text:
Wikipedia:Writing better articles
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
"Wikipedia:Topic" redirects here. For information about topic bans, see WP:TBAN.
This is an explanatory supplement to the Wikipedia:Manual of Style guideline.
It is intended to make up for a deficiency considered overly detailed for inclusion in the page(s) it supplements. This page is not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community.
Shortcuts:
WP:BETTER
WP:WBA

Contributing to Wikipedia
Protocols
Editing policy
(Content policies)
Etiquette guide
(Dispute resolution)
Simple rule set
Simple style manual
Introductions
About Wikipedia
(Administration)
How to contribute
(Tutorial)
Newcomers' primer
Plain & simple
Wikipedia Adventure
VisualEditor
How-to pages
Creating an account
How to edit
Starting an article
(Article wizard)
Talk pages
(BOLD, revert, discuss)
Referencing
Renaming
Deletion
Media
Lists
Tables
Templates
Copying text
Style tips
Wiki markup
Writing advice
Article development
Basic copyediting
Layouts
Avoiding mistakes
Writing better
Perfect article
Advanced editing
Writing about women
Community
Portal
Dashboard
Essays
Maintenance
WikiProjects
Editor's index
Directories
FAQs
Help index
Tools
Interactive help
Teahouse
Help desk
v
t
e
This page sets out advice on how to write an effective article, including information on layout, style, and how to make an article clear, precise and relevant to the reader.
You can post questions about English grammar and usage at Wikipedia's language desk.
If you want to peruse some of Wikipedia's finest articles, have a look at Wikipedia:Featured articles.
For information on how to cite sources, see Wikipedia:Citing sources.
For our guidelines on style, see the Wikipedia:Manual of Style and its subsidiary pages, listed in the template to the right.
To learn about markup in Wikipedia articles, see Wikipedia:How to edit a page.
To learn about lists, disambiguation pages, and images, see Wikipedia:Lists, Wikipedia:Disambiguation, and Wikipedia:Picture tutorial.
Contents
[hide]
1 Layout
1.1 Structure of the article
1.1.1 Introductory material
1.1.2 Paragraphs
1.1.3 Headings
1.1.4 Images
1.1.5 Standard appendices
1.2 Size
1.2.1 Articles covering subtopics
2 Information style and tone
2.1 Summary style
2.2 Inverted pyramid (news style)
2.3 Tone
3 Provide context for the reader
3.1 Evaluating context
3.2 Build the web
3.3 State the obvious
4 Lead section
4.1 Opening paragraph
4.2 First sentence content
4.3 First sentence format
4.4 The rest of the opening paragraph
4.5 The rest of the lead section
4.6 "Lead follows body"
5 Use other languages sparingly
6 Use color sparingly
7 Use clear, precise and accurate terms
7.1 Be concise
7.2 Principle of least astonishment
7.3 Use of "refers to"
7.4 Check your facts
7.4.1 Check your fiction
7.4.2 Stay on topic
7.5 Pay attention to spelling
7.6 Avoid peacock and weasel terms
7.6.1 Examples
7.6.2 Exceptions
7.7 Make omissions explicit for other editors
8 Other issues
9 See also
10 Notes
Layout
Main page: Wikipedia:Layout
Manual of Style (MoS)
Content[show]
Accessibility
Biographies
Disambiguation pages
Hidden text
Infoboxes
Linking
Self-references
Words to watch
Formatting[show]
Abbreviations
Capitalization
Dates and numbers
Pronunciation
Proper names
Spelling
Text formatting
Titles
Images[show]
Captions
Galleries
Icons
Images
Layout[show]
Layout
Lead section
Tables
Trivia sections
Lists[show]
Embedded lists
Lists
Lists of works
Road junctions
Stand-alone lists
Legal[show]
Legal
Trademarks
By topic area[show]
Arts[show]
Comics
Film
Lyrics and Poetry
Novels
Philosophy
Television
Visual arts
Writing about fiction
Music
Music samples
Record charts
Stringed instruments
Category
Regional[show]
Specific naming conventions
Canada
China
France
Hawaii
India
Ireland
Japan
Korea
Philippines
Poland
Singapore
Trinidad and Tobago
Religion[show]
Islam
Latter Day Saints
Science[show]
Chemistry
Computer science
Computing
Mathematics
Medicine
Sports[show]
Cue sports
Snooker
Related guidelines[show]
Article size
Article titles
Categories, lists, and navigation templates
Categorization
Citing sources
Hatnotes
Military history
Signatures
Subpages
Talk page guidelines
Template namespace
Understandability
User pages
Wikimedia sister projects
WikiProjects
Overview
Contents
Tips
v
t
e
Layout matters. Good articles start with introductions, continue with a clear structure, and end with standard appendices such as references and related articles.
Structure of the article
Introductory material
Good articles start with a brief lead section (WP:CREATELEAD) introducing the topic. We discuss lead sections in greater detail below. The lead section should come above the first header; it is almost never useful to add something like ==Introduction==. Sometimes, the first section after the lead is a broad summary of the topic, and is called "Overview", although more specific section titles and structures are generally preferred.
Paragraphs
Paragraphs should be short enough to be readable, but long enough to develop an idea. Overly long paragraphs should be split up, as long as the cousin paragraphs keep the idea in focus.
One-sentence paragraphs are unusually emphatic, and should be used sparingly. Articles should rarely, if ever, consist solely of such paragraphs.
Some paragraphs are really tables or lists in disguise. They should be rewritten as prose or converted to their unmasked form. Wikipedia:When to use tables and Wikipedia:Embedded list offer guidance on the proper use of these elements.
Headings
Shortcut:
WP:HEADER
Headings help clarify articles and create a structure shown in the table of contents. To learn about how the MediaWiki software uses sections, see Help:Section.
Headings are hierarchical. The article's title uses a level 1 heading, so you should start with a level 2 heading (==Heading==) and follow it with lower levels: ===Subheading===, ====Subsubheading====, and so forth. Whether extensive subtopics should be kept on one page or moved to individual pages is a matter of personal judgment. See also below under #Summary style.
Headings should not be Wikilinked. This is because headings in themselves introduce information and let the reader know what subtopics will be presented; Wikilinks should be incorporated in the text of the section.
Images
If the article can be illustrated with pictures, find an appropriate place to position these images, where they relate closely to text they illustrate. If there might be doubt, draw attention to the image in the text (illustration right). For more information on using pictures, see Wikipedia:Layout § Images and Wikipedia:Picture tutorial.
Standard appendices
As explained in more detail at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout § Standard appendices and footers, optional appendix sections containing the following information may appear after the body of the article in the following order:
A list of books or other works created by the subject of the article (works)
A list of internal "wikilinks" to related Wikipedia articles (see also)
Notes and references (notes, footnotes, or references)
A list of recommended relevant books, articles, or other publications that have not been used as sources (further reading)
A list of recommended relevant websites that have not been used as sources (external links).
With some exceptions, any links to sister projects appear in further reading or external links sections. Succession boxes and navigational footers go at the end of the article, following the last appendix section, but preceding the category and interwiki templates.
Size
Shortcut:
WP:BETTER#SIZE
See also: Wikipedia:Article size
Excessively long articles should usually be avoided. Articles should ideally contain less than 50KB worth of prose. When articles grow past this amount of readable text, they can be broken up into smaller articles to improve readability and ease of editing, or may require trimming to remain concise. The headed sub-section should be retained, with a concise version of what has been removed under an italicized header, such as Main article: History of Ruritania (a list of templates used to create these headers is available at Category:Wikipedia page-section templates). Otherwise, context is lost and the general treatment suffers. Each article on a subtopic should be written as a stand-alone article—that is, it should have a lead section, headings, et cetera.
When an article is long and has many sub articles, try to balance the main page. Do not put undue weight into one part of an article at the cost of other parts. In shorter articles, if one subtopic has much more text than another subtopic, that may be an indication the subtopic should have its own page, with only a summary presented on the main page.
Articles covering subtopics
Wikipedia articles tend to grow in a way that leads to the natural creation of new articles. The text of any article consists of a sequence of related but distinct subtopics. When there is enough text in a given subtopic to merit its own article, that text can be summarized in the present article and a link provided to the more detailed article. Cricket is an example of an article covering subtopics: it is divided into subsections that give an overview of the sport, with each subsection leading to one or more subtopic articles.
Information style and tone
Two styles, closely related and not mutually exclusive, tend to be used for Wikipedia articles. The tone, however, should always remain formal, impersonal, and dispassionate.
These styles are summary style, which is the arrangement of a broad topic into a main article and side articles, each with subtopical sections; and the inverted pyramid style (or news style, though this term is ambiguous), which prioritizes key information to the top, followed by supporting material and details, with background information at the bottom.
A feature of both styles, and of all Wikipedia articles, is the presence of the lead section, a summarizing overview of the most important facts about the topic. The infobox template found at the top of many articles is a further distillation of key points.
Summary style
Main page: Wikipedia:Summary style
Summary style may apply both across a category of articles and within an article. Material is grouped and divided into sections that logically form discrete subtopics, and which over time may spin off to separate articles, to prevent excessive article length as the main article grows. As each subtopic is spun off, a concise summary of it is left behind with a pointer (usually using the {{Main}} template) to the new side article.
There are three main advantages to using summary style:
Different readers want varying amounts of detail, and this style permits them to choose how much they are exposed to. Some readers need just a quick summary and are satisfied by the lead section; others seek a moderate amount of info, and will find the main article suitable to their needs; yet others want a lot of detail, and will be interested in reading the side articles.
An article that is too long becomes tedious to read. Progressively summarizing and spinning off material avoids overwhelming the reader with too much text at once.
An excessively detailed article is often one that repeats itself or exhibits writing that could be more concise. The development of summary-style articles tends to naturally clear out redundancy and bloat, though in a multi-article topic this comes at the cost of some necessary cross-article redundancy (i.e., a summary of one article in another).
The exact organizing principle of a particular summary-style article is highly context-dependent, with various options, such as chronological, geographical, and alphabetical (primarily in lists), among others.
Some examples of summary style are the featured articles Association football and Music of the Lesser Antilles.
Inverted pyramid (news style)
See also: Wikipedia:Too long; didn't read
Shortcut:
WP:PYRAMID
Some Wikipedians prefer using the inverted pyramid structure of news style. This information presentation technique is that found in short, direct, front-page newspaper stories and the news bulletins that air on radio and television. This is a style only used within an article, not across a category of them.
The main feature of the inverted pyramid is placement of important information first, with a decreasing importance as the article advances. Originally developed so that the editors could cut from the bottom to fit an item into the available layout space, this style encourages brevity and prioritizes information, because many people expect to find important material early, and less important information later, where interest decreases.
Encyclopedia articles are not required to be in inverted pyramid order, and often aren't, especially when complex. However, a familiarity with this convention may help in planning the style and layout of an article for which this approach is a good fit. Inverted-pyramid style is most often used with articles in which a chronological, geographical, or other order will not be helpful. Common examples are short-term events, concise biographies of persons notable for only one thing, and other articles where there are not likely to be many logical subtopics, but a number of facts to prioritize for the reader.
The lead section common to all Wikipedia articles is, in essence, a limited application of the inverted pyramid approach. Virtually all stub articles should be created in inverted-pyramid style, since they basically consist of just a lead section. Consequently, many articles begin as inverted-pyramid pieces and change to summary style later as the topic develops, often combining the approaches by retaining a general inverted pyramid structure, but dividing the background material subtopically, with summary pointers to other articles.
Tone
Shortcuts:
WP:COLLOQUIAL
WP:FORMAL
WP:SLANG
WP:TONE
WP:NARRATOR
"WP:SLANG" redirects here. For the policy that covers writing Wikipedia articles at about slang terms, see Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary.
See also: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view § Impartial tone
Wikipedia is not a manual, guidebook, textbook, or scientific journal. Articles, and other encyclopedic content, should be written in a formal tone. Standards for formal tone vary a bit depending upon the subject matter, but should usually match the style used in Featured- and Good-class articles in the same category. Encyclopedic writing has a fairly academic approach, while remaining clear and understandable. Formal tone means that the article should not be written using argot, slang, colloquialisms, doublespeak, legalese, or jargon that is unintelligible to an average reader; it means that the English language should be used in a businesslike manner.
Articles should not be written from a first- or second-person perspective. In prose writing, the first-person (I/me/my and we/us/our) point of view and second-person (you and your) point of view typically evoke a strong narrator. While this is acceptable in works of fiction and in monographs, it is unsuitable in an encyclopedia, where the writer should be invisible to the reader. Moreover, pertaining specifically to Wikipedia's policies, the first person often inappropriately implies a point of view inconsistent with the neutrality policy, while second person is associated with the step-by-step instructions of a how-to guide, which Wikipedia is not. First- and second-person pronouns should ordinarily be used only in attributed direct quotations relevant to the subject of the article. As with many such guidelines, however, there can be occasional exceptions. For instance, the "inclusive we" is widely used in professional mathematics writing, and though discouraged on Wikipedia even for that subject, it has sometimes been used when presenting and explaining examples. Use common sense to determine whether the chosen perspective is in the spirit of the guidelines.
Gender-neutral pronouns should be used (or pronouns avoided) where the gender is not specific; see Gender-neutral language for further information.
Punctuation marks that appear in the article should be used only per generally accepted practice. Exclamation marks (!) should be used only if they occur in direct quotations. This is generally true of question marks (?) as well; do not pose rhetorical questions for the reader.[1]
As a matter of policy, Wikipedia is not written in news style in other senses than the inverted pyramid (above), including tone. The encyclopedic and journalistic intent and audience are different. Especially avoid bombastic wording, attempts at humor or cleverness, reliance on primary sources, editorializing, recentism, pull quotes, journalese, and headlinese.
Similarly, avoid news style's close sibling, persuasive style, which has many of those faults and more of its own, most often various kinds of appeal to emotion and related fallacies. This style is used in press releases, advertising, op-ed writing, activism, propaganda, proposals, formal debate, reviews, and much tabloid and sometimes investigative journalism. It is not Wikipedia's role to try to convince the reader of anything, only to provide the salient facts as best they can be determined, and the reliable sources for them.
Not all tone flaws are immediately obvious as bias, original research, or other policy problems, but may be relevance, register, or other content-presentation issues. A common one is the idea, often taught to debate students, that each section or even paragraph should introduce a key statement (a thesis), then supporting evidence in additional sentences, and finish with a recapitulation of the original thesis in different wording. This style is redundant and brow-beating, and should not be used in encyclopedic writing.[2] Another is attempting to make bits of material "pop" (an undue weight problem), such as with excessive emphasis, the inclusion of hyperbolic adjectives and adverbs, or the use of unusual synonyms or loaded words. Just present the sourced information without embellishment, agenda, or fanfare. Another presentation problem is "info-dumping" by presenting information the form of a long, bulletized list when it would be better given as normal prose paragraphs. This is especially true when the items in the list are not of equal importance or are not really comparable in some other way, and need context. Using explanatory prose also helps identify and remove trivia.
Provide context for the reader
Shortcuts:
WP:PCR
WP:AUDIENCE
"WP:PCR" redirects here. For the pending changes reviewer user rights, see Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes.
"WP:AUDIENCE" redirects here. For guideline on notability of companies with regards to reach of sources, see Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) § Audience.
For context and linking, see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking.
Wikipedia is an international encyclopedia. People who read Wikipedia have different backgrounds, education and opinions. Make your article accessible and understandable for as many readers as possible. Assume readers are reading the article to learn. It is possible that the reader knows nothing about the subject, so the article needs to explain the subject fully.
Avoid using jargon whenever possible. Consider the reader. An article entitled "Use of chromatic scales in early Baroque music" is likely to be read by musicians, and technical details and terms are appropriate, linking to articles explaining the technical terms. On the other hand, an article entitled "Baroque music" is likely to be read by laypersons who want a brief and plainly written overview, with links to available detailed information. When jargon is used in an article, a brief explanation should be given within the article. Aim for a balance between comprehensibility and detail so that readers can gain information from the article.
Evaluating context
Here are some thought experiments to help you test whether you are setting enough context:
Does the article make sense if the reader gets to it as a random page? (Special:Random)
Imagine yourself as a layperson in another English-speaking country. Can you figure out what the article is about?
Can people tell what the article is about if the first page is printed out and passed around?
Would a reader want to follow some of the links? Do sentences still make sense if they can't?
Build the web
Main page: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (linking)
Remember that every Wikipedia article is tightly connected to a network of other topics. Establishing such connections via wikilink is a good way to establish context. Because Wikipedia is not a long, ordered sequence of carefully categorized articles like a paper encyclopedia, but a collection of randomly accessible, highly interlinked ones, each article should contain links to more general subjects that serve to categorize the article. When creating links, do not go overboard, and be careful to make your links relevant. It is not necessary to link the same term twelve times (although if it appears in the lead, then near the end, it might be a good idea to link it twice).
Avoid making your articles orphans. When you write a new article, make sure that one or more other pages link to it, to lessen the chances that your article will be orphaned through someone else's refactoring. Otherwise, when it falls off the bottom of the Recent Changes page, it will disappear into the Mists of Avalon. There should always be an unbroken chain of links leading from the Main Page to every article in Wikipedia; following the path you would expect to use to find your article may give you some hints as to which articles should link to your article.
State the obvious
Shortcut:
WP:OBVIOUS
"WP:OBVIOUS" redirects here. For the essay about over-citing obvious things, see Wikipedia:You don't need to cite that the sky is blue.
State facts that may be obvious to you, but are not necessarily obvious to the reader. Usually, such a statement will be in the first sentence or two of the article. For example, consider this sentence:
The Ford Thunderbird was conceived as a response to the Chevrolet Corvette and entered production for the 1955 model year.
Here no mention is made of the Ford Thunderbird's fundamental nature: it is an automobile. It assumes that the reader already knows this—an assumption that may not be correct, especially if the reader is not familiar with Ford or Chevrolet. Perhaps instead:
The Ford Thunderbird is a car manufactured in the United States by the Ford Motor Company.
However, there is no need to go overboard. There is no need to explain a common word like "car". Repetition is usually unnecessary, for example:
Shoichi Yokoi was conscripted into the Imperial Japanese Army in 1941.
conveys enough information (although it is not a good first sentence). However, the following is not only verbose but redundant:
Shoichi Yokoi was a Japanese soldier in Japan who was drafted into the Imperial Japanese Army in 1941.
Lead section
As explained in more detail at Wikipedia:Lead section § Introductory text, all but the shortest articles should start with introductory text (the "lead"). The lead should establish significance, include mention of consequential or significant criticism or controversies, and be written in a way that makes readers want to know more. The appropriate length of the lead depends on that of the article, but should normally be no more than four paragraphs. The lead itself has no heading and, on pages with more than three headings, automatically appears above the table of contents, if present.
Opening paragraph
Shortcut:
WP:BETTER/GRAF1
Normally, the opening paragraph summarizes the most important points of the article. It should clearly explain the subject so that the reader is prepared for the greater level of detail that follows. If further introductory material is appropriate before the first section, it can be covered in subsequent paragraphs in the lead. Introductions to biographical articles commonly double as summaries, listing the best-known achievements of the subject. Because some readers will read only the opening of an article, the most vital information should be included.
First sentence content
The article should begin with a short declarative sentence, answering two questions for the nonspecialist reader: "What (or who) is the subject?" and "Why is this subject notable?"[3]
If possible, the page title should be the subject of the first sentence:[4] However, if the article title is merely descriptive—such as Electrical characteristics of a dynamic loudspeaker—the title does not need to appear verbatim in the main text. Similarly, where an article title is of the type "List of ...", a clearer and more informative introduction to the list is better than verbatim repetition of the title.
When the page title is used as the subject of the first sentence, it may appear in a slightly different form, and it may include variations.[5] Similarly, if the title has a parenthetical disambiguator, the disambiguator should be omitted in the text.[6]
If its subject is amenable to definition, then the first sentence should give a concise definition: where possible, one that puts the article in context for the nonspecialist. Similarly, if the subject is a term of art, provide the context as early as possible.[7]
If the article is about a fictional character or place, make sure to say so.[8]
First sentence format
As a general rule, the first (and only the first) appearance of the page title should be in boldface as early as possible in the first sentence:
An electron is a subatomic particle that carries a negative electric charge.
However, if the title of a page is descriptive and does not appear verbatim in the main text, then it should not be in boldface. So, for example, Electrical characteristics of dynamic loudspeakers begins with:
The chief electrical characteristic of a dynamic loudspeaker's driver is its electrical impedance as a function of frequency.
If the subject of the page is normally italicized (for example, a work of art, literature, album, or ship) then its first mention should be both bold and italic text; if it is usually surrounded by quotation marks, the title should be bold but the quotation marks should not:
Las Meninas (Spanish for The Maids of Honour) is a 1656 painting by Diego Velázquez, ...
"Yesterday" is a pop song originally recorded by The Beatles for their 1965 album Help!.
If the subject of the page has a common abbreviation or more than one name, the abbreviation (in parentheses) and each additional name should be in boldface on its first appearance:
Sodium hydroxide (NaOH), also known as lye, caustic soda and (incorrectly, according to IUPAC nomenclature) sodium hydrate, is ...
Use as few links as possible before and in the bolded title. Thereafter, words used in a title may be linked to provide more detail:
Arugam Bay is a bay situated on the Indian Ocean in the dry zone of Sri Lanka's southeast coast.
The rest of the opening paragraph
Then proceed with a description. Remember, the basic significance of a topic may not be obvious to nonspecialist readers, even if they understand the basic characterization or definition. Tell them. For instance:
Peer review, known as refereeing in some academic fields, is a scholarly process used in the publication of manuscripts and in the awarding of money for research. Publishers and agencies use peer review to select and to screen submissions. At the same time, the process assists authors in meeting the standards of their discipline. Publications and awards that have not undergone peer review are liable to be regarded with suspicion by scholars and professionals in many fields.
The rest of the lead section
If the article is long enough for the lead section to contain several paragraphs, then the first paragraph should be short and to the point, with a clear explanation of what the subject of the page is. The following paragraphs should give a summary of the article. They should provide an overview of the main points the article will make, summarizing the primary reasons the subject matter is interesting or notable, including its more important controversies, if there are any.
The appropriate length of the lead section depends on the total length of the article. As a general guideline:
Article Length
Lead Length
Fewer than 15,000 characters One or two paragraphs
15,000–30,000 characters Two or three paragraphs
More than 30,000 characters Three or four paragraphs
"Lead follows body"
Shortcut:
WP:LEADFOLLOWSBODY
The sequence in which you edit should usually be: first change the body, then update the lead to summarize the body. Several editors might add or improve some information in the body of the article, and then another editor might update the lead once the new information has stabilized. Don't try to update the lead first, hoping to provide direction for future changes to the body. There are three reasons why editing the body first and then making the lead reflect it tends to lead to better articles.
First, it keeps the lead in sync with the body. The lead, being a summary of the article, promises that the body will deliver fuller treatment of each point. Generally, wiki pages are imperfect at all times, but they should be complete, useful articles at all times. They should not contain "under construction" sections or refer to features and information that editors hope they will contain in the future. It's much worse for the lead to promise information that the body does not deliver than for the body to deliver information that the lead does not promise.
Second, good ways to summarize material usually only become clear after that material has been written. If you add a new point to the lead before it's covered in the body, you only think you know what the body will eventually contain. When the material is actually covered in the body, and checked and improved, usually by multiple editors, then you know. (If having a rough, tentative summary helps you write the body, keep your own private summary, either on your computer or in your User space.)
Third, on contentious pages, people often get into edit wars over the lead because the lead is the most prominent part of the article. It's much harder to argue constructively over high-level statements when you don't share common understanding of the lower-level information that they summarize. Space is scarce in the lead, so people are tempted to cram too much into one sentence, or pile on lots of references, in order to fully state and prove their case—resulting in an unreadable lead. In the body, you have all the space you need to cover subtleties and to cover opposing ideas fairly and in depth, separately, one at a time. Once the opposing ideas have been shaken out and covered well in the body, editing the lead without warring often becomes much easier. Instead of arguing about what is true or what all the competing sources say, now you are just arguing over whether the lead fairly summarizes what's currently in the body.
Use other languages sparingly
Main page: Wikipedia:Manual of Style § Foreign terms
It is fine to include foreign terms as extra information, but avoid writing articles that can only be understood if the reader understands the foreign terms. Such words are equivalent to jargon, which should be explained somehow. In the English-language Wikipedia, the English form does not always have to come first: sometimes the non-English word is better as the main text, with the English in parentheses or set off by commas after it, and sometimes not. For example, see Perestroika.
Non-English words in the English-language Wikipedia should be written in italics. Non-English words should be used as titles for entries only as a last resort. Again, see Perestroika.
English title terms taken from a language that does not use the Roman alphabet can include the native spelling in parentheses. See, for example, I Ching (simplified Chinese: 易经; traditional Chinese: 易經; pinyin: yì jīng) or Sophocles (Greek: Σοφοκλῆς). The native spelling is useful for precisely identifying foreign words, since transliterations may be inaccurate or ambiguous. Foreign terms within the article body do not need native spellings if they can be specified as title terms in separate articles; just link to the appropriate article on first occurrence.
Use color sparingly
See also: Help:Using colors
If possible, avoid presenting information with color only within the article's text and in tables.
Color should only be used sparingly, as a secondary visual aid. Computers and browsers vary, and you cannot know how much color, if any, is visible on the recipient's machine. Wikipedia is international: colors have different meaning in different cultures. Too many colors on one page look cluttered and unencyclopedic. Specifically, use the color red only for alerts and warnings.
Awareness of color should be allowed for low-vision viewers: poor lighting, color blindness, dark or overbright screens, and the wrong contrast/color settings on the display screen.
Use clear, precise and accurate terms
Shortcut:
WP:ATE
Be concise
Main page: WP:BECONCISE
Shortcuts:
WP:TRITE
WP:TERSE
Articles should use only necessary words. This does not mean using fewer words is always better; rather, when considering equivalent expressions, choose the more concise.
Vigorous writing is concise. A sentence should contain no unnecessary words, a paragraph no unnecessary sentences, for the same reason that a drawing should have no unnecessary lines and a machine no unnecessary parts. This requires not that the writer make all his sentences short, or that he avoid all detail and treat his subjects only in outline, but that every word tell.
—  William Strunk, Jr. from the 1918 work, The Elements of Style
Reduce sentences to the essentials. Wordiness does not add credibility to Wikipedia articles. Avoid temporary expressions like "due to the fact that" in place of "because", or "at the present time" for "currently". The ideal method of specifying on-going events is "as of 2017". Wikipedia "grammar bots" will replace these types of expressions with correct wording.
Conciseness does not justify removing information from an article. The use of subjective qualifiers should be avoided.
Principle of least astonishment
Further information: Wikipedia:Offensive material
Shortcuts:
WP:LEAST
WP:ASTONISH
WP:SURPRISE
When the principle of least astonishment is successfully employed, information is understood by the reader without struggle. The average reader should not be shocked, surprised, or overwhelmingly confused by your article. For example, do not write, "Most people in Fargo, North Dakota, are dead. That is, dead tired by the end of a long work day". You should not use provocative language in descriptions or arguments. Instead, offer information gently. Use consistent vocabulary in parts that are technical and difficult. To work out which parts of the sentence are going to be difficult for the reader, try to put yourself in the position of a reader hitherto uninformed on the subject.
You should plan your page structure and links so that everything appears reasonable and makes sense. If a link takes readers to somewhere other than where they thought it would, it should at least take them somewhere that makes sense.
Similarly, make sure that concepts being used as the basis for further discussion have already been defined or linked to a proper article. Explain causes before consequences and make sure your logical sequence is clear and sound, especially to the layperson.
Ensure that redirects and hatnotes that are likely to be useful are in place. If a user wants to know about the branch of a well-known international hotel chain in the French capital, they may type "Paris Hilton" into the search box. This will, of course, take them to the page associated with a well-known socialite. Luckily, though, a hatnote at the top of that article exists in order to point our user to an article which they will find more useful.
Use of "refers to"
See also: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary § Fixing the introductory sentence: removing "refers to"
Shortcuts:
WP:REFERS
WP:UMD
Phrases such as refers to, is the name of, describes the, or is a term for are sometimes used inappropriately in the introduction to a Wikipedia article. For example, the article Computer architecture once began with the sentence, "Computer architecture refers to the theory behind the design of a computer."
That is not true: Computer architecture is the theory. The words "computer architecture" refer to the theory, but the article is not about the words; it is about the theory.
Thus it is better to say, "Computer architecture is the theory behind the design of a computer."
This is known as the use–mention distinction. For the vast majority of articles, the introduction is using a term ("Computer architecture is a theory"), rather than mentioning it.
Disambiguation pages mention the term, so in such cases it is correct to write "Great Schism may refer to either of two schisms in the history of Christianity: ...". However, a content article should read "There have been two Great Schisms in the history of Christianity".
When referring directly to a term rather than using it, write the word in italics, as shown above; see WP:WORDSASWORDS.
Check your facts
See also: Wikipedia:Verifiability
Write material that is true: check your facts. Do not write material that is false. This might require that you verify your alleged facts.
This is a crucial part of citing good sources: even if you think you know something, you have to provide references anyway to prove to the reader that the fact is true. Material that seems to naturally stem from sourced claims might not have been actually claimed. In searching for good references to cite, you might even learn something new.
Be careful about deleting material that may be factual. If you are inclined to delete something from an entry, first consider checking whether it is true. If material is apparently factual, in other words substantiated and cited, be extra careful about deleting. An encyclopedia is a collection of facts. If another editor provided a fact, there was probably a reason for it that should not be overlooked. Therefore, consider each fact provided as potentially precious. Is the context or overall presentation the issue? If the fact does not belong in one particular article, maybe it belongs in another.
Examine entries you have worked on subsequent to revision by others. Have facts been omitted or deleted? It may be the case that you failed to provide sufficient substantiation for the facts, or that the facts you incorporated may need a clearer relationship to the entry. Protect your facts, but also be sure that they are presented meaningfully.
Check your fiction
Shortcut:
WP:CYF
Main page: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction)
The advice about factual articles also applies to articles on fiction subjects. Further considerations apply when writing about fictional topics because they are inherently not real. It is important to keep these articles verifiable and encyclopedic.
If you add fictional information, clearly distinguish fact and fiction. As with normal articles, establish context so that a reader unfamiliar with the subject can get an idea about the article's meaning without having to check several links. Instead of writing
"Trillian is Arthur Dent's girlfriend. She was taken away from Earth by Zaphod when he met her at a party. She meets Dent while travelling with Zaphod."
write
"Trillian is a fictional character from Douglas Adams' radio, book and now film series The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. In the first book, Trillian is introduced to the main character Arthur Dent on a spaceship. In her backstory, she was taken away from Earth when the space alien Zaphod Beeblebrox met her at a party."
And so forth.
Shortcut:
WP:FICTENSE
Works of fiction are generally considered to "come alive" for their audience. They therefore exist in a kind of perpetual present, regardless of when the fictional action is supposed to take place relative to the reader's "now". Thus, generally you should write about fiction using the historical present tense, not the past tense. (See WP:Manual of Style § Verb tense and WP:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction § Contextual presentation.) Examples:
Homer presents, Achilles rages, Andromache laments, Priam pleads.
"Holden Caulfield has a certain disdain for what he sees as 'phony'."
"Friends is an American sitcom that was aired on NBC."
Conversely, discussion of history is usually written in the past tense and thus "fictional history" may be presented in that way as well.
"Chroniclers claimed that Thalestris, queen of the Amazons, seduced Alexander the Great."
Articles about fictional topics should not read like book reports; instead, they should explain the topic's significance to the work. After reading the article, the reader should be able to understand why a character, place, or event was included in the fictional work.
Editors are generally discouraged from adding fictional information from sources that cannot be verified or are limited to a very small number of readers, such as fan fiction and online role-playing games. In the latter case, if you absolutely have to write about the subject, please be especially careful to cite your sources.
If the subject, say a character in a television show, is too limited to be given a full article, then integrate information about that character into a larger article. It is better to write a larger article about the television show or a fictional universe itself than to create all sorts of stubs about its characters that nobody can find.
Stay on topic
"WP:TOPIC" redirects here. For information about the Topic namespace, see Wikipedia:Flow.
Shortcuts:
WP:TOPIC
WP:OFFTOPIC
The most readable articles contain no irrelevant (nor only loosely relevant) information. While writing an article, you might find yourself digressing into a side subject. If you are wandering off-topic, consider placing the additional information into a different article, where it will fit more closely with that topic. If you provide a link to the other article, readers who are interested in the side topic have the option of digging into it, but readers who are not interested will not be distracted by it. Due to the way in which Wikipedia has grown, many articles contain redundant passages of this kind. Please be bold in merging these passages.
Pay attention to spelling
Main page: Wikipedia:Spellchecking
Pay attention to spelling, particularly of new page names. Articles with good spelling and proper grammar can help encourage further contributions of well-formed content. Proper spelling of an article name will also make it easier for other authors to link their articles to your article. Sloppiness begets sloppiness, so always do your best.
Browsers have the native ability to highlight misspelled words in text boxes.
Use free online dictionaries like Ask Oxford, Dictionary.com, Onelook.com, Google Define and a spell checker such as SpellCheck.net, GingerSoftware, or your browser's built-in spell checker. See Wikipedia:Typo Team for tips on how to use these resources.
Articles may also be spell-checked in a word processor before being saved. A free word processor may be obtained from OpenOffice.org or LibreOffice.org.
A "draft" message on certain free email websites, such as Gmail, can also provide spell-check. This might be convenient, especially regarding email websites with which you are already familiar and use often.
Avoid peacock and weasel terms
Avoid peacock terms that show off the subject of the article without containing any real information. Similarly, avoid weasel words that offer an opinion without really backing it up, and which are really used to express a non-neutral point of view.
Examples of peacock terms
an important... one of the most prestigious... one of the best...
the most influential... a significant... the great...
Examples of weasel words
Some people say... ...is widely regarded as... ..is widely considered...
...has been called... It is believed that... It has been suggested/noticed/decided...
Some people believe... It has been said that... Some would say...
Legend has it that... Critics say that... Many/some have claimed...
Believe in your subject. Let the facts speak for themselves. If your ice hockey player, canton, or species of beetle is worth the reader's time, it will come out through the facts. However, in some cases (for example, history of graphic design) using superlative adjectives (in the "... one of the most important figures in the history of ..." format) in the description may help readers with no previous knowledge about the subject to learn about the importance or generally perceived status of the subject discussed. Note that to use this type of superlative adjective format, the most reputable experts in the relevant field must support the claim.
Avoid blanket terms unless you have verified them. For example, this article states that of the 18 Montgomery Counties in the United States, most are named after Richard Montgomery. This is a blanket statement. It may very well be true, but is it reliable? In this instance, the editor had done the research to verify this. Without the research, the statement should not be made. It is always a good idea to describe the research done and sign it on the article's talk page.
If you wish to, or must refer to an opinion, first make sure someone who holds some standing in that subject gives it. A view on former American President Gerald Ford from Henry Kissinger is more interesting for the reader than one from your teacher from school. Then say who holds the opinion being given, preferably with a source or a quote for it. Compare the following:
Some critics of George W. Bush have said he has low intelligence.
Author Michael Moore in his book Stupid White Men ...and Other Sorry Excuses for the State of the Nation! wrote an open letter to George Bush. In it, he asked, "George, are you able to read and write on an adult level?"
Examples
Sometimes the way around using these terms is to replace the statements with the facts that back them up. Instead of:
"The Yankees are one of the greatest baseball teams in history."
Write:
"The New York Yankees have won 26 World Series championships—almost three times as many as any other team."
By sticking to concrete and factual information, we can avoid the need to give any opinion at all. Doing so also makes for writing that is much more interesting, for example:
William Peckenridge, eighth Duke of Omnium (1642? – May 8, 1691) is widely considered to be one of the most important men to carry that title.
William Peckenridge, eighth Duke of Omnium (1642? – May 8, 1691) was personal counselor to King James I, general in the Wars of the Roses, a chemist, bandleader, and the director of the secret society known as The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. He expanded the title of Omnium to include protectorship of Guiana and right of revocation for civil-service appointments in India.
Show, don't tell. The first example simply tells the reader that William Peckenridge was important. The second example shows the reader why he was important.
Exceptions
When repeating established views, it may be easier to simply state: "Before Nicolaus Copernicus, most people thought the sun revolved round the earth", rather than sacrifice clarity with details and sources, particularly if the statement forms only a small part of your article. However, in general, everything should be sourced, whether within the text, with a footnote, or with a general reference.
Make omissions explicit for other editors
Make omissions explicit when creating or editing an article. When writing an article, always aim for completeness. If for some reason you cannot cover a point that should be explained, make that omission explicit. You can do this either by leaving a note on the discussion page or by leaving HTML comments within the text and adding a notice to the bottom about the omissions. This has two purposes: it entices others to contribute, and it alerts non-experts that the article they are reading does not yet give the full story.
That's why Wikipedia is a collaborative encyclopedia—we work together to achieve what we could not achieve individually. Every aspect that you cover means less work for someone else, plus you may cover something that someone else may not think of but which is nevertheless important to the subject. Add {{todo}} to the top of the talk page of articles for which you can establish some goals, priorities or things to do.
Other issues
Honorifics
Do not use honorifics or titles, such as Mr, Ms, Rev, Doctor, etc. See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility) and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies)
Inappropriate subjects
If you are trying to dress up something that doesn't belong in Wikipedia—your band, your Web site, your company's product—think twice about it. Wikipedia is not an advertising medium or home page service. Wikipedians are pretty clever, and if an article is really just personal gratification or blatant advertising, it's not going to last long—no matter how "important" you say the subject is.
Integrate changes
When you make a change to some text, rather than appending the new text you would like to see included at the bottom of the page, if you feel so motivated, please place and edit your comments so that they flow seamlessly with the present text. Wikipedia articles should not end up being a series of disjointed comments about a subject, but unified, seamless, and ever-expanding expositions of the subject.
Avoiding common mistakes
It is easy to commit a Wikipedia faux pas. That is OK—everybody does it! Nevertheless, here are a few you might try to avoid.
Make a personal copy
Suppose you get into an edit war. Or worse, a revert war. Therefore, you try to stay cool. This is good. Congratulations! However, what would be great is if you could carry on working on the article, even though there is an edit war going on, and even though the version on the top is the evil one favored by the other side in the dispute.
So, make a personal copy as a subpage of your user page. Just start a new page at Special:MyPage/Article name (it can be renamed in the URL address to start a page with a different article name), and copy and paste the wiki-source in there. Then you can carry on improving the article at your own pace! If you like, drop a note on the appropriate talk page to let people know what you are doing.
Some time later, at your leisure, once the fuss has died down, merge your improvements back in to the article proper. Maybe the other person has left Wikipedia, finding it not to their taste. Maybe they have gone on to other projects. Maybe they have changed their mind. Maybe someone else has made similar edits anyway (although they may not be as good as yours, as you have had more time to consider the matter).
See also
Wikipedia:Article development
Wikipedia:Basic copyediting
Wikipedia:Make technical articles understandable
Wikipedia:Principle of some astonishment
Wikipedia:Peer review, where experienced editors carefully go through an article, significantly helping it toward Good or Featured article status
"Common issues seen in Peer review" from The Signpost, the online newspaper covering the English Wikipedia and the Wikimedia movement
Notes
Jump up ^ Rhetorical questions can occasionally be used, when appropriate, in the presentation of material, but only when the question is asked by the material under consideration, not being asked in Wikipedia's own voice. Example here.
Jump up ^ For an example found in, and removed from, a high-profile article, see here.
Jump up ^ For example:
Amalie Emmy Noether [ˈnøːtɐ] (23 March 1882 – 14 April 1935) was a German mathematician known for her groundbreaking contributions to abstract algebra and her contributions to theoretical physics.
This example not only tells the reader that the subject was a mathematician, it also indicates her field of expertise and work she did outside of it. The years of her birth and death provide time context. The reader who goes no further in this article already knows when she lived, what work she did, and why she is notable. (Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies) has more on the specific format for biography articles.)
Jump up ^ For example:
This Manual of Style is a style guide containing ...
not
This style guide, known as the Manual of Style, contains ...
Jump up ^ For example, in the article "United Kingdom":
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, commonly known as the United Kingdom, the UK, or Britain, is a sovereign island country located off the northwestern coast of continental Europe.
Jump up ^ Thus, the article Egg (food) should start like this:
An egg is an ovum produced by ...
Not like this:
An egg (food) is an ovum produced by ...
Jump up ^ For example, instead of:
A trusted third party is an entity that facilitates interactions between two parties who both trust the third party.
write:
In cryptography, a trusted third party is an entity that facilitates interactions between two parties who both trust the third party.
Jump up ^ For example:
Homer Simpson is a fictional character in The Simpsons.
[show]
v
t
e
Writing guides
Starting an article
Getting started Layout
Visual structure of articles The perfect article
A checklist of components
Article development
Suggested stages of an article Manual of Style
Comprehensive style guide Writing better articles
A collection of advice
[show]
v
t
e
Wikipedia help pages
Visit the Teahouse if you are a new editor looking for interactive help, or the Help desk for an interactive Q & A forum.
FAQs (?)
Reference desks (?)
Noticeboards (?)
Missing Manual (?)
Cheatsheet (?)
Directories (?)
About Wikipedia
Administration
Purpose
Principles
Wikipedia in brief
Policies and guidelines
What Wikipedia is not
Disclaimer (parental advice)
Making requests
where to ask questions
contact Wikipedia directly
Who writes Wikipedia?
Why create an account?
Help for readers
FAQ
Books
Copyright
Glossary
Mobile access
Navigation
Other languages
Searching
Students
Viewing media
Contributing
to Wikipedia
A plain and simple overview
A primer for newcomers
Advice for young editors
Avoiding common mistakes
Etiquette (community expectations)
Learning the ropes
Instructional material
Simplified Manual of Style
Simplified rule-set
"Ignore all rules"
"The rules are principles"
Style-tips
Tip of the day
Task Center
Your first article (article wizard)
Vandalism
Getting started
Wikipedia intro
Wikipedia tutorial
The Wikipedia Adventure
Manual of Style intro
Graphics tutorials
Picture tutorial (Uploading intro)
IRC (live chat) tutorial
Navigating intro
Policies intro
Referencing intro
Tables intro
Talk pages intro
VisualEditor user guide
Dos and don'ts
Accessibility
Bio's
Categorization
Disambiguation
Images
Links
Lists
References
Tables
Talks
How-to pages and
information pages
Appealing blocks
Article deletion
Categories
Citations / references
Referencing for beginners
Citation Style 1
Cite errors
References and page numbers
Convert
Diff
Editing
toolbar
edit conflict
Email confirmation
Find sources
Files
Footnotes
Image deletion
Infoboxes
Linking (link color)
Logging in
Merging
Namespaces
Page name
Redirect
Renaming pages
Passwords
Reverting
Talk pages (archiving)
URL
User contributions
User page design center
Coding wiki markup
Wiki markup
Barcharts
Calculations
Characters
Citation templates
Columns
Hidden text
HTML
Lists
Magic words (introduction)
Music symbols
Sections
Sounds
Tables (introduction)
Templates
documentation
messages
cleanup messages
Transclusion
Visual files
Wiki tools
Directories
Abbreviations
Departments
Editor's index
Essays
FAQs
Glossary
Guidelines
Help menu
Manual of Style
Policies
Shortcuts
Tasks
Tips
Ask for help on your talk page
[show]
v
t
e
Essays on building Wikipedia
Philosophy
Articles must be written
Avoid vague introductions
Be a reliable source
Cohesion
Concede lost arguments
Eight simple rules for editing our encyclopedia
Explanationism
Here to build an encyclopedia
Not editing because of Wikipedia restriction
Paradoxes
Paraphrasing
POV and OR from editors, sources, and fields
Product, process, policy
Purpose
Reason-ability rule
The role of policies in collaborative anarchy
The rules are principles
Ten Simple Rules for Editing Wikipedia
Tendentious editing
Trifecta
Wikipedia in brief
Wikipedia is a community
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia
Construction
100K featured articles
A navbox on every page
Advanced article editing
Advanced table formatting
Advanced template coding
Advanced text formatting
Alternatives to the "Expand" template
Amnesia test
An unfinished house is a real problem
Autosizing images
Avoid mission statements
Bare URLs
Be neutral in form
Beef up that first revision
Cherrypicking
Citation overkill
Concept cloud
Creating controversial content
Criticisms of society may be consistent with NPOV and reliability
The deadline is now
Dictionaries as sources
Don't demolish the house while it's still being built
Don't get hung up on minor details
Don't hope the house will build itself
Don't panic
Editing on mobile devices
Editors are not mindreaders
Encourage the newcomers
Endorsements (commercial)
Featured articles may have problems
Give an article a chance
How to run an edit-a-thon
Inaccuracies in Wikipedia namespace
Inaccuracy
Law sources
Link rot
Minors and persons judged incompetent
"Murder of" articles
Not every story/event/disaster needs a biography
Not everything needs a navbox
Not everything needs a WikiProject
Nothing is in stone
Permastub
Potential, not just current state
Printability
Publicists
Put a little effort into it
Restoring part of a reverted edit
Robotic editing
Sham consensus
Temporary versions of articles
There is a deadline
Walled garden
What an article should not include
Wikipedia is a work in progress
Wikipedia is not being written in an organized fashion
The world will not end tomorrow
Writing
HER
Write the article first
Writing about women
Writing better articles
Deletion
Adjectives in your recommendations
AfD is not a war zone
Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions
Arguments to avoid in deletion reviews
Arguments to avoid in image deletion discussions
Arguments to make in deletion discussions
Avoid repeated arguments
Before commenting in a deletion discussion
Content removal
Delete the junk
Does deletion help
Don't overuse shortcuts to policy and guidelines to win your argument
Follow the leader
How to save an article proposed for deletion
I just don't like it
Immunity
Identifying blatent advertising
Identifying test edits
Liar Liar Pants on Fire
Nothing
Overzealous deletion
Relisting can be abusive
What to do if your article gets tagged for speedy deletion
Why was the page I created deleted?
Wikipedia is not Whack-A-Mole
About essays
Avoid writing redundant essays
Difference between policies, guidelines and essays
Don't cite essays as if they were policy
Finding an essay
Quote your own essay
Value of essays
Related subjects
About policies and guidelines
Guidelines
Policies
Wikipedia is a volunteer service
Essay directory
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Writing_better_articles&oldid=805946595"
Categories:
Wikipedia supplemental pages
Wikipedia how-to
Wikipedia essays on building the encyclopedia
Wikipedia editor help
Wikipedia essays about editing
Wikipedia page help
Hidden categories:
Wikipedia semi-protected project pages
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Project page
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
View source
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Afrikaans
العربية
বাংলা
भोजपुरी
Български
Català
Deutsch
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
Français
Gaeilge
Galego
گیلکی
हिन्दी
Bahasa Indonesia
Íslenska
Italiano
Lietuvių
Magyar
Bahasa Melayu
မြန်မာဘာသာ
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ
Português
संस्कृतम्
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Basa Sunda
ไทย
中文
Edit links
This page was last edited on 18 October 2017, at 17:19.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

attrs: alt src width height srcset data-file-width data-file-height

values: This page is semi-protected due to vandalism

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

values:
note
hatnote navigation-not-searchable

value: b

value: span

values: float: right; border: 1px solid #aaa; background: #fff; margin: 0; padding: 0.3em; text-align: center; line-height: 1.4em; font-weight: bold; font-size: smaller;

values:
plainlinks ombox ombox-notice
presentation

values: padding:0.2em 0 0.4em;padding-bottom:1.0em;border-bottom:1px solid;

values: padding:0 0.1em 0.4em;padding:0.2em 0 0.6em; font-size:93%;

values:
/wiki/Help:Using_talk_pages
mw-redirect
Help:Using talk pages

values: Wikipedia:Creation and usage of media files

values:
/wiki/Help:Table/Introduction_to_tables
mw-redirect
Help:Table/Introduction to tables

values: Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources

values:
/wiki/Help:Wiki_markup
mw-redirect
Help:Wiki markup

values: Wikipedia:Essays in a nutshell/Article writing

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:How_to_edit_a_page
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:How to edit a page

values: Category:Wikipedia Manual of Style (content)

values: font-size:105%;background:transparent;text-align:left;background-color: #def; padding-left: 2px;

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Self-references to avoid

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch

values: font-size: 105%; padding: 0.2em 0px 0.4em; text-align: center; display: none;

values: Category:Wikipedia Manual of Style (formatting)

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Capital letters

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Text formatting

values: Category:Wikipedia Manual of Style (images)

values: Category:Wikipedia Manual of Style (layout)

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trivia sections

values: Category:Wikipedia Manual of Style (lists)

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Embedded lists

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists of works

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Road junction lists

values: Category:Wikipedia Manual of Style (legal)

values: Category:Wikipedia Manual of Style (arts)

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Stringed instrument tunings

values: Category:Wikipedia Manual of Style (music)

values: float:right;clear:right;width:22.0em;margin:0 0 1.0em 1.0em;background:#f9f9f9;border:1px solid #aaa;padding:0.2em;border-spacing:0.4em 0;text-align:center;line-height:1.4em;font-size:88%;border-collapse:collapse; border-spacing:0px; border:none; width:100%; margin:0px; font-size:100%; clear:none; float:none

values: Category:Wikipedia Manual of Style (regional)

values: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Canada-related articles

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/China-related articles

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/France & French-related

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Hawaii-related articles

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/India-related articles

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Ireland-related articles

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Japan-related articles

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Korea-related articles

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Philippine-related articles

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Poland-related articles

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Singapore-related articles

values: Wikipedia:Trinidad and Tobago Wikipedians' notice board/Style guide

values: Category:Wikipedia Manual of Style (religion)

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Islam-related articles

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Latter Day Saints

values: Category:Wikipedia Manual of Style (science)

values: Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer science/Manual of style

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles

values: Category:Wikipedia Manual of Style (sports)

values: Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Military history

values: Wikipedia:Make technical articles understandable

values: padding:0.3em 0.4em 0.3em;font-weight:bold;border-top: 1px solid #aaa; border-bottom: 1px solid #aaa;

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:When_to_use_tables
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:When to use tables

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Embedded_list
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Embedded list

values: float:right;border:1px solid #aaa;background:#fff;margin:.3em .3em .3em 1em;padding:.4em .6em;text-align:center;font-size:smaller;line-height:2em;font-weight:bold

values: History of Ruritania (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Article_length
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Article length

values:
/wiki/Gender-neutral_pronoun
mw-redirect
Gender-neutral pronoun

values:
/wiki/Pull_quotes
mw-redirect
Pull quotes

values: Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Explain_jargon
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Explain jargon

values: Wikipedia:You don't need to cite that the sky is blue

values: font-family: Georgia, 'DejaVu Serif', serif; color: #8B0000;

values: font-family: Georgia, 'DejaVu Serif', serif; color: #006400;

values: Electrical characteristics of a dynamic loudspeaker

values:
/wiki/Technical_terminology
mw-redirect
Technical terminology

values: Electrical characteristics of dynamic loudspeakers

values: International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry

values: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English)

values:
/wiki/Help:Using_colors
mw-redirect
Help:Using colors

values:
/wiki/William_Strunk,_Jr.
mw-redirect
William Strunk, Jr.

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction)

values:
/wiki/Fictional_character
mw-redirect
Fictional character

values:
nofollow
http://www.askoxford.com/
external text

values:
nofollow
http://www.dictionary.com/
external text

values:
nofollow
http://www.onelook.com/
external text

values:
nofollow
http://www.spellcheck.net/
external text

values:
nofollow
http://www.openoffice.org/
external text

values:
nofollow
https://www.libreoffice.org/
external text

values:
nofollow
https://www.gmail.com/
external text

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Avoid_peacock_terms
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Avoid peacock terms

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Avoid_weasel_words
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Avoid weasel words

values:
/wiki/Canton_(administrative_division)
mw-redirect
Canton (administrative division)

values: List of the most common U.S. county name etymologies

values: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility)

values: Wikipedia:Masking the lack of notability

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_war
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Edit war

values: Wikipedia:Staying cool when the editing gets hot

values:
/wiki/Help:Starting_a_new_page
mw-redirect
Help:Starting a new page

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Talk_page
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Talk page

values: Wikipedia:Principle of some astonishment

values: Representation in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)

values:
reflist mw-references-wrap
list-style-type: decimal;

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Starting_an_article
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Starting an article

values: nowraplinks collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner

values: This is a list of frequently asked questions about using and contributing to Wikipedia.

values: Works like a library reference desk. Ask a question here and Wikipedia volunteers will try to answer it.

values: Pages where editors can ask questions and request assistance from people who are familiar with the policies and guidelines covered by each individual board.

values: A how-to guide that explains the process of contributing to the English Wikipedia, both for novice users and experienced editors.

values: For a list of the most commonly used Wiki markup and templates.

values: For a list of Wikipedia's directories and indexes.

values: Wikipedia:Expectations and norms of the Wikipedia community

values: Help:Introduction to the Manual of Style/1

values: Help:Introduction to images with Wiki Markup/1

values: Help:Introduction to navigating Wikipedia/1

values: Help:Introduction to policies and guidelines/1

values: Help:Introduction to referencing with Wiki Markup/1

values: Help:Introduction to tables with Wiki Markup/1

values:
/wiki/Wiki_markup
mw-redirect
Wiki markup

values: nowraplinks hlist collapsible collapsed navbox-inner

values: Template talk:Essays on building Wikipedia

values:
col
navbox-title
2
text-align: center;;;

values:
row
navbox-group
text-align: center;;width:1%

values: Wikipedia:Eight simple rules for editing our encyclopedia

values: Wikipedia:Not editing because of Wikipedia restriction

values: Wikipedia:POV and OR from editors, sources, and fields

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Reasonability_Rule
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Reasonability Rule

values: Wikipedia:The role of policies in collaborative anarchy

values: Wikipedia:Ten Simple Rules for Editing Wikipedia

values: Wikipedia:Alternatives to the "Expand" template

values: Wikipedia:An unfinished house is a real problem

values: Wikipedia:Criticisms of society may be consistent with NPOV and reliability

values: Wikipedia:Don't demolish the house while it's still being built

values: Wikipedia:Avoid Parkinson's Bicycle Shed Effect

values: Wikipedia:Don't hope the house will build itself

values: Wikipedia:Featured articles may have problems

values: Wikipedia:Inaccuracies in Wikipedia namespace

values: Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (law)

values: Wikipedia:Minors and persons judged incompetent

values: Wikipedia:Not every story/event/disaster needs a biography

values: Wikipedia:Not everything needs a WikiProject

values: Wikipedia:Potential, not just current state

values: Wikipedia:For publicists publicizing a client's work

values: Wikipedia:Restoring part of a reverted edit

values: Wikipedia:Temporary versions of articles

values: Wikipedia:What an article should not include

values: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is a work in progress

values: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not being written in an organized fashion

values: Wikipedia:The world will not end tomorrow

values: Wikipedia:Adjectives in your recommendations

values: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion is not a war zone

values: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions

values: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion reviews

values: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in image deletion discussions

values: Wikipedia:Arguments to make in deletion discussions

values: Wikipedia:Before commenting in a deletion discussion

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Does_deletion_help
mw-redirect
Wikipedia:Does deletion help

values: Wikipedia:Don't overuse shortcuts to policy and guidelines to win your argument

values: Wikipedia:How to save an article proposed for deletion

values: Wikipedia:What to do if your article gets tagged for speedy deletion

values: Wikipedia:Why was the page I created deleted?

values: Wikipedia:Avoid writing redundant essays

values: Wikipedia:The difference between policies, guidelines and essays

values: Wikipedia:Don't cite essays or proposals as if they were policy

values: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is a volunteer service

values: nowraplinks collapsible collapsed navbox-inner

values: Category:Wikipedia essays on building the encyclopedia

values: Category:Wikipedia semi-protected project pages

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:Writing_better_articles
View the project page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values:
This page is protected.
You can view its source [ctrl-alt-e]

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values:
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page [ctrl-alt-z]
z

values: Featured content – the best of Wikipedia

values: Find background information on current events

values:
/wiki/Special:Random
Load a random article [ctrl-alt-x]
x

values: portal navigation p-navigation p-navigation-label

values: Guidance on how to use and edit Wikipedia

values: About the project, what you can do, where to find things

values: A list of recent changes in the wiki [ctrl-alt-r]

values: portal navigation p-interaction p-interaction-label

values: List of all English Wikipedia pages containing links to this page [ctrl-alt-j]

values:
uls-settings-trigger
Language settings
0
button
true

values: Wikipedia:Wenke vir die skryf van ’n goeie artikel – Afrikaans

values: ويكيبيديا:تطوير المقالات – Arabic

values: উইকিপিডিয়া:উৎকৃষ্ট নিবন্ধ লিখন – Bangla

values: विकिपीडिया:बढ़ियाँ लेख लिखे खातिर कुछ सलाह – Bhojpuri

values: Уикипедия:Енциклопедичност – Bulgarian

values: Viquipèdia:Com escriure un bon article – Catalan

values: Wikipedia:Wie schreibe ich gute Artikel – German

values: Ayuda:Cómo escribir mejores artículos – Spanish

values: Helpo:Kiel verki bonan artikolon – Esperanto

values: ویکی‌پدیا:راهنمایی برای نوشتن مقاله‌های بهتر – Persian

values: Aide:Comment rédiger un bon article – French

values: Vicipéid:Conas leathanach iontach a scríobh – Irish

values: Wikipedia:Como escribir un bo artigo – Galician

values: विकिपीडिया:अच्छे लेख लिखने के सुझाव – Hindi

values: Wikipedia:Panduan menulis artikel yang lebih baik – Indonesian

values: Hjálp:Að skrifa betri greinar – Icelandic

values: Aiuto:Come scrivere una buona voce – Italian

values: Wikipédia:Hogyan írhatok jó szócikket? – Hungarian

values: Wikipedia:Garis panduan penulisan yang lebih baik – Malay

values: Wikipedia:ဆောင်းပါးကောင်းများ ရေးသားနည်းလမ်းညွှန် – Burmese

values: Help:Tips voor het schrijven van een goed artikel – Dutch

values: Wikipedia:Hvordan skrive bedre artikler – Norwegian

values: ਵਿਕੀਪੀਡੀਆ:ਚੰਗੇ ਲੇਖ ਲਿਖਣ ਸੰਬੰਧੀ ਸੁਝਾਅ – Punjabi

values: Wikipédia:Livro de estilo/Como escrever um bom artigo – Portuguese

values: विकिपीडिया:उत्तमलेखस्य रचनायै मार्गदर्शिका – Sanskrit

values: Wikipedia:How to write Simple English pages – Simple English

values: Wikipédia:Ako napísať výborný článok – Slovak

values: Wikipedija:Vodnik k izboljšanju člankov – Slovenian

values: Википедија:Водич за писање бољих чланака – Serbian

values: Wikipedia:Pituduh nulis artikel anu leuwih hadé – Sundanese

values: วิกิพีเดีย:แนวทางการเขียนบทความให้ดียิ่งขึ้น – Thai

values:
suggestions
display: none; font-size: 13px;

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-4 ns-subject page-Wikipedia_Writing_better_articles rootpage-Wikipedia_Writing_better_articles vector-experimental-print-styles vector-nav-directionality skin-vector action-view