884
edits
(Answer to Johan) |
|||
Line 364: | Line 364: | ||
: Never mind, I'll check if I can ban myself right away :-) --[[User:Hooray|Hooray]] ([[User talk:Hooray|talk]]) 17:37, 17 August 2014 (UTC) | : Never mind, I'll check if I can ban myself right away :-) --[[User:Hooray|Hooray]] ([[User talk:Hooray|talk]]) 17:37, 17 August 2014 (UTC) | ||
::: Hello Johan | |||
::: Thanks for your answer. I'm studying to get a vocational school teacher, the last 6 months I was working as a freelance lecturer at a nursing school. So I not only have to read a lot of books, text and writing informative handouts, also had to create a lot of educational text for my students. Not always easy. For both sides, the students and me, it is important to get the needed information in a short time. At my university text is considered as scientific when the language is: comprehendible using short easy-to-read sentences , objective and unemotional. Though this wiki of course does not have to be seen scientific, we probably want the same: spreading knowledge. So I think the same rules applies to this wiki. | |||
:::So in my eyes text full of quotes from the forum doesn't help here. Sometimes (but only sometimes!) it is needed to highlight certain facts with statements, therefor a quote can be helpful. As you said. But articles like [[http://wiki.flightgear.org/Status_of_AI_in_FlightGear]] aren't very helpful, not for user or (future) developers, and wasting space. | |||
:::So I'm totally against such articles and especially the useless use of quotes. | |||
:::How to deal? Proposal: www.wikipedia.org has a nice feature, they sign good articles with a star. Maybe we should do the same, so it is an orientation for those writing an article here. I think it is better then setting up "rules", especially as readability is also subjective. | |||
:::--[[User:HHS|HHS]] ([[User talk:HHS|talk]]) 19:13, 17 August 2014 (UTC) | |||
[[Category:FlightGear wiki]] | [[Category:FlightGear wiki]] |
edits