Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote: On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 15:49:09
-0400, "Kirill Lokshin"
wrote:
I suspect, though, that it matters to our *readers*
(you know, those
people we're supposed to be writing this thing for).
"You suspect"..? Are you telling me this template was created without any
request by the target audiance in question...? This is ridiculous. Who are we...?
We're editors of an neutral encyclopedia. Its not up to us to make such assumptions
without founded edvidence.
Its somewhat similar to the premise of a mother giving her lad a jacket in the
wintertime without asking him if he desired one. Do we really assume our readers are that
stupid...? If you see a header called "Plot" and there's three pharagraphs
below it, then its obvious what lies within. This template is incredibly redundant.
If there were previously some sort of a mass request where millions of readers
requested this nonsense, advocating it assisted them in the informative reading of an
encyclopedia, then I could possbily understand. Currently, it gives the entirely wrong
impression of what an encyclopedia is and what its attempting to convey. This isn't a
networking site.
---------------------------------
Sneak preview the all-new
Yahoo.com. It's not radically different. Just radically
better.