[WikiEN-l] Re:Writing with our readers in mind

Sun Jul 10 22:52:33 UTC 2005

> A good example of the difficulties is outlined in today's featured article
> on the Island Fox. The bit on the main page includes the sentence "Its
> small size is a result of [[island dwarfing]], a kind of [[allopatric
> speciation]]". Come again! To find out what that means you have to wade
> through the technical article [[island dwarfing]] and [[allopatric
> speciation]] - and to begin to understand the latter, you also have to try
> to understand [[speciation]]. I think it means - "It is small because it
> is on a small island", but why not just say that?

It *does* say that. Anyone can understand that
this is what "island dwarfing" means. And it
says some more too, this phenomenon has to do
with something called "allopatric speciation".
If you're not in the know about that you can
read the relevant article, helpfully linked to.
If you're not interested in knowing you skip
the link and move on. And it's not unreasonable
to use the word "speciation" in an article about
a species. You wouldn't explain what a "diesel motor"
is in an article about a particular type of truck.

I'm sure there are pages where Wikipedia is
unnecessarily written in an inaccessible and
technical style but I don't think this is a
very good example.

The risk in always trying to simplify down to the level
of an absolute beginner in the relevant field (zoology
in this case) is that the article can get cluttered or
information lost.

Of course this is a matter of good taste and balance and
reasonable people can disagree.

Regards,
Haukur