User talk:Jmco

Arial
''In general, most professional graphic designers will not use Arial preferring Helvetica (usually numbered version), Univers, Frutiger (numbered version), Syntax, Thesis, Myriad, Interstate, or many other better designed fonts. But the ubiquity and mindless overuse of of Arial forces many to use it in pre-existing documents and web sites. Arial, in a way, has become the Helvetica of the early 21st century. Only not as well drawn as these other exceptional types.''

I don't really disagree with the sentiment, but the paragraph above doesn't belong in the Arial article. It has a number of problems:


 * In general – superfluous, given that you say most.
 * most professional graphic designers will not use Arial – unverifiable.
 * preferring [list of fonts] – unverifiable.
 * better designed fonts – opinion.
 * mindless overuse – opinion & hyperbole.
 * of of – typo.
 * the ubiquity ...of Arial forces many to use it – unverifiable hyperbole, with a weasel word ("many").
 * ...in pre-existing documents and web sites – dubious: you're saying the documents/sites weren't using Arial originally, but then their authors were forced to use Arial, and the reason they were forced to use it was because Arial is so ubiquitous and overused? That doesn't make sense, and is also a circular argument (Arial is overused because it is overused). You also seem to be saying that people have no choice but to use Arial, yet professionals do have a choice and choose not to.
 * Arial, in a way, has become the Helvetica of the early 21st century – unencyclopedic tone, and unverifiable.
 * Only not as well drawn as these other exceptional types – sentence fragment, opinion, hyperbole.

Dubious claims, opinion and hyperbole (including generalizations) must be avoided. Unverifiable material must be attributed to reliable sources. That is, if it's true and noteworthy that most professional graphic designers 1. don't use Arial, 2. prefer certain other fonts, and 3. consider those other fonts to be better drawn, then it shouldn't be hard to find a newspaper, trade magazine, or edited book (not a self-published blog or op-ed piece), that says so. Likewise, reliable sources should be found for any explanations of Arial's ubiquity. —mjb (talk) 20:28, 27 September 2010 (UTC)