| 
Posted 5 Weeks Ago by Not-so-bald-eagle
Contradictory advice is just part and parcel of the PR system but can be especially daunting for a newcomer when it is about one of the basics.
There seems to be some confusion about entry updating. Scouts' advice doesn't seem to take the sub-ed position into acount and vice-versa. Are there any particular guideslines?
Example:http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/brune...48874?thread=7038313&skip=0&show=20
 
|
 
|  | |
| |
Posted 5 Weeks Ago by lil ~ ACE/Scout {Auntie Giggles}
I was trying to politely say 'Let the sub-eds deal with Updates' as they are very different from the normal PR Entries. They have to be fully polished within the Update thread as they by-pass the normal sub-editing system, and are not put up for 'recommendation' by a Scout.
Please read RF21 where you will also find this paragraph:
'It is vital that all editing is done before the entry is accepted for the update, as it will not pass onto a Sub-editor for final proofing like any other Entry that passes through Peer Review. That means that all the punctuation and grammar must be spot on, that links and GuideML be correctly inserted and that - to be quite blunt - the update is perfect.'
I hope you find this of some assistance.
|
| | |
| |
Posted 5 Weeks Ago by Not-so-bald-eagle
As it's not me who's updating an entry, I'm not the one needing assistance. The writer of the entry in question probably has little idea of who is who, and the advice was - let's face it - contradictory. The sub-ed involved in that thread has since changed his original stance on the picture for instance. It's not a criticism, I fully appreciate that volunteers put time and effort into doing a good job for the guide.
Nonetheless, the volunteers (scouts vs sub-ed basically) involved don't seem very sure themselves about the criteria for updating. It wasn't a criticism just a hint to all be talking the same language.
Note that I was very cautious in my first post. But after the various developments on that thread, it seemed better to raise the matter here rather than have any appearance of squabbling in PR.
No problem, I'll leave the thread alone and let those who know best take care of it.
|
| | |
| |
Posted 5 Weeks Ago by lil ~ ACE/Scout {Auntie Giggles}
Galaxy Babe and Gnomon are sub-editors. As a Scout, I wouldn't normally have ventured into an Update, but I was concerned about you and Nbb being in there and giving advice which might, or might not, be relevant ie:
In normal PR threads not using Guide ML isn't an issue. In Updates, it is.
Which is why I was asking you both to slow down until the sub-editors could get in there to assist.
|
| | |
| |
Posted 5 Weeks Ago by Not-so-bald-eagle
I don't really understand the reason for your last post.
Here, I suggested that the people involved clarified the position re updates to avoid putting off a newcomer.
You are referring to your 'whoa' comment in the PR thread apparently.
I think, if you take a 2nd look at the thread, you'll find that (post 3) I linked to the previous thread and said (post 4) the entry/update was interesting.
After Gnomon's rather terse post 6, I pointed out that the picture had a breast on it and breasts wern't mentioned in the text.
*After* the writer had mentioned using other photos I mentioned copyright infringement (post 13).
Post 15 was your 'whoa' post.
I again pointed out the 'breast' (post 16). I'll admit, I had the impression that nbb and I were the only ones who had actually looked at both texts.
In post 17, you said nbb and I were giving good advice.
And I haven't said anything substantial since (a friendly word about not worrying about 'internal clarifications'). I never mentioned Guide ML and, frankly, I have the impression that you're more annoyed by the fact that I posted here than by anything that was said on that thread.
At least my post here led to http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/brunel/RF21 being posted on the thread which will help clarify matters (something I said I wasn't experienced enough to do on my very first post on the previous thread). I can't help thinking that it would have been better had it been posted earlier.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Yesterday by Malabarista - considering the aesthetics of variable-altitude livestock
I don't think we should be telling newbies to do updates, plain and simple.
An update is more complicated than a new entry, and shouldn't be attempted by someone not yet familiar with the writing style and so on, because it doesn't get subbed.
So the way forward would probably be to encourage them to write a few different entries of their own first, before they try to update something.
As for recommending that something like A60246092 be used for an update...  It's obviously not suitable. That's just confusing the newbie.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Yesterday by lanzababy - Pirate - Scout - adrift on life's ocean
Thank you! It's lovely to see your comment Mala  I was thinking just the same myself. I find that I am rapidly becoming a grouchy old Scout. All I seem to be saying is 'Please take this out of PR!' and so on.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Yesterday by Malabarista - considering the aesthetics of variable-altitude livestock
 I know what you mean. It's hard not to sound arrogant when you really *do* know better how it's meant to go... 
|
| | |
| |
Posted Yesterday by Galaxy Babe FP Author
Indeed. I've stopped nitpicking too, and am enjoying PR much more than I was
|
| | |
| |
Posted Yesterday by lanzababy - Pirate - Scout - adrift on life's ocean
yes, I saw your last post!  It made me smile! But then I had to be mean and tell them to read the guidelines...
|
| | |
| |
Posted Yesterday by Galaxy Babe FP Author
Heh, I can smell 'em a mile off.
|
| | |
| |
| |
Key |  |  |
A: An older reply to the parent Posting
B: The parent Posting, to which this is a reply
C: A newer reply to the parent posting
D: The first reply to this Posting
| | |
Click on this icon to make a complaint about a specific Posting | |
|
Home
Reply
