Wiktionary talk:Tutorial (Keep in mind)

In the section Notability there is a sentence: New articles should be encyclopedic information about notable subjects. In my opinion this contradicts the policy of Wiktionary of not being encyclopedic. Probably besides this statement there are some other things that need to be revised, as it seems that most of the tutorial has been taken from the Wikipedia tutorial. Juzeris 15:36, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * More than one year later, that sentence remains... I am new to Wiktionary, so I think that I will ask someone who knows the rules to fix this tutorial. --Kernigh 21:40, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * No, no, no! One of the founding guidelines of Wikipedia and its sister-projects is "Be bold!"  If you see a problem and you know how to fix it, fix it!  You just learned how to fix the problem while you were reading the tutorial, so there is no time like the present to use your newly-acquired skills!  As a note to Juzeris, I noticed that sentence, too.  If I have a free minute later today, I'll fix it.  Happy editing!  --Cromwellt 17:15, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Upon further reflection and reading the section again, I realized that none of it applies to Wiktionary. Notability is not the criteria for inclusion (except in Wikipedia, not here), attestation or attestation and idiomaticy are.  Also, biographies should never be included in Wiktionary.  They should be in Wikipedia.  Original research also doesn't fit here.  So I'm pulling out the section and sticking it here for anyone who wants to see it or disagrees:

Notability
New articles should be encyclopedic information about notable subjects. Not a personal biography of you or your friends. If you have made notable accomplishments, someone else is bound to make an article about you. This is also not the place for "original research"--that is, new theories, etc., that haven't been supported by peer review. For more details about what Wiktionary should include, see What Wiktionary is not, Criteria for inclusion of biographies and What's in, what's out.
 * Looking at the page again, I'm not really sure about the editorial policy section either. How often do you get an NPOV dispute over a dictionary entry?  I guess it could happen, but they don't show up on the "to do" list on the Community Portal.  I guess I'll leave it there for now, even though it is obviously from Wikipedia and really belongs there.  I love making things better.  :D  --Cromwellt 21:26, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Regional English
This section could mention entries like color/colour, to show how we actually do things in practice. --Cien pies 6 (talk) 11:16, 11 April 2018 (UTC)