bah, humbug. all right...I'll add my two cents. Factual writeups are great, but most people get very confused about the style. A bland, dry laundry list of information is not interesting, and in no way separates
Everything from your common
dictionary or
encyclopaedia. If you care about your topic, make it witty and interesting, and present it in a way in which the reader doesn't feel like he's stuck in a
lecture hall; generally, it will then receive the votes it deserves.
I've come across this in academic writing all the time; the subject can be absolutely fascinating, but bad prose sucks all the joy out of it. The best book I've ever read was on Hittite history; it combined dry, otherwise mind-numbing archaeological fact with concise and interesting remarks.
Lastly, fact is fine; but if you tell me only that an emu is a large, flightless bird, I've come away no more informed than I was before. If you tell me about its habits, habitat, and taste when cooked into a decent chile, you will have given me facts which I can use and then apply.
p.s. Mind, I fall far short from the ideal, but that doesn't mean I will stop writing factual nodes. Quite frankly, I don't really care if they're upvoted, but if not, they should be re-examined if not rewritten, because there's probably something off. All right. Enough of that, then.