Wikipedia:WikiProject Usability/Readability guidelines: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 15:12, 29 August 2022

Revision as of 15:32, 29 August 2022

Line 59:

::: Not only. I meant overuse in a matter of quantity. Not really in a matter of color choice quality because soccer projects will have their way anyway (as well as many other projects, its just an example so don't take it personally). Do you consider [[Template:Gradient/testcases]] as good examples? I absolutely don't. There are too may contrast and color variations, and the eye needs to get adapted at every change of contrast. In the end, it simply makes it waaay longer to read.

::: It would be great if it was only used in table headers, for example. Thus, it would not disturb the reading of the main content. [[User:Dodoïste|Dodoïste]] ([[User talk:Dodoïste|talk]]) 01:12, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

== Not to be conflated with accessibility/length ==

"Accessibility" is related to [[WP:Article size|article length]], not readability (see [[WP:NOTPAPER]]). We do not delete content because an article is "too long." Instead, we split/fork off mere aspects of the whole topic that create an undue weight problem. Splitting long articles and leaving adequate summaries is a natural part of growth for a topic (see [[WP:Summary style]]).

== See also ==

* [[WP:Preserve]]

== Discussions ==

Line 88 ⟶ 96:

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.

They also conflate the issue with "accessibility", which does relatedrelate to article length (see WP:NOTPAPER). We do not delete content because an article is "too long". Instead, we split/fork off (see [[Wikipedia:Summary style]]) 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 long and 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 than a novel. That's okay.

Line 95 ⟶ 103:

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)

: {{Done}} at [[#Not to be conflated with accessibility/length]]. -- [[User:Valjean|Valjean]] ([[User talk:Valjean|talk]]) ('''''[[Help:Notifications|PING me]]''''') 15:31, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

[[Category:WikiProject Usability|Readability guidelines]]