Calling Wikipedia's BLUFF

You can talk about anything related to Wikipedia criticism here.
Post Reply
User avatar
wexter
Sucks Warrior
Posts: 574
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2020 4:18 pm
Has thanked: 274 times
Been thanked: 279 times

Calling Wikipedia's BLUFF

Post by wexter » Sat Apr 09, 2022 10:52 pm

This article is written like a personal reflection, personal essay, or argumentative essay that states a Wikipedia editor's personal feelings or presents an original argument about a topic. Please help improve it by rewriting it in an encyclopedic style. (August 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)


BLUF (bottom line up front)[1] is the practice of beginning a message with its key information (the "bottom line"). This provides the reader with the most important information first.[2] By extension, that information is also called a BLUF. It differs from an abstract or executive summary in that it is simpler and more concise, similar to a thesis statement, and it resembles the inverted pyramid practice in journalism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLUF_(communication)

As an old guy its a major frustration that folks are no longer direct, they never come to the point by starting off with "the conclusion" of their speech or writing right off the bat in the first sentence.

I think we should call Wikipedia's bluff right here right not.
Wikipedia - "Barely competent and paranoid. There’s a hell of a combination."

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4547
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1099 times
Been thanked: 1797 times

Re: Calling Wikipedia's BLUFF

Post by ericbarbour » Sun Apr 10, 2022 10:38 pm

And who put that stupid, unncessary template on the article (which dates from 2007)? Sandstein. Of course.

Drive-by shitposting. It's what he does.

Post Reply