[WikiEN-l] Being bold doesn't work anymore, or why our prose is so bad.

[Ben Yates]

Er.  With the exception of adding paragraph breaks.  That usually
works out okay.

On 9/7/07, Ben Yates <ben.louis.yates at gmail.com> wrote:
> We really, really need stable versions.  There's no point in trying to
> spruce up the writing style of heavily-trafficked articles until we
> get them; I gave up a long time ago.
>
> On 9/7/07, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Against my better judgment, I attempted to improve the wording of a
> > particularly badly written article. Last time I did this ([[Spruce
> > goose]]), it got reverted. Guess what?
> >
> > Here are my changes:
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bird_strike&diff=156028841&oldid=151904678
> >
> > And the (partial) revert:
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bird_strike&diff=next&oldid=156028841
> >
> > The reverter seems to think it's important to mention that birdstrikes
> > "will result in major injuries or death to the bird" and is
> > particularly enamored with the phrasing in "High speeds, however, as
> > for example with modern jet engine aircraft will produce considerable
> > energy and may cause considerable damage ".
> >
> > Is it just aviation? Is it just me being jaded and impatient? Or is
> > this the reason so much of Wikipedia prose is so crap? Because the
> > payoff for trying to fix it is so small, and editors put so much
> > weight on every possible detail being retained, at the expense of
> > clarity and readability?
> >
> > Feel free to tell me if I'm totally off base here.
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
>
> --
> Ben Yates
> Wikipedia blog - http://wikip.blogspot.com
>


-- 
Ben Yates
Wikipedia blog - http://wikip.blogspot.com