"the sites where men are most dominant – Wikipedia and Reddit – are on the whole very dry and text-based. ...The sites where women predominate ...Pinterest is full of gorgeous, nourishing images uploaded by contributors."
While I agree with the point that more images and more attractive layout would help attract female visitors/editors, I do not like the language the author used here. Why is text portrayed as "dry" while images as "nourishing"? Personally I prefer text much more over image when I am trying to gain information on a subject. Text is straightforward, precise and quickly processed. Unless I am browsing a geography, food or history article I turn off the image all together. Most of the time they don't tell me anything more than the text.
Wikipedia's purpose is to provide information and knowledge. Not entertainment.
While I agree with the point that more images and more attractive layout would help attract female visitors/editors, I do not like the language the author used here. Why is text portrayed as "dry" while images as "nourishing"? Personally I prefer text much more over image when I am trying to gain information on a subject. Text is straightforward, precise and quickly processed. Unless I am browsing a geography, food or history article I turn off the image all together. Most of the time they don't tell me anything more than the text.
Wikipedia's purpose is to provide information and knowledge. Not entertainment.