Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2011-04-18/WikiProject report

TLDR[edit]

I think this article needs subheadings and perhaps shorter paragraphs. It is currently a long list of very long paragraphs. --Mortense (talk) 17:06, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it is not that it is too long but the paragraphs are short. I am planning on making an article so I will learn from this one. --SomeDudeWithAUserName (talk with me!) 23:51, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback. If the interview is short, we normally leave it in a Q&A format. But if the responses are long, I try to put it into prose. I will consider using sub-headings in the future, but this article, at 1,600+ words, is really not that long. It is certainly not feature-length (which could be double the length). I will see if a sub-heading or two will help in future articles. – SMasters (talk) 05:57, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An "audience"?[edit]

Isn't is a bit much to call it an audience? I tried to look for evidence that "audience" was being used humorously but if it's there it went over my head. I'm not sure the WikiProject Council qualifies as a "state or religious dignitary" or should be "associated with monarchs and popes". 72.244.200.86 (talk) 03:41, 20 April 2011 (UTC) :-)[reply]

It was tongue-in-cheek. – SMasters (talk) 05:57, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good report[edit]

Well I for one thought this to be a well written and interesting to read report. I liked how the interviews were worked in as a continually flowing narrative. I tend to skim a lot when reading but this kept my attention reading the whole way through. -- œ ^™ 06:53, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for your kind words. An article takes hours to craft, often over a period of a number of days, so it's nice to know that people are actually reading the work. And if they enjoy it, then it's great to know that all the work has been worth it. – SMasters (talk) 05:57, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]