More languages
More actions
This guide aims to give effective and practical tips on how to write in a more encyclopedic tone. You're not strictly required to follow this guide, but may find it helpful when writing on ProleWiki.
It's by no means finished yet, and will likely be updated here and there.
What is encyclopedic tone?
Encyclopedic tone is probably different from how you normally write. Encyclopedic tone is very different from an essay or fiction tone, and often requires some getting used to -- the only remedy is to write with it, and keep doing it until it becomes second nature.
This helps the tone of ProleWiki be consistent across pages and never jarring to the reader. It also helps them understand what's written more easily, and with less possibilities of confusion. Be mindful that this guide was not written with encyclopedic tone, but will use examples.
Remember: we write for the reader first and foremost!
Tips to achieve encyclopedic tone
It's important to remember who you are writing for when making an edit to a page. And the people we are writing for is, well, anyone in the world. They may not read English as well as you do, or they may not be familiar at all with the topic you are writing about, essentially starting from 0. This is where it all starts before we even give any tips to achieve an encyclopedic tone.
We don't gain points for style and form. The point is to basically spoon-feed information to the reader on the basis that:
a- they may not know anything about the topic, or
b- we may still be able to teach them something they didn't know about the topic.
For this reason, we need to use clear, purposeful language. You should aim to write as concisely as possible, while conveying as much meaning as possible. This means writing short sentences that detail everything. When writing, think of the questions a reader that knows absolutely nothing about the topic will ask, and answer those questions for them.
This is actually something AI can help you with. You can send it a paragraph you've written and ask it to rewrite it in a more encyclopedic tone. It's pretty good at this kind of tasks.
The most common form we see on ProleWiki is trying to fit too much information in too little space, which just ends up in a jumble of adjectives and statements:
The CPUSA opposed the Korean War and Syngman Rhee's puppet government in South Korea as well as the U.S. puppet states in Taiwan Province and South Vietnam.
Rewritten with a more encyclopedic tone:
CPUSA opposed the Korean War as well as Syngman Rhee's government. It also opposed the puppet states the U.S. had set up in Taiwan and South Vietnam.
Let the words breathe, and make more sentences if you need to!
Generally, you should limit adjectives and adverbs to a minimum. You should also mix the use of the passive and active voices when suitable. Here's an example: "In 1944, Browder briefly [adverb] dissolved the CPUSA [active voice]. Due to [adjective] the intervention of the PCF [active voice], the party was reestablished and Browder was purged."
We could instead say:
In 1944, Browder dissolved the CPUSA [active voice]. The party was reestablished through the intervention of the PCF [passive voice], and Browder was purged."
These simple changes limit confusion and reading fatigue, and also save on reading time when multiplied over an entire page.
However, the proposed edit above is still not entirely complete. It doesn't detail when the party was re-established, when Browder was purged and why, or what exactly the PCF did. It's fine if there is a source attached, but this is something we should tell the reader directly.
Encyclopedic tone is very factual and tries not to be (overly) judgmental. Think of yourself as writing in the name of ProleWiki, meaning you are writing as 20 different authors. While we don't have strict rules against criticism and bias, it's better to just lay down the facts as we have them and let readers make up their own mind. Of course, as the writer you help steer the reader towards a certain conclusion -- this is bias, and we acknowledge that it exists and that it's not really possible to stop it entirely. This is why unlike other wikis, we don't have 0 tolerance for it.
Speaking of which, our job as encyclopedic writers is to convince the reader with our arguments and facts, and not simply because we write better or manage to say a lot or use the jargon. Rely on bluelinks to help you with this: you don't always have to write the entire history of Taiwan whenever you mention it. You can just link to the Taiwan page which explains it, and go on with what you were going to write about.
Sometimes, you might need to rewrite a paragraph from scratch. We tend to try and preserve as much original wording as possible when making an edit, but we shouldn't. You should absolutely feel free to
An example that we've had just recently was the following:
Patriotic socialists initially had yet to form a political party, [because they formed one in July 2024] instead promoting the ''CPUSA 2036'' slogan...
The reason this is phrased this way was because the earlier phrasing was:
Patriotic socialists have yet to form a political party, instead promoting the ''CPUSA 2036'' slogan...
In this case, the editor didn't want to remove wording that was already there. But they very well could have, simplifying the paragraph to:
Patriotic socialists formed their first party in July 2024. Prior to that, they promoted the "CPUSA 2036" slogan...
Working the lede
In journalism and wikis, the lede (pronounced lead as in leading) is the very first paragraph of an article or a page. We use it to introduce the topic, and it's often the most difficult paragraph to write. You basically only have 3 to 5 sentences available for it, but remember one thing: you don't have to explain the entire topic in these 5 sentences, you just have to introduce it. The rest of the page is used to go deeper into the topic and go through all of it.