Template talk:Wikinews user essay
Latest comment: 5 years ago by Pi zero in topic Technical phrasing
Technical phrasing
editIf our target audience is new guys, it might be better if the phrasing were a little less Wiki-technical. Darkfrog24 (talk) 01:41, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
- Which part do you feel is over-technical? (Consensus, for example, is common English vocabulary.) --Pi zero (talk) 01:53, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, but on Wikipedia and Wikinews, "consensus" has a meaning far more specific than its common English meaning.
- But I was thinking more of "community essay." That only just became a thing. We should include the meaning of the newly coined term "community essay" in the preceding clause.
- Also, current text can be parsed as "the fact that it is not a community essay implies that it does have community-consensus views."
- I'll give it another go in a couple hours. Darkfrog24 (talk) 02:20, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
- Consensus isn't something we traffic much in on Wikinews, since it's irrelevant to producing an article; and wikinewsies ridicule the Wikipedian bureaucratic red tape of such things. And even if we were inclined to stand on ceremony about consensus, the difference between senses of the word would not matter to a reader's ability to understand this text.
I think you mean, "the fact that is not a community essay implies that it does not have community-consensus views". But no, the current phrasing does not imply that. It says that that there is no implication of such-and-such. That does not say, nor imply nor suggest, anything about whether or not such-and-such is actually the case. --Pi zero (talk) 03:04, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
- "Wikinews essay" tag says
- This is an essay on using and contributing to Wikinews. The contents are strongly recommended practices, but may not be enforced official policy; however, they may supplement, comment upon, or offer guidance to interpreting official policy. Links to official policies can be found in the Wikinews introduction.
- How about making "Wikinews user essay" say
- This is an unofficial essay on using and contributing to Wikinews. The contents may supplement, comment upon, or offer guidance to interpreting official policy from the point of view of individual contributor(s). Links to official policies can be found in the Wikinews introduction. Gryllida (talk) 05:15, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
- In the case of making this change, the name 'Wikinews community essay' may be unnecessary? It is either a individual user essay (opinion or thoughts of one particular individual) = 'user essay', or just an essay (more widely recognized) = 'essay'? Gryllida (talk) 05:38, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
- I'll think on that a bit (this being by nature not a day-to-day news-production task). It occurred to me overnight that I'd intended the word "community" to be descriptive, in place of more verbose and awkward explanations. --Pi zero (talk) 11:14, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
- Had a thought, tried something. --Pi zero (talk) 12:09, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
- I like Gryllida's idea but I have a nagging feeling it can be improved upon. Will ponder. Darkfrog24 (talk) 12:27, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
- How are we feeling about "or once had"? Darkfrog24 (talk) 23:28, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- I like Gryllida's idea but I have a nagging feeling it can be improved upon. Will ponder. Darkfrog24 (talk) 12:27, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
- Had a thought, tried something. --Pi zero (talk) 12:09, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
- I'll think on that a bit (this being by nature not a day-to-day news-production task). It occurred to me overnight that I'd intended the word "community" to be descriptive, in place of more verbose and awkward explanations. --Pi zero (talk) 11:14, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
- In the case of making this change, the name 'Wikinews community essay' may be unnecessary? It is either a individual user essay (opinion or thoughts of one particular individual) = 'user essay', or just an essay (more widely recognized) = 'essay'? Gryllida (talk) 05:38, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
- Consensus isn't something we traffic much in on Wikinews, since it's irrelevant to producing an article; and wikinewsies ridicule the Wikipedian bureaucratic red tape of such things. And even if we were inclined to stand on ceremony about consensus, the difference between senses of the word would not matter to a reader's ability to understand this text.
I feel the current text amounts to "don't bother to read this." We need a descriptor, not a disclaimer. Darkfrog24 (talk) 02:04, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
- The phrase "advice or opinions" was in your first draft of this template, and seems to me to be accurate. --Pi zero (talk) 02:22, 19 March 2019 (UTC)