead of getting closed, it gained several up-votes. So I made my mind to break my silence and made a comment along with a close vote, to which Hippietrail suggested me to raise a discussion in meta. So here is my post.

Reasons for this question should be closed (as per my opinion)

Not Constructive- This question wants for advices regarding the trustworthiness of a particular site, Wikitionary. To my understanding this question can only give rise to speculations where some people would suggest they found it bogus, some other would find it interesting (like the OP himself) and thus leading to an endless discussion proving this question is not constructive. Wikitionary itself quotes:

Hello, and welcome! Wiktionary is a multilingual free dictionary, being written collaboratively on this website by people from around the world. Entries may be edited by anyone!

So it is nothing other than other similar wiki sites. They can be right, can be wrong, too. In fact, I would rather add there is no need to ask this question in the first place if the prologue (the one I quoted) is seen once at least. So this is purely an individuals decision whether or not he would believe Wikitionary.

Off Topic- This question is purely off topic and obviously out of scope of this site. Focus of this site should be on different issues a learner can face during learning English. Definitely, he can check the problem in Wikitionary. But if it seems to him that Wikitionary might be wrong there, he can simply ask his problem with proper context here.

Whereas this question does not point to a particular problem on Englsih Language and the community is here not to evaluate truestworthiness of a site. Hence it is out of scope of this site.

However I do think this question can be asked in chat or in meta in regards with if it is acceptable to use Wikitionary as reference in any Q/A here.

So dear users, comment or answer on this post so that this can become clear whether this sort of question here will be welcome here in future or not.

Answer 1

I’ve never been comfortable with hiding discussion of reference works and other resources in Meta.

Book reviews are a vital part of scholarly literature in all disciplines; indeed, many disciplines have entire journals devoted entirely to reviews. These reviews are a primary means by which the discoveries and discussions among very narrowly focused specialists are communicated to a wider public. Even a scholar needs guidance when he ventures outside his own particular field—“Can I rely on what this work tells me, or should I be aware of important methodological or ideological bias?”

The need is even greater among lay readers. Scholars quickly learn which works are reliable and which are not, but students who consult a reference work are left to their own devices. I think we do a disservice to our audience when we confine discussions of the reliability of Wiktionary and the evidential value of NGrams to Meta, where a mainpage search will not find them. This is to make these discussions invisible to the very people who need them most.

I am not deterred by the horrid prospect of such discussion becoming contentious or subjectively opinionated. We’re all grownups here, Askers and Answerers alike; I don’t think there’s much danger of these discussions degenerating into personal squabbles. We all learn from the civil exchange of perspectives. And in any case, a subjective opinion is expressed every time a reference work is cited—and the opinion is often debated, repeatedly, in Comments.

Answer 2

I'm not sure I quite understand OP's position here, so I can't vote the question itself up or down according to whether I agree with it or not, as normally happens on meta. For the record, I have actually upvoted because I think it's an issue well worth raising.

I'm answering because I can't really endorse the implications of StoneyB's hiding discussion of reference works and other resources in Meta. That's what happens on ELU, and I completely agree with it there.

But here on ELL it seems to me such resources are an integral part of of what learners need if they are to become familiar with English. It's not that I feel very strongly about it, but at the moment I lean towards thinking questions about resources and methods of learning should be On Topic here.