Content deleted Content added
→Revert: Reply |
→Revert: Reply |
||
Line 9:
:::I thought "all" flowed better and added "redirects" because that is mentioned in the next paragraph, but I'm happy to take that out. Anything else? – [[User:Joe Roe|Joe]] <small>([[User talk:Joe Roe|talk]])</small> 05:12, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
::::Joe, I was giving examples from the first sentence as an illustration of how it was unnecessarily wordy. I did not mean those were the only "extra words". You have just put back a version that is substantially longer than the way it was. Please revert yourself. [[User:MB|<b style="color:#034503">MB</b>]] 05:33, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
:::::My primary intention was to make it ''less'' wordy; the current version is four words shorter than the one you reverted to. Again, can you be more specific about what you're objecting to? – [[User:Joe Roe|Joe]] <small>([[User talk:Joe Roe|talk]])</small> 05:38, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
::I think links are helpful to give context on wiki-insider jargon that new users may not be familiar with, and are widely used across help pages for that reason. However, I can tone it down and we can discuss them on a case-by-case basis.
::For example, I really think it's helpful to link "Wikipedia's core content policies"/"core policies" to something. A long-standing problem with NPP's communication has been the use of phrases like "not ready" or "minimum standard" without actually saying what that standard is. Linking to [[Wikipedia:Core content policies]] right at the start tells users what we actually expect from articles, which may be obvious to reviewers but can be opaque to new users. – [[User:Joe Roe|Joe]] <small>([[User talk:Joe Roe|talk]])</small> 05:21, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
| |||