Hi guys! I am recording spoken articles for Wikipedia and assume that a lot of people using that feature are listening because reading of a screen might pose a challenge. So I wanted to ask a few questions:
1. Is that actually a useful feature as text-to-speech software is getting better? 2. Do you have any particular points that bug you about the way information is being relayed in the spoken Wikipedia? 3. Do you have any tips, how to make spoken articles more useful when scientific notation or other visual representations are being used? 4. What kind of articles do you think are the most important to be recorded? (I record in German and we don't have a lot of spoken articles. Also suggestions for areas where some useful shorter articles exist would be nice of course, haha)
Thanks a lot!
DariusA925 points2y ago
I've never heard of spoken Wikipedia before. Interesting. To answer your question, it really depends on the individual. I usually prefer reading the text using my screen reader, but there are people who like human voices better.
BrennanBetelgeuse [OP]3 points2y ago
Thank you for your reply! Seems to be more niche than I thought haha
retrolental_morose2 points2y ago
I hate audiobooks generally, so the idea of Human narrated nonfiction is absolutely not for me.
snow6712 points2y ago
You can control the speed of screen readers, so I could see that as a reason to choose it over recorded audio.
Is each section a separate audio clip? You can skip over content easily with a screen reader.
Our mission is to provide everyone with access to large- scale community websites for the good of humanity. Without ads, without tracking, without greed.