March 18, 2009 at 19:18Writing texts for sites: do not over-dry, do not over-salt
Once I heard an interesting statement by one cook:
- Cooking is very simple! We must not overcook and undercook, we must not over-salt and under-salt, we must not over-dry and not over-soak.
The cunning chef did not reveal to us the secrets of his skill, but in many ways he is right: the quality of the work is noticeable when the author does not go to extremes.
Writing texts on a site is the same creative activity as any other. In my opinion, everyone has their own style. And it will be noticeable if it is not spoiled by extremes.
Here are some extremes for articles on the site:
- overdried text, very formal,
- familiar text, familiarity,
- too long text,
- too short text.
Similar texts are often found on the websites of large enterprises. It is as if they are writing a report to the tax office, or to a higher organization. Often they write as if they pass the test on a compromise: a lot of clever terms, not any lapidarity.
This style is also characterized by the spelling of words in capital letters, as they used to write the word "ORDER" on a typewriter.
People with different levels of knowledge of the subject come to the site, but all of them may be interested in easy, friendly presentation of the material.
Writing words only in capital letters makes it difficult to read, creates a subconscious unpleasant sensation.
You can write a formal text if it is aimed at a circle of narrow specialists who deeply understand the topic. This style is also useful if you are trying to hide really important things behind a bunch of insignificant terms and numbers.
Such texts sometimes happen to be written by people who know the joy of chat rooms, emoticons and Padonkov slang. Having decided that the Internet is a completely different culture, they are in a hurry to demonstrate their new knowledge.
Oddly enough, but mostly familiarity is manifested in typography and in the misuse of punctuation marks:
- a lot of exclamation points,
- out of place dots,
- dots out of a large number of points,
- dashes are placed where it is appropriate to put a colon,
- a dash is placed everywhere,
- written in a jumping register
- “ё” is put in and stands out where it is appropriate to write “e”
- in case of and idle use highlighting in bold, highlighting part of the text in a different color.
In fact, familiarity is the same formalism, but on the other side. The same disrespect for the text and site visitors.
The attention of visitors should be focused on the meaning, and not on your deep knowledge in chat-ICQ battles.
If you consciously want to present the meaning of the article as the logic of hysterical and stupid pseudo-rebels, then write like this.
In high school, I loved reading Victor Hugo. I liked his logic, his pessimistic irony, his paradox. About 5 years ago I tried to re-read it and could not. The rhythm of life has accelerated so much that reading how one thought develops on 3 pages has become simply unbearable.
Did you notice that I left the main topic? I switched to philology and personal preferences. The general rhythm of the article has been knocked down; there has been a change in focus. This example may be successful, but it is nevertheless from a different opera.
The length of the article is measured not only by the number of letters, but also by the number of tricks changed. The more different objects of attention, the more difficult it is to grasp the essence.
The attention of Internet users is already very defocused, they read fluently. Try to consider one object in one article. If the object in question is complex, it is better to split the article into several, and correctly link them with hyperlinks.
Participation in the contest "Make the user forget what the article is about until he reads until the middle."
Brevity is the sister of talent, but not always. It’s good when everything that’s needed is summarized. It’s bad when, instead of brevity, they slip us a lack of content.
Quite often I come across articles literally similar to these:
- What are gas silicate blocks all builders already know, so just go to the price list page.
- We thought for a long time that it was possible to write about the last party, and decided that this could not be described in words. Who was, he already knows, and who was not, will not understand.
Information must be given so that the user understands that the site owner understands the issue. If you send a user to Google, you show helplessness.
If you sincerely hate the owner of the site, but education does not allow him to spit in his face.
Quite often you have to hear from young and inexperienced that it’s cool, when you go to extremes, that this is the only way to distinguish yourself, and attention to details is boring and not interesting to anyone. I used to think so too. And I remember those times with warmth.
I wrote articles without punctuation, specifically, so that readers would arrange them at their discretion, that would completely change the meaning. I wrote articles consisting of the words of one root. There was a case, I repeated the same sentence, and at the end I put different emoticons.
All these experiments helped me understand how to write is not necessary. Creativity is generally good because it has the right to make a mistake. So if you have some kind of article “not going”, my advice to you:
- go to extremes, play with words, draw emoticons, trim, inflate. Write insanity. And then, with a fresh mind, throw out all the extremes and leave a whole, interesting, easy-to-read article.
The author of the article and photograph is Vadim Galkin. When publishing the material, please give a link to my personal page: vadimgalkin.pp.ru.
- Cooking is very simple! We must not overcook and undercook, we must not over-salt and under-salt, we must not over-dry and not over-soak.
The cunning chef did not reveal to us the secrets of his skill, but in many ways he is right: the quality of the work is noticeable when the author does not go to extremes.
Writing texts on a site is the same creative activity as any other. In my opinion, everyone has their own style. And it will be noticeable if it is not spoiled by extremes.
Here are some extremes for articles on the site:
- overdried text, very formal,
- familiar text, familiarity,
- too long text,
- too short text.
Formal text
Similar texts are often found on the websites of large enterprises. It is as if they are writing a report to the tax office, or to a higher organization. Often they write as if they pass the test on a compromise: a lot of clever terms, not any lapidarity.
This style is also characterized by the spelling of words in capital letters, as they used to write the word "ORDER" on a typewriter.
Why not write like that?
People with different levels of knowledge of the subject come to the site, but all of them may be interested in easy, friendly presentation of the material.
Writing words only in capital letters makes it difficult to read, creates a subconscious unpleasant sensation.
Exception to the rule
You can write a formal text if it is aimed at a circle of narrow specialists who deeply understand the topic. This style is also useful if you are trying to hide really important things behind a bunch of insignificant terms and numbers.
Familiar text
Such texts sometimes happen to be written by people who know the joy of chat rooms, emoticons and Padonkov slang. Having decided that the Internet is a completely different culture, they are in a hurry to demonstrate their new knowledge.
Oddly enough, but mostly familiarity is manifested in typography and in the misuse of punctuation marks:
- a lot of exclamation points,
- out of place dots,
- dots out of a large number of points,
- dashes are placed where it is appropriate to put a colon,
- a dash is placed everywhere,
- written in a jumping register
- “ё” is put in and stands out where it is appropriate to write “e”
- in case of and idle use highlighting in bold, highlighting part of the text in a different color.
Why don't you write like that?
In fact, familiarity is the same formalism, but on the other side. The same disrespect for the text and site visitors.
The attention of visitors should be focused on the meaning, and not on your deep knowledge in chat-ICQ battles.
Exception to the rule
If you consciously want to present the meaning of the article as the logic of hysterical and stupid pseudo-rebels, then write like this.
Text Too Long
In high school, I loved reading Victor Hugo. I liked his logic, his pessimistic irony, his paradox. About 5 years ago I tried to re-read it and could not. The rhythm of life has accelerated so much that reading how one thought develops on 3 pages has become simply unbearable.
Did you notice that I left the main topic? I switched to philology and personal preferences. The general rhythm of the article has been knocked down; there has been a change in focus. This example may be successful, but it is nevertheless from a different opera.
The length of the article is measured not only by the number of letters, but also by the number of tricks changed. The more different objects of attention, the more difficult it is to grasp the essence.
Why shouldn’t you write like that?
The attention of Internet users is already very defocused, they read fluently. Try to consider one object in one article. If the object in question is complex, it is better to split the article into several, and correctly link them with hyperlinks.
Exception to the rule
Participation in the contest "Make the user forget what the article is about until he reads until the middle."
Text Too Short
Brevity is the sister of talent, but not always. It’s good when everything that’s needed is summarized. It’s bad when, instead of brevity, they slip us a lack of content.
Quite often I come across articles literally similar to these:
- What are gas silicate blocks all builders already know, so just go to the price list page.
- We thought for a long time that it was possible to write about the last party, and decided that this could not be described in words. Who was, he already knows, and who was not, will not understand.
Why you shouldn’t write like that
Information must be given so that the user understands that the site owner understands the issue. If you send a user to Google, you show helplessness.
Exception to the rule
If you sincerely hate the owner of the site, but education does not allow him to spit in his face.
About extremes and details
Quite often you have to hear from young and inexperienced that it’s cool, when you go to extremes, that this is the only way to distinguish yourself, and attention to details is boring and not interesting to anyone. I used to think so too. And I remember those times with warmth.
I wrote articles without punctuation, specifically, so that readers would arrange them at their discretion, that would completely change the meaning. I wrote articles consisting of the words of one root. There was a case, I repeated the same sentence, and at the end I put different emoticons.
All these experiments helped me understand how to write is not necessary. Creativity is generally good because it has the right to make a mistake. So if you have some kind of article “not going”, my advice to you:
- go to extremes, play with words, draw emoticons, trim, inflate. Write insanity. And then, with a fresh mind, throw out all the extremes and leave a whole, interesting, easy-to-read article.
Authorship
The author of the article and photograph is Vadim Galkin. When publishing the material, please give a link to my personal page: vadimgalkin.pp.ru.