Talk:Everglades
 | This article contains a translation of Everglades National Park from en.wikipedia. |
The article needs simplification[change source]
It seems the article does not meet "simple policy". Because many difficult words still used directly from English Wikipedia. Please consider to make it more simple.
The similar article can be found at enWP. But if a reader wants to find a simpler version of something on enWP, this is a place for those people. "The more we look like a mirror site for enWP, the less we are doing our job." --Green (talk) 13:49, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Green: Agreed. Do you want to tag team and help simplify the article? I'll give it a try now, but any other input and help would be greatly appreciated. — Infogapp1 (talk) 14:09, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Infogapp1: At this moment, I want to know what other editors thinking about. we are not in hurry, so I take my time. There must be various opinions towards "Simple Wikipedia". English including Pidgin is a communication tool for people all over the world; not only for the native English. In the meantime, I would like to do edits other articles for readers. --Green (talk) 17:12, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
Comment: : In my opinion, There are three ways to make an article simpler to avoid an incomplete understanding.
- Change a difficult word into a word which is only included in "simple word book".
- Link a word with another article or wiktionary which tell its meaning.
- Explain a word in the context in an article. --Green (talk) 10:26, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
No it doesn't![change source]
At a glance I can see the sentence length is shorter (in some places much shorter) than the En wiki version: the prose consists of simple declarative sentences, and the vocabulary is a bit simpler as well. Improvements may still be made, of course. Macdonald-ross (talk) 18:58, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
If I had doubts, they would be about the last section. It does need some attention. Macdonald-ross (talk) 19:04, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Macdonald-ross: I took a stab at editing it earlier after I saw @Green:'s note. Just hadn't updated the thread since I was relying on the edit history showing it. There were a few words and statements here and there could use a bit deconstruction, so I hope it works for everyone's liking at its current form. Anyone else who thinks it's still complex, is always free to help shape it up, of course. — Infogapp1 (talk) 19:14, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- One does come across the occasional geographical page which needs to be explained in full because the issues are so important. Here is a case in point. So important are the environmental issues that we have to go the extra yard to do them justice. Macdonald-ross (talk) 19:22, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- That's true. I've tried to simplify some of those areas and interlinked phrases that I believe simply cannot be unravelled any further (though more heads always come up with better ideas!) I think if there's anything specific that still seems to be complicated, we can try to specify them on here and we can all brainstorm. We can tag team how else we can make the information much easier to understand for the readers. We can do a point-by-point method, just like what @Yottie: and @Junedude433: for Talk:Lawrence, Kansas. — Infogapp1 (talk) 19:39, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- One does come across the occasional geographical page which needs to be explained in full because the issues are so important. Here is a case in point. So important are the environmental issues that we have to go the extra yard to do them justice. Macdonald-ross (talk) 19:22, 17 August 2020 (UTC)