User talk:Derek Harkness: Difference between revisions
imported>DavidGoodman (sstarting articles) |
imported>Dustin Meany (Great work! But...) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I am all in favor of working on specific articles along with the main ones, or even ahead of the main ones, and I am trying to do just that. I think its a better way to actually start, and the large complex general ones ae going to be problems. But I do consider that some of the things being added are not the right ones to start with. for some of them are in areas we have not been certain we will cover. [[User:DavidGoodman|DavidGoodman]] 14:12, 29 November 2006 (CST) | I am all in favor of working on specific articles along with the main ones, or even ahead of the main ones, and I am trying to do just that. I think its a better way to actually start, and the large complex general ones ae going to be problems. But I do consider that some of the things being added are not the right ones to start with. for some of them are in areas we have not been certain we will cover. [[User:DavidGoodman|DavidGoodman]] 14:12, 29 November 2006 (CST) | ||
== Great work! But... == | |||
Regarding the [[Cascading Style Sheets]] article, I'm glad you found so much to write about! However, check out this article on [http://locke.citizendium.org/wiki/CZ:Introduction_to_CZ_for_Wikipedians#Get_ready_to_rethink_how_to_write_encyclopedia_articles.21 writing for CZ]], most notably: ''You're probably used to well-developed Wikipedia articles being divided into many short sections, full of bulleted lists, and written in dense prose that shows off erudition more than really introducing a topic.'' | |||
While I won't change anything about the article for now (unless I get some brilliant ideas), I think the current draft for the introduction is very wordy. Most of what you said can be broken down and used inside the article itself to explain the structure and whatnot. Again, great additions though. --[[User:Dustin Meany|Dustin Meany]] 13:09, 10 April 2007 (CDT) | |||
Revision as of 13:09, 10 April 2007
I am all in favor of working on specific articles along with the main ones, or even ahead of the main ones, and I am trying to do just that. I think its a better way to actually start, and the large complex general ones ae going to be problems. But I do consider that some of the things being added are not the right ones to start with. for some of them are in areas we have not been certain we will cover. DavidGoodman 14:12, 29 November 2006 (CST)
Great work! But...
Regarding the Cascading Style Sheets article, I'm glad you found so much to write about! However, check out this article on writing for CZ], most notably: You're probably used to well-developed Wikipedia articles being divided into many short sections, full of bulleted lists, and written in dense prose that shows off erudition more than really introducing a topic.
While I won't change anything about the article for now (unless I get some brilliant ideas), I think the current draft for the introduction is very wordy. Most of what you said can be broken down and used inside the article itself to explain the structure and whatnot. Again, great additions though. --Dustin Meany 13:09, 10 April 2007 (CDT)