# Improving Discourse documentation **URL:** \ **Category:** Site feedback\ **Created:** [April 7, 2023, 10:32am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/improving-discourse-documentation/261781 "2023-04-07T10:32:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 2
**Author:** ![Jagster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/meta/user_avatar/meta.discourse.org/jagster/32/192154_2.png) [@Jagster](https://meta.discourse.org/u/Jagster)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2023, 1:43pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/improving-discourse-documentation/261781/2 "2023-04-07T13:43:12Z")
> [@Crius](#): > > it’s not a documentation No, it is not. And that has been, and still is, the biggest lack of Discourse. I don’t know if I’m too rude now or something, but tendency of acting here is too dev-centric — if you don’t know you can always read the source at GitHub. CDCK hasn’t too much motivation to start building good documentation to users — including admins too, of course — because theirs target is hosted big corporations. So for them minimum level plus community help for freeriders (who are doing big part of bug hunting and UX propositions 😉 ) was enough. Except then we would need more freely use of tags… _Was enough_ wasn’t just typo or low level english skills. CDCK/team has started build up better documentation and I’m totally sure that after some time side topics as this will be just echoes from past. --- _[View the full topic](https://meta.discourse.org/t/improving-discourse-documentation/261781)._