On 7/29/05, Haukur Þorgeirsson haukurth@hi.is wrote:
Now look at the article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromosome
It's not so bad. It even helpfully glosses some of the technical terms like 'mitosis' and 'histone'.
If you don't already know what DNA and genes are then you probably need to read about those terms first. Both articles are about as accessible to laymen as I would expect in an encyclopaedia.
I'm not saying it's impossible to do better but from my point of view most readers of these articles will already have a basic familiarity with genetics / molecular biology. To those readers wading through an explanation of all terms from first principles (which are what? what knowledge of biology and chemistry should we assume?) in each article would be tiresome.
Firstly, I think a fair number of Wikipedia users who would look at a page like chromosome will not be anything like experienced in the field. They will be secondary school (=high school) students beginning their study of genetics. Incidentally, this is exactly how I found Wikipedia, doing some chemistry research into ethanoic acid, finding myself at acetic acid, making a move suggestion on the talk page, and I was thence hooked. But I digress.
Surely what should be done is a simple explanation at the start, for those inexperienced in the field, and a more complex examination later? I am confused about why this would not considered a good idea.
Perhaps "readers first" is not the best title. Perhaps "writing for everyone" would be better. And a key factor of that is putting the easy stuff at the beginning, so that those who don't understand the complexities of the article don't get put off.
We do have to write to the lowest common denominator -- it's part of being an encyclopaedia. Nevertheless, some highest common factors (or whatever the appropriate antonym is) can also be written for, but not in a way that compromises the simple understanding of the topic. I think that is the basis of Jon's proposal.
I struggle to find why people would argue with such an aim.
Sam