I was looking at the Accordance Wikipedia page a moment ago. There are a number of places where it’s out of date and incomplete. I’ve made a few minor updates before, but I know that, technically, Wikipedia rules frown upon employees of a company updating a company page on Wikipedia. And I understand that.
So I thought I’d put out a request here to see if any of you, our users/customers, might want to freshen up the page a bit. I would still have no problem tweaking things here and there, but if some of you were to work on it, then the change history wouldn’t reflect that I had done all the work.
There are a number of things that initially strike me as needing changes:
- I know there's a balance between writing an objective, descriptive article and creating a promotional piece, but there are so many places that need improving in my opinion. For instance, the first sentence: “Accordance is a Bible study program for Apple Macintosh and iPhone, and now Windows and Android, developed by OakTree Software, Inc.” Really, this should read something to the effect of, “Accordance Bible Study Software is a study program [not 100% certain I like that designation, but...] for Windows, macOS, iOS, and Android, developed by OakTree Software, Inc."
- The above change illustrates an issue with the sidebar as well. It says “Stable release 12.x/June 2017.” Technically, though, there should be “stable release” listings for four different platforms.
- The “Operating System” section of the sidebar is out of date. That information can be found on our System Requirements page.
- In regard to the above, any macOS-centric language/descriptions needs to be adjusted to reflect that we are on four different platforms, not just one.
- Should the title of the entry/article be changed to “Accordance Bible Software”?
- Regarding program history, I am going to be putting together a more comprehensive list in conjunction with our 25th anniversary this year, and those could be added to this section.
- Obviously, “Modules available” has to be representative, but this list is very out of date.
- The “Reviews” section needs to be updated. Our reviews page would be a good source.
Although there is a “Talk” page on Wikipedia for content discussion, there might be more freedom to discuss content changes here, and I would also be much quicker to see comments here and respond if there was a question I could answer.
If any of you are up to the task of helping us improve the Accordance Wikipedia page, we thank you!