[WikiEN-l] Guardian article about Wikipedia

[David Gerard]

Snowspinner wrote:
>On Oct 24, 2005, at 12:06 PM, David Gerard wrote:

>> I would say not in the least, because we're primarily writing for the
>> Web. 32 kilobytes (which used to be a hard technical limit but I still
>> think is a very good *stylistic* limit) is 6000 words, which is a LOT
>> of text to read on a screen. It's really quite a lot even if you print
>> it (about ten or so pages). Anything longer than 32k really needs some
>> attention to what can possibly be spun out.

>On the other hand, I've seen many an article that starts spinning out
>stuff well before it's sensible - mysteriously, it's the "criticism
>of" sections that always are the first to go. Wonder why that could be.


Gosh! etc ;-)

There's nothing wrong with spinning out "criticism of" sections as log
as a good summary is left behind in the main article, so that the
split is main/sub rather than POV/POV. This is of course an editorial
matter.


- d.