Revision as of 02:02, 19 August 2009 edit SMcCandlish (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors 203,717 edits m General cleanup w/r/t words as words, and split run-on entry into two bullets. Better linking. ← Previous edit		Revision as of 02:04, 19 August 2009 edit undo SMcCandlish (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors 203,717 edits m tech. terms and jargon are not synonymous Next edit →
Line 2: {{Style}} {{shortcut\|WP:TTD}} When writing technical ~~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'' (also termed ''oblique'' with [[sans-serif]] fonts), '''bold''', and '''''bold italic'''''. The following uses of these styles are recommended for technical articles:

Wikipedia:Technical terms and definitions: Difference between revisions