In this post:
- Standards for each kind of article.
- A rough idea of the structure of each kind of article.
Last time, I went over the topics I want to cover for OMICE. This time, let's figure out what kind of standards I want to cover for each kind of article I can write for them.
All articles need someone besides me to edit them before they're "done".
In no particular order:
- Survey articles, summing up the history of a particular idea, need some level (unsure) of good-quality sources. Ideally, a few people in the relevant field would take a look at it.
- Articles on general principles should give several qualitatively different examples of the principle in action, say around three.
- Accounts of scientific discoveries should explain how things closer to human experience were used to observe things further away, what common phenomena made more sense in light of the discovery, and what practical implications or applications the discovery had.
- Accounts of overturned ideas should explain how the idea was arrived at, and why it was convincing, as well as what evidence ended up weighing against it.
- For the worked examples of worldbuilding, there should be some accompanying fiction that takes advantage of the final product, and directly deals with around a quarter of the worldbuilding details. Not sure where I want the fiction to go. The worldbuilding articles should have links to survey and philosophy articles, where appropriate.
- The worldbuilding, even when grounded in "describing fictional physics" should have a cultural component.
- Relatedly, some worldbuilding should be focused on alien situations, but with no "fictional physics"; for example, a planet that could exist somewhere in this universe.
- I don't want it to be a core focus, but one aspect of the worldbuilding examples could be "here's this high-profile worldbuilding; how would I do it differently?"
- For the philosophy "how" articles, after I feel like it's developed enough, I attempt to apply it, and revise it in light of any challenges I encounter.
- For "when" articles, I guess I have to do some worked examples and make sure the recommendations make sense.
Structurally, an article will consist of a title (which includes its categorization), and then:
- Philosophy articles will open with a profile of the intended audience. Next, they'll develop the article's argument. (I'm not sure I'm thinking about this well. "Write the rest of the damn article.")
- Worldbuilding articles will open with a "what-if" question, and explore its implications.
- Survey articles of discoveries or overturnings will maybe be based around a timeline with collapsible sections. Before that, a brief description of what was believed before the discovery, and when exactly that was.
- Survey articles of discoveries will follow the timeline with an "in practice" section.
- Survey articles of principles will, when feasible, open with an example of something the reader can do to observe the principle. Then, a timeline of development and applications.
I'm rushing this out a bit because I got distracted playing video games. I'm going to try to run these ideas past other people, and see if they can suggest any changes or refinements.
Next time, how this week went.