User:Dreftymac/Docs/RealWorldAmbiguity

This essay in brief: When describing elements within the subject matter of an article, avoid phrases like "real world" or "actual" to describe those elements if a more specific alternate term or phrase can be used instead. The meaning of "real world" may be obvious to some, but to others it is not obvious at all.

Overview
RealWorldAmbiguity is a problem that editors should try to avoid.

Summary steps for fixing the problem:
 * 1) replace "real world", "actual" or "real life" (or other related term) with a more specific term;
 * 2) check to make sure the "replacement term" is not even more confusing, if so, go back to step 1);
 * 3) turn the first instance of that more specific term into a wiki-link that readers can follow;
 * 4) follow the link to make sure it has the correct context;

Problem
Many articles introduce the phrase "real world" (or something similar) to describe an element of the subject matter, and the phrase is implied to refer to something that should be obvious to the reader.

This is a problem because terms like "real world" and "actual" (sometimes) convey little or no information to a non-expert reader, and even an expert who knows the intended meaning gains nothing from the use of such imprecise terminology. Moreover, in some cases, the terms have the unwanted effect of being substantively meaningless and even misleading.

Examples that demonstrate this problem:
 * Studio renderings often have imperfections, but most real world pieces do not
 * In the diagrams, simplified names are used, but in real world networks, simplifications are not allowed
 * This part of the file does not contain the actual database query code.
 * A fictional character is any person who appears in a work of fiction, and is not a real-life figure.
 * while serious games are entertaining, they are actually used to copy real-life

Examples of improvements:
 * A fictional character is any person who originated from a work of fiction.
 * Studio renderings often have imperfections, but most commissioned art pieces do not.
 * in contrast to most games, serious games are meant to be entertaining as well as educational; depicting military, medical or business processes and operations.

Solution
Don't use the ambiguous phrases, use a specific term that clearly indicates the intended context. Moreover, once you have introduced the specific term, if possible, turn it into a "wiki link" that the reader can follow.

Rationale
RealWorldAmbiguity makes material more difficult for readers who are unfamiliar with the subject matter. It also impairs the credibility, tone, and professionalism of the article.

Reasons for usage
Some editors probably introduce phrases like "real world" and "actual" because the idea they are attempting to communicate is so basic to the subject matter, that it is difficult to think of a more "precise" term. What is basic to one person, however, may not be so to another. Therefore it is usually good to "step back" from the material and determine whether there are assumptions or gaps in the explanation that should be addressed.

The phrase "real world" is unfortunately quite widespread in certain categories of articles. This usually extends from habitual use among students in a particular academic discipline. This usually represents sloppy practice or habitual imprecision.

Problems with word count
Some might protest that removing "real world" might make the article text more wordy. This protest, however, reflects a "false economy," at least in an encyclopedia, because the reduced word count often comes at the expense of making too many assumptions about the level of familiarity among readers. Another expense is the lost opportunity to link to potentially informative and related Wikipedia content that would otherwise not be easily found.

Note, however, that sometimes removing or modifying "real world" usage may favorably reduce word count as well. This can be seen in the example for "fictional character" mentioned above.

Not always undesirable
The term "real world" and its synonyms do not always automatically justify changes to an article. Sometimes the phrase is appropriate because it is a formal usage, or a specific "term of art" used in fiction, law, commercial practice or other recognizable context where the exact wording of the phrase has independent relevance. Sometimes it should be simply "augmented" instead of totally removed.