Improving Articles

peterchen

Just look at the ITL article*. I'm sick of it. Although the low entrance barrier reduces maintenance costs, it's the core of the problem. And I have a solution. A set of pre-editors, that are allowed to accept or reject articles based solely on their personal taste. no other rules, no questions asked. They can sign with their known name, a chosen nick, or not at all. In case of rejection, they can add a detailed reasoning, or vogon poetry, or whatever they see fit. The selection of the pre-editors should by no means be transparent. Setting up variosu shadow elections can be helpful to occupy and distract the masses. Revocation of power can be immediate, but should be rare, and generally not announced to the public. Signed The Undersigner

*) you expect me to post a link to that?

It's a royal pain to watch a sex drugs and rock'n'roll design decay into an aids crack and techno implementation [sighist] [Agile Programming] [doxygen]

Paul Riley

peterchen wrote: you expect me to post a link to that? You expect me to bother looking for it, if it's that bad? ;P I'm not sure I get the point of your message. What's wrong with the current editors being given more freedom to hack articles? I wonder if editors should be able to temporarily remove an article from view and then if a given number of them agree that it holds no benefit to the site as a whole, just get rid of it. Paul Pleasently caving in, I come undone - Queens of the Stone Age, No One Knows

Lost User

Nice doxygen article BTW. :-D :-D :-D

When I am king, you will be first against the wall.

Brian Delahunty

The editors will probably remove it. There was talk previously of having all articles "held" until an editor can take a quick look at it and then post it in the unedited section as long as it's not a total pile of crap... not sure how that's progressing at the moment though. Regards, Brian Dela :-)
Run naked in the snow until you're sweating like a stuck pig and can't seem to catch your breath. When the flu becomes pneumonia, they can cure that with a shot. - Roger Wright

peterchen

Brian Delahunty wrote: until an editor can take a quick look at it and then post it in the unedited section as long as it's not a total pile of crap That would be an easy solution - and IMO the restriction is necessary only for "article newbies" - maybe st. like "Submission wizard - if you have 3 approved articles up" I have no problem with "badrticles now and then, but once upon a time, a Codeproject article was something with a good reputation. My post was a (not really serious) attempt to solve the problem at a completely different point: change user behavior. Step 1) create FUD to make them controllable Step 2) control at will :cool:

It's a royal pain to watch a sex drugs and rock'n'roll design decay into an aids crack and techno implementation [sighist] [Agile Programming] [doxygen]