Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Is it just me or is Wikipedia unreadable?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is it just me or is Wikipedia unreadable?

post #1 of 28
Thread Starter 
Perhaps I'm being a bit ignorant here, but I've been browsing wikipedia for a little while now and have found certain topics to be particularly unreadable, namely the more grandoise topics such as politics. But it's not that they don't make sense, it's just that there are so many prerequesite terms that you need to first look at to understand something - and then these prereq. terms themselves have prerequisites terms that you need to click through and read about.

Take the article on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialismfor example, just by reading the first few paragraphs you are inundated with terms and concepts that make it impossible to get any sort of brief understanding unless you click through. To me it seems unnecessarily complicated and makes reading it quite a task, imploring me to remember all the terms and meanings just to understand a simple concept, my short term memory is only so big.

But I don't know how other people see it, perhaps I'm looking at things the wrong way or I should have a better understanding of something before trying to decipher the wiki page. What do you guys think, is wikipedia unreadable?

Oh and poll is anonymous for the self-conscious .
post #2 of 28
ya, file me under 'once in a while'. I blame bored undergrads. I will occasionally go to wiki and think 'I wonder what that [topic] was all about' hoping to get a skin-deep understanding to sate curiosity. This fails because a zillion and three undergrads have academic-ed it up to the point where - as you point out - I am link surfing definitions on a 2000 word piece, when all I was hoping for was a 100 word skim read.
post #3 of 28
Thread Starter 
Yes, I was going to say something about the academic muscle-flexing on the site but felt it might've been a bit crass, though some of the writing really does read like its been taken from a term paper.
post #4 of 28
I like the title of this thread.
post #5 of 28
Thread Starter 
Oh shit haha, I started it with "Wikipedia is unreadable" then added "Is it just me or is" without realising I had to remove the 'is' inbetween wikipedia and unreadable.
post #6 of 28
Math concepts are hard to grasp over wiki (imho).

Better to use wolfram alpha if you're in need of some math help.
post #7 of 28
While I do know what you're saying, I'm not seeing anything that confuses me in the first 5-6 paragrpahs of that article (and I'm a pre-med student with a disdain for politics). I do know what you mean though. However I think these hyperlinks increase the usability and benefit of Wikipedia. If you want a brief and shallow understanding, skip the words you don't know. If you've got more time you can practically become an asshole/expert on a topic by understanding all the things that it relates to as well, it ain't rocket science.
post #8 of 28
Thread Starter 
Though it's of note that traditional writing methods don't allow for hyperlinks and therefore have to explain what they are saying to some degree. While being able to get extra info on certain terms is certainly not a bad thing in itself, I think it has lead some wikipedians to omit explaining themselves on the pretext that the 'explanation is in the hyperlink', which is where I think the readability issue comes from.
post #9 of 28
I find any chemistry related article unreadable.
post #10 of 28
Thread Starter 
I just found this article which perfectly explains the issue I mentioned before http://www.thebizofcoding.com/2007/0...ummies-wanted/
post #11 of 28
You get what you pay for.
post #12 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLMountainMan View Post
You get what you pay for.

ZING!
post #13 of 28
Heh yea. And I'm the kind of person that when I don't understand a word or something I follow the link to find out wtf it means. So 10 wikipedia links/pages later I get back to the main article to continue.
post #14 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by XenoX101 View Post
Though it's of note that traditional writing methods don't allow for hyperlinks and therefore have to explain what they are saying to some degree. While being able to get extra info on certain terms is certainly not a bad thing in itself, I think it has lead some wikipedians to omit explaining themselves on the pretext that the 'explanation is in the hyperlink', which is where I think the readability issue comes from.
Scholarly articles and books are equally inaccessible to people outside the field of study, and often more so because they don't have hyperlinks to explain difficult concepts and terms. If you don't understand something, try to understand it. Read more about the subject. It takes time and effort, but there's no way to avoid the work so there's no need to become frustrated. Different people have different amounts of knowledge regarding different subjects, and Wikipedia's format is probably the most democratic of any.
post #15 of 28
I was all set to defend Wiki, but then I read the link for Socialism. Wow, that's pretty dense. While I understand your criticism, I think why states it best.
Quote:
Originally Posted by why View Post
Scholarly articles and books are equally inaccessible to people outside the field of study, and often more so because they don't have hyperlinks to explain difficult concepts and terms. If you don't understand something, try to understand it. Read more about the subject. It takes time and effort, but there's no way to avoid the work so there's no need to become frustrated. Different people have different amounts of knowledge regarding different subjects, and Wikipedia's format is probably the most democratic of any.
If you're have a hard time understand the Wiki article, just skim it. You can get a basic understanding within the first few paragraphs without getting too confused. Try to resist the urge to click links and get off topic. I think this speaks more about our shrinking attention span than the unreadability of Wikipedia. Rather than read through something a couple times and try to decipher a term through its context, we now have the ability to look up that term instantly, which inevitably has an explanation with more links to terms we don't understand. Have patience, try and understand what is presented, and then follow the links to new terms.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Chat
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Is it just me or is Wikipedia unreadable?