Wikipedia:Technical terms and definitions: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 02:13, 19 August 2009

Latest revision as of 20:18, 8 March 2022

(42 intermediate revisions by 30 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{short description|historical document}}

{{Subcat guideline|style guideline}}

{{Stylehistorical}}

{{shortcut|WP:TTD}}

When writing technical (scientific, medical, legal, etc.) articles, it is usually the case that a number of [[Technical terminology|'''technical terms''' or '''terms of art''']] and ''[[jargon]]'' specific to the subject matter will be presented. These should be defined or at least alternative language provided, so that a non-technical reader can both learn the terms and understand how they are used by scientists. It is also the case that such an article can cover a range of related subjects that might not each justify a separate article or Wikipedia page, and therefore making technical terms stand out in the text is the first level in a sequence from definition to subtitle to separate article. On the other hand, do not treat every “scientific” word as a technical term. Ask the question: Is this the only article or one of a very few where the term might be encountered in Wikipedia? Consider the examples presented below.

There are three basic markups used to make technical terms stand out; these are ''italic'' (in [[typography]] also termed ''oblique'' with regard to [[sans-serif]] fonts), '''bold''', and '''''bold italic'''''. The following uses of these styles are recommended for technical articles:

''Italic'' (edited as <code><nowiki>''</nowiki>italic<nowiki>''</nowiki></code>) is used for:

Line 14:

*Words as words: <code>''Deuce'' means ''two''</code>, or <code>"deuce" means "two"</code>, whichever will be clearer in context (consider an article with many quotations, or an article full of italicized foreign terms). See [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Words as words|Wikipedia:Manual of Style: "Words as words" subsection]] for more information.

*Legal case names are always italicized: ''Plessy v Ferguson''.

*See also [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Captions|Wikipedia:Manual of Style: "Captions" subsection]] and [[Wikipedia:Cite your sources]] for other uses of italicized (oblique) text.

'''Bold''' (edited as <code><nowiki>'''</nowiki>bold<nowiki>'''</nowiki></code>); used for:

Line 27:

As in the fern example above, any of the three styles described above could be turned into a link if there exists a more detailed or better explanation of the technical term in a separate article. It may not be necessary then to define the term in the article if a link leads to a definition. However, to aid the reader in continuing with the text without having to leave an article for other details, it might still be appropriate to include a non-technical substitute in parentheses, as in the fern example above.

When a vast amount of jargon appears in an article, you might consider bundling all terms and their definitions within a [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (glossaries)|glossary]]. When you do so, do useusing the appropriate definition list markup:

Instead of

<blockquote><code><nowiki>*'''term''': definition</nowiki></code></blockquote>

use

<blockquote><code><nowiki>; term : definition</nowiki></code></blockquote>

Wikipedia uses "double quotation marks" (and for quotations within quotations, 'single quoations marks'), regardless of [[WP:ENGVAR|English-language variant]]. “Curly quotes” are not used in articles. See the [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Quotation marks|"Quotation marks" subsection of the Manual of Style]] for more information.

==See also==

* [[Wikipedia:Explain jargon]]

* [[Wikipedia:Federal Standard 1037C terms]]

* [[Wikipedia:Make technical articles accessible]]

[[Category:Wikipedia help|{{PAGENAME}}]]

[[Category:Wikipedia how-to|{{PAGENAME}}]]

[[Category:Wikipedia style guidelines|{{PAGENAME}}]]

[[Category:General style guidelines]]

[[pt:Wikipedia:Termos técnicos e definições]]

[[zh:Wikipedia:术语和定义]]