Difference between revisions of "Atomic Threats In The Baltic Sea Region/Working meetings/Fourth meeting/article discussion"
From Nuclear Heritage
Jump to navigationJump to search (Created page with "{{Atomic Threats In The Baltic Sea Region}} '''<= book project | [[Atomic Threats In The Baltic Sea Region|<= Atomic Thr...") |
(updated) |
||
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
* style looks like advertising for the nuclear plant, better to improve it | * style looks like advertising for the nuclear plant, better to improve it | ||
* fixing future style of writing; style should give more suggestions/possibilities, than fix the perspective like the nuclear industry wishs it | * fixing future style of writing; style should give more suggestions/possibilities, than fix the perspective like the nuclear industry wishs it | ||
+ | ** ''phrasing should rather be "is supposed to", "proposed", etc. instead of fixing the future with "will" terms'' | ||
* last part should be extracted/put to another part of the article | * last part should be extracted/put to another part of the article | ||
* many parts could be described more briefly (date, content, events, etc.) | * many parts could be described more briefly (date, content, events, etc.) |
Revision as of 11:12, 11 May 2014
Project Atomic Threats In The Baltic Sea Region - call out - timeline - book - Nuclear Baltic Map
media group - planning meeting - working meetings - updating internet conferences - coordination - finances
<= book project | <= Atomic Threats In The Baltic Sea Region project | <= 4th project working meeting
Ostrovets NPP
This is what we found useful for improving on the article about the NPP in Belarus. Comments and suggestions are welcome!
- article is too long for the book
- create a subpage for the book article with an extract of the main article, see for instance the article on Olkiluoto NPP
- would be nice to have better understanding of risks (safety concerns) of the NPP
- style looks like advertising for the nuclear plant, better to improve it
- fixing future style of writing; style should give more suggestions/possibilities, than fix the perspective like the nuclear industry wishs it
- phrasing should rather be "is supposed to", "proposed", etc. instead of fixing the future with "will" terms
- last part should be extracted/put to another part of the article
- many parts could be described more briefly (date, content, events, etc.)
- contacts to critics are missing, also data box, photo, links section etc.
- references should be improved
- line "under construction" should be removed (all articles in the wiki are the same "under construction" as this one), chapter "news" maybe too - for short version
- necessary to format view of main page
- would be good to provide scaring pictures, e.g. what impact an accident in Ostrovets could have - show dread/fears of possible effects of explosion/ pollution
- necessary to check terms, text, linguistic construction