Talk:Technical writing

	Writing portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WikiProject Writing systemsWriting system
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Contributors and Editors for Technical Writing

Have a look at Wikiversity's Technical Writing course. Please lend a hand...TWFred 08:45, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect

I put a redirect to Technical Writing, but it doesn't seem to be working. Can someone help me out?AuroraMae 13:47, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I figured it out. I copied it from the previous article titled Technical Writing and redirected the Technical Writing page to this one. My basis was Wikipedia:Redirect and the Capitalization convention suggested on that page.AuroraMae 14:02, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There should be a link to the technical writing section from this section. I have more material to add to this part. I would prefer it to stay where it is for the time being.

Technical Writers

This section seems to be a collection of both TW groups and helps. It should probably be split up into two more representative sections. Silverstarseven 20:10, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Changes

My university technical communication class has been encouraged to make changes/improvements to the article on Technical Communication as a class project. Because this article is is article relates fairly heavily in subject matter there may be some crossover edits. Do not be surprised if there is an increase in edits (especially anonymous edits) over the next week or so. Ve4cib 02:27, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Remove "Tech Writing 2.0"

The section called "Tech writing 2.0" is meaningless and should be removed. A search on the web reveals that "Tech writing 2.0" is a product http://www.cherryleaf.com/techwriting.htm. The writer stole that piece from Answers.com, http://www.answers.com/topic/technical-writing-1, and neglected to footnote it properly as coming from a guy named "Ellis Pratt". Below is the bio for Ellis Pratt - I stole it from here http://www.stcuk.org/programme/programme.htm.

Ellis Pratt, Cherryleaf Ellis is Sales and Marketing Director for Cherryleaf, and he has over ten years experience working on documentation projects. He is an accomplished speaker on topics such as the future trends for user assistance, online Help and online communities. He is the author of "Tech Writing 2.0 - The application of Web 2.0 technologies to technical documentation" and "Network to Get Work". His philosophy is winning by sharing, connecting people to what they seek, networked businesses and people. The aim is to create a network of business professionals who support one another, learning, networking and trading.

So, basically, Ellis is selling a tech writing guide and courses, and "Tech Writing 2.0" is his name for this program. Thing is, Wikipedia isn't here to offer up courses, merchandise or sell products.

Please remove this from Wikipedia.

Thanks,

Rick M, Ontario Canada.

I agree that this sales message should be removed Bobdoyle 23:33, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletions

A fair amount of deletion has been made to this article (not by me), most of which I haven't restored since a lot of what was carved out did seem to me to be vague, with a high word-to-content ratio, which seemed more intended to convince the reader of the goodness and worthiness of technical writing, rather than deliver information on what it is. However, that said, what is left, is pretty lean. CAN the essense of tech writing be put down here, without leaving out really important and key ideas, but also without undue boosterism? It's a pretty problem in tech writing! S B H arris 03:52, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Additions/edits are pending

I am a student in a graduate tech writing course. Our class has been encouraged to update this wiki article, possibly with the focus of adding the topics of Ethics and Theory.

added section on career growth, options skylab (talk) 08:24, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good, then maybe you can explain this weird emphasis on ethics:

Students of Technical Writing must combine their ability to create clearly written documents with a larger ethical consideration of how their construction of these documents affects other individuals. Because of the reciprocal infuence of technology and society, Technical Writers must analyze the impetus behind technical writing and should ask themselves, "What is the ethical driving force behind these products?"

COMMENT: this needs an example where such considerations made, or could make, some difference. Was a tech writer asked to do a manual for some criminal enterprise? Or how to waterboard people for the best reponse and least water used? What? As written, the above makes the tech writer sound like they're out to change the ethical world, one article at a time. Sorry, but that's for the clergy. Which somebody seems to have confused themselves with, since we're being preached at, here. S B H arris 21:23, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Acceptable External Links

The zealous (some might say overzealous) "ohnoitsjamie" has taken it upon himself to be the gatekeeper of this page. One of his edits was to remove all the external links. The only way they can go back again and stay there is if there is consensus as to their suitability. The links he removed are below. Please discuss and come to a decision. I certainly agree that some of the links should be removed, but many should stay because they go to sites that assist students and practitioners of technical writing.

--Hattrick (talk) 23:55, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]