[etep]

I disagree with the nitpick. Electricity is not a technical term. In its common usage, it encompasses many effects and broadly invokes many technical concepts, i.e. among them EMF or voltage, current, electromagnetic waves, etc. etc.

This article is not written for physicists, engineers, or anyone else so technically trained. If it were, it would read as follows: "Electricity is a vague term used to variously refer to the many aspects of electromagnetic phenomena."

If you want to keep that sentence, and cover your bases, you could reword as "the flow of electric charge, the potential to cause the same." And in any case, the escape clause already exists as "there’s so much behind that simple statement."

[emcrazyone]

What proof do you have the article wasn't written for physicists, engineers or anyone else so technically trained?

This is the basis for not agreeing? If it is, then it seems you drew an assumption then formed an opinon that is contrary to many college level courses, texts, and teachings I've sat through where electricity is carefully described as the force alone.

[cbd1984]

> What proof do you have the article wasn't written for physicists, engineers or anyone else so technically trained?

It's defining the term 'electricity', for a start.