Wiktionary
Hacker ApprovedRanked 6 of 7 online encyclopedias by recommenders
People recommend Wiktionary for its broad coverage of word meanings and for being a quick, usually reliable answer to word questions. Critics say it is not always accurate, and some entries contradict each other.
People recommend Wiktionary for its broad coverage of word meanings and for being a quick, usually reliable answer to word questions. Critics say it is not always accurate, and some entries contradict each other.
15 people gave an opinion
- recommend it
- 12
- criticize it
- 3
- approval share
- 80%
Recommended in 8 of 13 months
- November 2025: recommended
- December 2025: not recommended
- January 2026: recommended
- February 2026: recommended
- March 2026: not recommended
- April 2026: recommended
- May 2026: recommended
- June 2026: not recommended
- July 2026: not recommended
- August 2026: recommended
- September 2026: recommended
- October 2026: recommended
- November 2026: not recommended (month in progress)
Why it carries the badge
- 12 people recommend itNeeds 10 or more, met.
- 4 recommenders for every criticNeeds 2 to 1 or better, met.
- Recommended in 8 of 13 monthsNeeds 4 or more, met.
The same three rules apply to every product, and the badge can’t be bought. How the badge works
What people say about it
The reasons people give, with the number of comments that give each one. Open a reason to read what they said.
Why people recommend it
Each mark is one comment
Broad coverage of word meanings
“wiktionary is better for this usecase since it tends to have a richer coverage of various meanings”
Comment from 27 Apr 2026 in “The next phase of the Microsoft OpenAI partnership – OpenAI” “Wiktionary is also often quite decent”
Comment from 7 May 2026 in “The Vatican's Website in Latin” Good enough for quick answers
“that's usually Good Enough™ to find me an answer”
Comment from 7 Feb 2026 in “We Mourn Our Craft” “Wiktionary was extremely helpful”
Comment from 20 Nov 2025 in “'Calvin and Hobbes' at 40”
What people warn about
Each mark is one comment
Links can lead to contradictions
“Following the links around on wiktionary may, in general, lead to self-contradictory results.”
Comment from 22 Feb 2026 in “How far back in time can you understand English?” Some entries coded incorrectly
“This whole cluster of words is coded into Wiktionary incorrectly”
Comment from 8 Feb 2026 in “We Mourn Our Craft”
Other online encyclopedias people recommend
The four most recommended other online encyclopedias, with the same counts for each, so you can compare like for like. The tick on each bar marks the 2 to 1 line the badge needs.
| Product | Recommend | Criticize | Approval | Months | Owned | Badge |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wikipedia | 404 | 327 | 55% | 12 | 20 yrs15 owners | — |
| Grokipedia | 52 | 161 | 24% | 10 | — | — |
| Local Wikipedia | 45 | 9 | 83% | 1 | — | — |
| Britannica11.org | 14 | 6 | 70% | 1 | — | — |
| WiktionaryThis page | 12 | 3 | 80% | 8 | — | Approved |
What people said
11 of the 15 comments that mention it, newest first. Each links to the original comment.
“Start at က, work your way through Unicode in order”
“is usually more authoritative”
“It's obviously not perfect, but neither was Google for that matter.”
“Wiktionary is also often quite decent”
“That helps us know not to take Wiktionary seriously.”
“wiktionary is better for this usecase since it tends to have a richer coverage of various meanings”
“while Wiktionary or similar always came short”
“Following the links around on wiktionary may, in general, lead to self-contradictory results.”
“This whole cluster of words is coded into Wiktionary incorrectly”
“that's usually Good Enough™ to find me an answer”
“Wiktionary was extremely helpful”
Counts come from 1,795,640 Hacker News comments, November 2025 to November 2026. How we count. Report a mistake.