It would have a different aim than Wikipedia. Wikipedia, is, above all, a source of knowledge. That's where I go when I want to chain-read about the German Revolution of 1918. It doesn’t have the emotional and sociological theme I’m describing.
VD on the other hand would be a real-time, K-clustered map of the human experience. If you go to the entry for Love, you’d see people from all over the world sharing what loves mean to them, anecdotes and all. Crowdsourced feedback would surface the best entries to the top. Political topics would solicit good-faithed micro-blogs with the specific aim of humanizing each other and learning why we believe in what we do. You'd be able to go back in time to see where people's minds and hearts were at on a certain day. Algorithms and strict moderation would ensure that diverse viewpoints are shared and treated in good faith. Maybe I’m wrong, but I think if there’s a dictionary for swearwords, there’s certainly room for a dictionary of the human experience.
Check out the below study published in Nature in 2019. It makes the claim that cultural values of openness are what give rise to democracy, rather than the other way around. We need more of that openness right now. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-019-0769-1
Isn't that Wikipedia?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skimming_(reading)#Methods_&_P...
> also not as long as a Wikipedia entry.
I don't get the issue. What would this Verbose Dictionary provide that Wikipedia doesn't? You seem to want to differentiate it for no reason.