Revision as of 17:16, 15 August 2025 edit Jacobolus (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 40,094 edits m →Avoid overly technical language: maybe the "main" template is better ← Previous edit		Revision as of 10:52, 17 August 2025 edit undo Femke (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Administrators 23,229 edits move analogies down to the explain new concepts section, didn't work in 'avoid technical terms' one Tag: 2017 wikitext editor Next edit →
Line 56: * '''Use some short sentences and short paragraphs.''' Comprehension decreases when average sentence length exceeds about 12 words. However, using too many short sentences in a row becomes monotonous and stilted; vary sentence length to maintain reader interest. Similarly, split long paragraphs into smaller ones. * '''Use language similar to what you would use in a conversation.''' Many people use more technical language when writing articles and speaking at conferences, but try to use more understandable prose in conversation. * '''Use analogies''' to describe a subject in everyday terms. Avoid far-out analogies. The best analogies can make all the difference between incomprehension and full understanding. However, [[WP:NOTTEXTBOOK\|Wikipedia is not a textbook]], so analogies need to be written in an encyclopedic way and be [[WP:V\|attributable]] to [[WP:RS\|reliable sources]]. Extensive explanations without a specific source may constitute [[WP:NOR\|original research]], or [[WP:SYNTH\|original research by synthesis]].▼ ==~~<span id="The lead section">~~Structure~~</span>~~== === Lead section === Line 84 ⟶ 83: :A '''verb''' is a [[word]] that generally conveys an action (''bring'', ''read'', ''walk'', ''run'', ''learn''), an occurrence (''happen'', ''become''), or a state of being (''be'', ''exist'', ''stand''). Examples must still meet the same requirement of [[WP:NOR\|no original research]] that other content is subject to. === Analogies === ▲* '''Use analogies~~'''~~ to describe a subject in everyday terms. Avoid far-out analogies. The best analogies can make all the difference between incomprehension and full understanding. However, [[WP:NOTTEXTBOOK\|Wikipedia is not a textbook]], so analogies need to be written in an encyclopedic way and be [[WP:V\|attributable]] to [[WP:RS\|reliable sources]]. Extensive explanations without a specific source may constitute [[WP:NOR\|original research]], or [[WP:SYNTH\|original research by synthesis]]. === Explain formulae in English ===

Wikipedia:Make technical articles understandable: Difference between revisions