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

[Peter Ansell]

On 09/09/2007, Marc Riddell <michaeldavid86 at comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > On 9/9/07, Matthew Brown <morven at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> IMO, an article should contain most information in the prose.  The
> >> infobox is a place for a summary of quick facts, and perhaps for
> >> statistics that would make for dry reading in the article itself.
> >
> on 9/9/07 9:00 AM, Steve Bennett at stevagewp at gmail.com wrote:
>
> > I'd lean towards repeating material in both. There are lots of
> > downstream uses of Wikipedia text that will have trouble processing
> > infoboxes. Best to have it in the text as well. But succession
> > information, flags, maps, categorisation etc can all just be in the
> > infobox.
> >
> I agree with you, Steve. As perhaps a side issue, one thing I am finding
> more and more is a conflict between the data in the main section of an
> Article and its infobox. Mostly such items as birth and death dates, places
> of birth and death, dates in office, etc. This forces me to check the
> sources, and, where there aren't any in some cases, find my own.

If the infobox was generated based on a set of templates used
somewhere in the article then you wouldn't have that problem....

Peter