Wikipedia:Proseline

This is an essay.

It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.

Shortcuts

This page in a nutshell: When writing articles, begin paragraphs with the date sparingly. Instead, condense the text and focus on the main ideas.

A textbook example of proseline in the Trial of Saddam Hussein article (November 7, 2006). Note the series of short paragraphs starting with dates.

As an encyclopedia that can be edited at any moment by anyone anywhere, it is possible for a Wikipedia article to be written or produced on a particular current event mere hours, or even minutes, after the event occurs. Unfortunately, the inevitable scramble to add up-to-the-minute information to appropriate articles can often result in something we shall call proseline (/ˈproʊzlaɪn/ PROHZ-lyne)—segments of articles that attempt to be (and should be) prose, but end up looking like timelines. Being comprehensive and up-to-date is perfectly reasonable and okay to a point, but proseline tends to degrade the quality of the articles in which they reside by interrupting the natural flow with unnecessarily choppy sentences and paragraphs.

The origin of proseline

Proseline typically originates from a scramble to add new information to articles as soon as events happen. An editor normally will not add new information in the form of entire paragraphs or sections because either:

An editor feels they must be first to add this new event and writing a full paragraph would let another editor beat them
An editor does not have the time or desire to elaborate further

Or most commonly:

There just isn't anything beyond a On Date X, Event Y happened.

Sometimes waiting for a story to develop will prevent proseline (and also false information) from entering articles on Wikipedia, but the tendency to keep Wikipedia current is irresistible to many. If I decide to wait for more information, one thinks, someone else will add it anyway. Thus, I might as well add it myself.

How does one spot proseline?

There are normally three types of proseline:

Most often proseline can be detected as a series of one-sentence paragraphs, often containing a date or year.
Sometimes proseline is a bit sneakier, however, showing up as bulleted lists. This second type of proseline is a problem because we have an unenumerated list where an actual paragraph of prose would do.
The third form of proseline, and the most difficult to identify, is when a number of sentences within the same paragraph start with a date or year.

At all times, proseline must be identified stylistically, as it is not specific to any particular formatting technique or grammatical construction. (See below.)

What proseline is not

Another example of proseline, from a 2022 version of Iran–United States relations, which as of May 2024 has still not been fixed.

The endorsement of the elimination of proseline should not translate to an endorsement of the elimination of timelines on Wikipedia. There is no cut-and-dried formula for when timelines are appropriate, but if a vast amount of basic chronological information is available and one takes great care, encyclopedic and informational timelines could be created (see Timeline of the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy or Timeline of the September 11, 2001 attacks). Perhaps one way to help determine the appropriateness of a timeline is to think about the degree to which the reader will benefit from knowing the exact date, time, and order of events.

Regarding the second form of proseline, it is not a matter of short sentences; concise writing is allowed and encouraged. Writers on Wikipedia, in academia, and elsewhere often make the mistake of believing that long sentences signal knowledge, insight or wisdom on the part of the writer. More often, long sentences indicate poor writing and a lack of clarity. Proseline, on the other hand, can appear in both long and short segments—as an awful example of narrative transition between adjacent reported facts, and a lack of cohesiveness within a given paragraph, section, or article.

What should be done?

In short, the best way to deal with proseline is to convert it to either prose or a timeline, depending on which is more appropriate. Perhaps you could try combining a section of proseline into paragraph and prose form just to see what happens.

Avoid leaving sections and articles as just series of short sentences without bullets. If a list is beginning to form, make a list with bullets (asterisks [*] in wiki-markup); that contributes to the coherence and organization of the associated article, even if ultimately the section should end up as prose.

Often, the dates included become unimportant when a final resolution occurs. For example, events and stops during a political campaign become less important in an encyclopedia once the election takes place. These small events should then be summarized, removing many or all of the dates. Another example is article coverage of an ongoing war. Each battle or engagement may be added to the article, almost giving the appearance of newspaper dispatches. The result can be very large, overly detailed article sections that will be difficult ever to condense.

Example of a proseline and a possible resolution

The following is a hypothetical example of a proseline that you might see in an article (on the left) and a rewritten section that incorporates the events into a readable paragraph.

On January 9, 1989, Kujo held a press conference to announce that he would run in the 1990 gubernatorial election against incumbent Dio Brando.

On February 14, 1989, Kujo was endorsed by Noriaki Kakyoin and the Speedwagon Foundation.

On March 20, 1989, Dio Brando said that Kujo was a "pathetic worm" and had "no chance" to defeat him.

On May 6, 1989, polling indicated that Brando had a 17-point lead on Kujo.

On July 9, 1989, attorney general Hol Horse resigned during a campaign finance investigation.

On August 13, 1989, Hol Horse was disbarred.

On September 12, 1989, Brando was involved in the "greatly embarrassing" Cairo Incident.

On November 13, 1989, Kujo received wide press coverage for "heroic resolve" after a November 6 incident in which he saved the life of French ambassador Jean-Pierre Polnareff.

In January 1990, polls indicated that 65% of voters favored Kujo, with many citing the Cairo Incident and the Hol Horse scandals as a factor in their change of opinion.

Kujo held a press conference on January 9, 1989, to announce that he would run in the 1990 gubernatorial election against incumbent Dio Brando. In February, he received the endorsement of Noriaki Kakyoin and the Speedwagon Foundation; Brando said in a March interview that Kujo was a "pathetic worm" who had "no chance" of defeating him.

However, a series of scandals soon occurred in the Brando administration; in July, attorney general Hol Horse resigned during a campaign finance investigation (and was disbarred in August). Additionally, Brando's own involvement in the September 1989 Cairo Incident damaged his credibility. Meanwhile, Kujo received wide press coverage for "heroic resolve" after a November 6 incident in which he saved the life of French ambassador Jean-Pierre Polnareff.

By January 1990, polls indicated that 65% of voters favored Kujo, with many citing the Cairo Incident and the Hol Horse scandals as a factor in their change of opinion.