Charles Matthews wrote:
Reading this list,. anyway, you'd think driving out 'amateurism' was defined by NPOV, NOR and sources. Not by Fowler, Gowers, Strunk-White. We hardly hear about 'style crimes'; and it has been argued that lame, academic style is kind of OK. More subediting needed.
Oh goodness yes. We need *good writers* in general.
I have a pile of links on style on my user page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:David_Gerard#My_personal_style_guide
I will often see a badly-written article on something I know about and do some rewriting with edit summary "tighten [section name]".
My favourite writing style is still that found in The Economist: incredibly tight writing, giving simple sentences with a fantastic density of information. They're not interested in NPOV - some of the casual opinionation really makes me think of a friend's summary: "I love The Economist. It's like a really rational guy on crack." - but I think we have a *lot* to learn from their writing style.
- d.