Wikipedia:WikiProject Usability/Readability guidelines: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 17:31, 10 July 2020

Revision as of 02:51, 26 August 2022

Line 79:

:: Il est particulièrement important de guider le regard, et cela me ramène au sujet de cette discussion, les bordures qui délimitent clairement les différentes interventions.--[[Utilisateur:MoniqueBrunel|Monique Brunel]] ([[Discussion utilisateur:MoniqueBrunel|d]]) 3 février 2010 à 19:56 (CET)

}}}}

=== Delimitation, ergo, what "readibility" is not ===

At Wikipedia, the standard description applies, as found at the article [[Readability]]:

{{quotebox|'''Readability''' is the ease with which a [[reading (process)|reader]] can [[understanding|understand]] a [[writing|written text]]. In [[natural language]], the readability of text depends on its [[content (media)|content]] (the complexity of its [[vocabulary]] and [[syntax]]) and its presentation (such as [[typography|typographic]] aspects that affect [[legibility]], like [[font size]], [[line height]], [[Kerning|character spacing]], and [[line length]]).<ref>{{Cite web|title=Typographic Readability and Legibility|url=https://webdesign.tutsplus.com/articles/typographic-readability-and-legibility--webdesign-12211|access-date=2020-08-17|website=Web Design Envato Tuts+}}</ref>}}

Unfortunately, some fringe editors try to use the argument that readability applies to article length, and they do it as part of their [[WP:IDONTLIKEIT|"I don't like it"]] attempts to get rid of content (and whole articles if they can get away with it) they don't agree with. Article length is determined by many factors, especially complexity, notability, controversiality, and the sheer amount of RS coverage. Some topics are not worthy of a long article, and others are worthy of a large mother article and many daughter sub-articles.

We do not delete content because an article is "too long". Instead, we split/fork off content that creates an undue weight problem for a mere aspect of the whole topic.

Some topics lend themselves to easy reading, like reading a novella, and are accessible to even grade school readers. People will often sit down and read the whole article. Other topics are more accessible to university graduates, and yet others are so complicated that they are only of interest to researchers seeking information, facts, historical context, and opinions/reception, and such articles are definitely not "easy reading". They are best used to find information by searching for specific words and phrases on the page. Few people sit down and read them from top to bottom, sometimes 50-80 printed pages, maybe more. Their readability can be perfect, but their sheer length and complexity make them harder to read as one reads a novel. That's okay.

We simply have myriad types of articles, and we should not dumb down a complex and long topic to read like a short novella read by fourth graders. "Readability" applies to the things mentioned in the lead quote above and does not refer to article length.

Could we add this "not article length" delimitation? We need something we can point to in discussions with such fringe editors. -- [[User:Valjean|Valjean]] ([[User talk:Valjean|talk]]) ('''''[[Help:Notifications|PING me]]''''') 02:50, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

[[Category:WikiProject Usability|Readability guidelines]]