A Wikipedia for the rest of us?

[SiD the Turtle]

http://simple.wikipedia.org

Have a read, I find a lot of the articles a lot easier to understand when they aren't written in the 'expert language' of the subject matter.

It does make you type and talk funny after reading it for a while though.

 

[Maccy]

Perfect for me, thanks

 

[Greenlizard0]

I've never found any entry difficult to understand, even those that are in subjects I know nothing about. That's surely the point of an encyclopedia, anybody can read it. You then have specialist textbooks which are above it?

It's for children or those with less knowledge of English.

 

[Lysander]

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree

A tree is a tall plant with a trunk and branches made of wood. It can live for many years. The roots of a tree are under the ground.

Aghhhhhhh it's too basic

 

[Gilly]

How do you mean 'rest of us'? By 'us' do you mean children and those requiring remedial studies?

 

[Noel Gallagher]

Looks like wiki for retards :/

 

[SiD the Turtle]

I've never found any entry difficult to understand, even those that are in subjects I know nothing about.

I can follow most, but I can come unstuck on medical and maths articles, when they dive in and use terminology that you may not understand. Of course this doesn't mean that each maths article should start with a basic maths tutorial, but you get my point!

 

[uber soldat]

I wasn't aware that the regular Wikipedia was hard to understand.

 

[Cosimo]

Aghhhhhhh it's too basic

Yup, primary school level.

 

[Gilly]

I can follow most, but I can come unstuck on medical and maths articles, when they dive in and use terminology that you may not understand. Of course this doesn't mean that each maths article should start with a basic maths tutorial, but you get my point!

Most, if not all, of them explain the terminology used when going into heavily specialised areas.

 

[megatron]

"The Simple English Wikipedia is for everyone! That includes children and adults who are learning English."

 

[Greenlizard0]

I can follow most, but I can come unstuck on medical and maths articles, when they dive in and use terminology that you may not understand. Of course this doesn't mean that each maths article should start with a basic maths tutorial, but you get my point!

Most pages are heavily linked. And they often start with basic definitions to get people going.

 

[SiD the Turtle]

Clearly I've made myself look like a simpleton, so I'm going to back out of this thread before I do any more damage

 

[Happy]

I've never found any entry difficult to understand, even those that are in subjects I know nothing about. That's surely the point of an encyclopedia, anybody can read it. You then have specialist textbooks which are above it?

It's for children or those with less knowledge of English.

Same

 

[orderoftheflame]

I've never found any entry difficult to understand, even those that are in subjects I know nothing about. That's surely the point of an encyclopedia, anybody can read it. You then have specialist textbooks which are above it?

It's for children or those with less knowledge of English.

This.

If I get stuck on a word I don't know the meaning of, I tend to look it up on wikipedia anyway.

 

[gillywibble]

Is there an even easier Wikipedia for me?

 

[Phil99]

http://xkcd.com/547/

 

[strudey]

I thought this thread was going to be about http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page

I am very glad it wasn't.

 

[SiD the Turtle]

http://xkcd.com/547/

^ Yup that's where I found it

 

[Mat]

Yup, saw that this morning too