Talk:Infodumping

Is this article's tone or style not acceptable?
Why does the article have these cleanup tags? Jarble (talk) 14:25, 21 December 2023 (UTC)


 * An issue I immediately see is usage of things like calling it "important [to the person infodumping]" without that language in the source. Or calling it an "issue". These are not neutral presentations. The "Engaging with infodumping" is particularly bad with it's presentation. Moreover, there is not a single high quality source here, and those being used are all low and questionable quality. The template regarding it being written like a guide is likely targeted at the sort of wording used in the "Engaging with infodumping" section. The article does have multiple issues and does need work. Kimen8 (talk) 15:19, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Exactly. I think there's a plausible article about "infodumping" but this version suffers from the problems described above. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 06:23, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Feedback from New Page Review process
I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Good start. Infodump is a very generic widely used term. This is an article about infodumping with respect to autistic/neurodivergent people. This article really needs a more specific title. I would have renamed except I think it can better be done by and editor with more expertise/sources in this area. Happy editing!

North8000 (talk) 17:40, 30 March 2024 (UTC)