From Corona Party to Coronapaniek: Cross-Linguistic Critique of COVID-Related Contributions to Wiktionary

Abstract

Thirteen Wiktionary language versions are analyzed for inclusion of coronavirus vocabulary: How do they include coronavirus-related neologisms? Do coronavirus-related words shape the definition and examples in other entries? If yes, is Wiktionary’s neutrality rule obeyed? The results show that neologisms feature particularly in French, English, and Dutch versions. In English, typical examples include proper names, in German quotations from people/organizations and amendments in brackets, and in French war metaphors. Contrary to Wiktionary rules, definitions are often inadequate. Particularly in French, some definitions are discriminatory. Similarly, examples often violate Wiktionary rules and are not always good illustrations of meaning. In Dutch, examples are rarely referenced. Examples reflect ideologies or discrimination particularly in German, French, Dutch, and English. Rule violations are committed even by high-status contributors and occur even with lemmas unrelated to coronavirus, particularly in German and French. In sum, the evidence suggests that collective intelligence does not work (quickly): Wiktionary needs better quality management.