[WikiEN-l] Re: On Clarity and Generalists

Tue Oct 18 14:23:31 UTC 2005

"Stephen Bain" <stephen.bain at gmail.com> wrote 
in message 
news:f30e42de0510150615x4cf575d0ld1a888b4e65ecb59 at mail.gmail.com...
On 10/15/05, Anthony DiPierro 
<wikispam at inbox.org> wrote:
> > Is Wikipedia simply a general encyclopedia? I always thought it was more
> > than that. I think the goal is really to include general information and
> > specific information, and let the user navigate easily between the two.
> > Maybe I'm wrong about this, though. It's an interesting question.
> There's room for both. Since wiki is not paper (as we are so often
> told) there is plenty of room for general articles on general
> subjects, and specific articles on specific subjects. As a reader, I
> would probably expect (and want) to find the most general information
> first, and have the option of looking at specific information if I
> should so desire. Confronting readers with all available information
> at once just gets confusing.

I agree with the above, with the proviso (for the avoidance of doubt) that 
we should not avoid providing specific information in fear of confusing a 
reader who stumbles upon an article on some arcane subject. We should 
instead provide clear and obvious pointers to alternative articles which 
present a simplified view.

Sometimes, it might be suitable to combine the simplified and detailed views 
into one article, but often that merely makes it too long and complex for 
ease of navigation.

On the other hand there is the perennial problem of having an article on 
some abstruse subject nominated for deletion on the grounds that the person 
who stumbled upon it can't understand it, so it must be "non-notable". We'll 
just have to deal with that as it arises :-)
-- 
Phil
[[en:User:Phil Boswell]] 