[WikiEN-l] What to do about our writing quality?

[George Herbert]

On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 3:18 PM, Ian Woollard <ian.woollard at gmail.com> wrote:
> The problem is that a copyeditor makes a sentence read well, but in
> some cases, the sentence is simply the best sentence that anyone knows
> how to write- it's awkward text, because it's a difficult concept. The
> copyeditor just sweeps in and 'simplifies' it. Enough copyediting and
> the article is no longer in anyway correct.


While this is in places true, if I put my copyeditor hat on and spend
time looking at articles I am involved enough in to know what the heck
is really going on (and be able to clearly tell what would be a
factually incorrect rephrasing), there are huge improvements that can
be made in the writing.

A very few ugly semantical things have to be that way due to complex
underlying facts.  In a vast majority of cases, it's just bad writing
looking for an excuse.

It's reasonable to say that copyeditors need to be followed around by
subject matter experts to catch such things.  Saying that we shouldn't
have them participate is unreasonable.  On the whole, our writing is
C- level from a college perspective.  Our readers deserve better.


-- 
-george william herbert
george.herbert at gmail.com