| advertise add site services publishers database health videos | ![]() | about toolbar stats live show health store more stuff JOIN/LOGIN |
definitions of popular medical... socalgastroenterologist.c... |
Style and formatting MOS Subpages
Policies & Guidelines
Culture specific
When writing technical (scientific, medical, legal, etc.) articles, it is usually the case that a number of technical terms or terms of art and jargon specific to the subject matter will be presented. These should be defined or at least alternative language provided, so that a non-technical reader can both learn the terms and understand how they are used by scientists. It is also the case that such an article can cover a range of related subjects that might not each justify a separate article or Wikipedia page, and therefore making technical terms stand out in the text is the first level in a sequence from definition to subtitle to separate article. On the other hand, do not treat every “scientific” word as a technical term. Ask the question: Is this the only article or one of a very few where the term might be encountered in Wikipedia? Consider the examples presented below. There are three basic markups used to make technical terms stand out; these are italic (in typography also termed oblique with regard to sans-serif fonts), bold, and bold italic. The following uses of these styles are recommended for technical articles: Italic (edited as
Bold (edited as
Bold italic (edited as
As in the fern example above, any of the three styles described above could be turned into a link if there exists a more detailed or better explanation of the technical term in a separate article. It may not be necessary then to define the term in the article if a link leads to a definition. However, to aid the reader in continuing with the text without having to leave an article for other details, it might still be appropriate to include a non-technical substitute in parentheses, as in the fern example above. When a vast amount of jargon appears in an article, you might consider bundling all terms and their definitions within a glossary. When you do so, do use the appropriate definition list markup: Instead of
use
Wikipedia uses "double quotation marks" (and for quotations within quotations, 'single quotation marks'), regardless of English-language variant. “Curly quotes” are not used in articles. See the "Quotation marks" subsection of the Manual of Style for more information. [edit] See also |
| ↑ top of page ↑ | about thumbshots |