Just 100 more to go...
-
c2423 wrote:
encourages shorter, less complicated articles?
The article approval process should catch must of these types of articles. However, many such articles have been approved by sympathetic users teaming up just for the points and status
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
IMO there is nothing pathetic about that. IMO an article should have the length the subject deserves. Here are some facts: 1. the instructions for an "article needing approval":
Article Moderation: Should this article be published?
\* Is the goal of the article clear? \* Could the article help someone in their day-to-day work? \* Is the code and methodology explained? \* Is the formatting (text, code, images) OK?If yes then click to publish. If one item needs improving, leave an encouraging comment to the author.
Make Article Publicly Available
Purpose: to stop the publication of obviously inappropriate material, plagiarised content or articles that are clearly not an actual article. If the author has genuinely tried to provide a decent article, even if they may need some encouraging to improve it, then let it through. Read more...it does not mention article length. 2. The article wizard imposes a lower limit of 100 words. If CP wants longer articles, the obvious thing to do is raise the limit in the wizard. :)
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
Prolific encyclopedia fixture proof-reader browser patron addict?
We all depend on the beast below.
-
Actually 48 or 49 seems to be the lower end of the Legend status.
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"Man who follows car will be exhausted." - Confucius
This legend[^] did only 18. In theory all it takes is one excellent article, and patience. Patience is where most legends fail, they insist on writing more articles. :laugh:
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
Prolific encyclopedia fixture proof-reader browser patron addict?
We all depend on the beast below.
-
Sacha's a new dad and Daniel is writing a book. Quick, strike now while you have the chance.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
lol - I'm planning on it, later today I hope... (Then I will hopefully have a little free time) But there are lots of other great articles out there. I'm putting my money on either Daniel's latest MTVT article, or SpiroGraph Shapes by Ken Johnson! I'd need a whole new section to win, as well as some prizes that I could actually use! :laugh: (I'm just chuffed I got third for the best overall article last month! :-D)
-
IMO there is nothing pathetic about that. IMO an article should have the length the subject deserves. Here are some facts: 1. the instructions for an "article needing approval":
Article Moderation: Should this article be published?
\* Is the goal of the article clear? \* Could the article help someone in their day-to-day work? \* Is the code and methodology explained? \* Is the formatting (text, code, images) OK?If yes then click to publish. If one item needs improving, leave an encouraging comment to the author.
Make Article Publicly Available
Purpose: to stop the publication of obviously inappropriate material, plagiarised content or articles that are clearly not an actual article. If the author has genuinely tried to provide a decent article, even if they may need some encouraging to improve it, then let it through. Read more...it does not mention article length. 2. The article wizard imposes a lower limit of 100 words. If CP wants longer articles, the obvious thing to do is raise the limit in the wizard. :)
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
Prolific encyclopedia fixture proof-reader browser patron addict?
We all depend on the beast below.
I agree, an article should be as long as necessary. As someone said here about resume lengths; They should be like womens skirts, short enough to be interesting but long enough to cover the subject. However, it seems some articles get approved that don't meet the requirements. My theory is they are approved by others for friendship, nationality, or something other than merit.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
-
I'm awarding you a negative man point for knowing what bath soap is. And one less for myself by proxy.
Being a man means knowing about things that aren't about being a man so you can maintain some kind of situational awareness where possible man point deductions can occur. If nothing else, I *gain* main points for being aware of the existance of bath soap so as to avoid escribing it.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001 -
Being a man means knowing about things that aren't about being a man so you can maintain some kind of situational awareness where possible man point deductions can occur. If nothing else, I *gain* main points for being aware of the existance of bath soap so as to avoid escribing it.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001 -
Finally submitted my first article. Just 100 more to go 'til legend status (give or take). Does anybody else think that having such a high points requirement (even for silver) encourages shorter, less complicated articles? Chris
c2423 wrote:
Finally submitted my first article.
We all started there, with the first article. :)
c2423 wrote:
Does anybody else think that having such a high points requirement (even for silver) encourages shorter, less complicated articles?
Not for me. I write for writing, not for the article count. It made sense to break apart certain articles, but that wasn't for the counter, that was just because seemed logical and it allowed me to get feedback early so I could incorporate it in the subsequent articles. Marc
-
I agree, an article should be as long as necessary. As someone said here about resume lengths; They should be like womens skirts, short enough to be interesting but long enough to cover the subject. However, it seems some articles get approved that don't meet the requirements. My theory is they are approved by others for friendship, nationality, or something other than merit.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
I think the fundamental flaw in the approval system is a single person can approve, even if it is a bad article, which already got downvoted and heavily criticized. I would prefer a voting system, where all voters (say silver+ authors) can vote -2/-1/0/1/2 (multiplied by color weight, up to 8 for platinum), and an article needs say 12 (or 20) points to get approved. That way: - not a single person can approve all by himself; - a bad article can be voted down making it less likely it will get approved later on. :)
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
Prolific encyclopedia fixture proof-reader browser patron addict?
We all depend on the beast below.
-
c2423 wrote:
Finally submitted my first article.
We all started there, with the first article. :)
c2423 wrote:
Does anybody else think that having such a high points requirement (even for silver) encourages shorter, less complicated articles?
Not for me. I write for writing, not for the article count. It made sense to break apart certain articles, but that wasn't for the counter, that was just because seemed logical and it allowed me to get feedback early so I could incorporate it in the subsequent articles. Marc
I agree wholeheartedly with this - in fact if I get good enough feedback* on this first one, I have 3 or 4 follow on articles. My issue however is that people less interested in quality and more interested in ratings may try to abuse the system. Two articles barely good enough to get approved still give more points then a good article with a few up votes. *Just so we're clear - I'm not interested in up votes. I define good enough feedback as any positive comment from one of the members with a generally good reputation such as yourself.
-
I think the fundamental flaw in the approval system is a single person can approve, even if it is a bad article, which already got downvoted and heavily criticized. I would prefer a voting system, where all voters (say silver+ authors) can vote -2/-1/0/1/2 (multiplied by color weight, up to 8 for platinum), and an article needs say 12 (or 20) points to get approved. That way: - not a single person can approve all by himself; - a bad article can be voted down making it less likely it will get approved later on. :)
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
Prolific encyclopedia fixture proof-reader browser patron addict?
We all depend on the beast below.
I thought there was a time when approval required a certain number approvers? If I remember it was also criticized as being too strict. There has to be a happy medium somewhere.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
-
I thought there was a time when approval required a certain number approvers? If I remember it was also criticized as being too strict. There has to be a happy medium somewhere.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
Mark Nischalke wrote:
required a certain number approvers?
Maybe, I don't recall that. Another factor that may reduce wrongful approval is publishing the approver's identity. That is what reduced the univoting problem on articles. :)
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
Prolific encyclopedia fixture proof-reader browser patron addict?
We all depend on the beast below.
-
I agree wholeheartedly with this - in fact if I get good enough feedback* on this first one, I have 3 or 4 follow on articles. My issue however is that people less interested in quality and more interested in ratings may try to abuse the system. Two articles barely good enough to get approved still give more points then a good article with a few up votes. *Just so we're clear - I'm not interested in up votes. I define good enough feedback as any positive comment from one of the members with a generally good reputation such as yourself.
c2423 wrote:
My issue however is that people less interested in quality and more interested in ratings may try to abuse the system.
I really have never seen that happening. It takes a certain amount of will power to write an article, and mediocre articles tend to get slammed pretty quickly, discouraging people from even bothering to write. So, I guess I wouldn't really worry about it. :) Marc
-
Mark Nischalke wrote:
required a certain number approvers?
Maybe, I don't recall that. Another factor that may reduce wrongful approval is publishing the approver's identity. That is what reduced the univoting problem on articles. :)
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
Prolific encyclopedia fixture proof-reader browser patron addict?
We all depend on the beast below.
Luc Pattyn wrote:
publishing the approver's identity.
Good idea. Anyone from the staff listening in?
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
