Talk:FREELANG Dictionary

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Low-importance).
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Reference works (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Reference works, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Reference worksWikipedia:WikiProject Reference worksTemplate:WikiProject Reference worksReference works articles

referenced changes[edit]

Here is the link that proves that the change is correct and true : http://forum.lokanova.net/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=30409 Leelou1000 (talk) 21:24, 5 August 2014 (UTC)Leelou1000[reply]

It's a forum... come on... Read WP:RS Diego Grez (talk) 22:45, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is the official forum for Freelang. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.250.178.225 (talk) 16:41, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia.fr gives the proof that this forum is freelang official forum. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freelang#Communaut.C3.A9 --iubito (talk) 07:35, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Spam[edit]

I have removed the spam of the page. --MisterWiki talk contribs 13:42, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

License, etc.[edit]

The site/org is pretty confused, but surfing around I finally realized that the same organization is standing behind www.freelang.org and www.freelang.net. Just in case someone wondered. The site is also heavily loaded with advertizements, which nevertheless don't affect the validity of the site and its free dictionaries.

The license is not open source. The license heavily confuses the dictionaries with one program, prob a client. It makes CopyLeft-like statements of full attribution of all contributors, then prohibits all commercial redistribution for profit. Contributing to it is not a fair deal for the contributor. The license won't pass through any OpenSource validation. Rursus dixit. (^mbork³!) 08:38, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]