Forum:Should we have a copyediting team?: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
m (Sorry for having to do this, but I'm being forced to change my sig, and clean up after it, by Wikia Staff) |
||
| (7 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ | {{archive|Panopticon archives}}[[category:failed proposals]] | ||
A lot of files need an improvement in quality. There are numerous typing errors and grammatical error. I think we should put together a crack team of cleanup moderators. [[User:The Valeyard|The Valeyard]] 12:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC) | A lot of files need an improvement in quality. There are numerous typing errors and grammatical error. I think we should put together a crack team of cleanup moderators. [[User:The Valeyard|The Valeyard]] 12:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC) | ||
| Line 8: | Line 6: | ||
Fair enough. [[User:The Valeyard|The Valeyard]] 20:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC) | Fair enough. [[User:The Valeyard|The Valeyard]] 20:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC) | ||
:you do have a good point,categories could use clean-up, too. the timeline section ''really'' needs work. in practice,though, we do have relatively new numbers of people who edit here. | :you do have a good point, categories could use clean-up, too. the timeline section ''really'' needs work. in practice,though, we do have relatively new numbers of people who edit here. categories need clean-up, too. as for me, I will do a better job of proofreading myself and for that matter, other editors. --[[User:***Stardizzy***|***Stardizzy***]] 20:40, 2 March 2007 (UTC) | ||
I can proofread others, however, I am dreadful at proofreading myself! [[User:The Valeyard|The Valeyard]] 20:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
::I've been tweaking stuff like typos and generally inelegant writing as and when I find it, as well as fixing stuff that seems screamingly dubious or factually incorrect... obviously there have been a few issues concerning style, but anyway... It seems bad manners not to fix stuff if you know it needs doing. | |||
==Archivist's notes== | |||
Although the ''concept'' of copyediting never goes out of date, the environment of this discussion certainly has. This comes from a time on the wiki where there weren't many people around, so it got rejected simply on the basis that there weren't enough people to implement the proposal. It's certainly not the case that we now have copy editing "teams". But we do now have users like [[user:Boblipton|Boblipton]], whose major focus is copyediting. It might be possible in the current environment to resurrect this idea. | |||
On a fun note, I ''genuinely love'' that the original proposal for a "crack team" of people to correct typos itself has a typo. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}'''14:57:20 Mon '''30 May 2011 </span> | |||
Latest revision as of 04:20, 28 August 2012
A lot of files need an improvement in quality. There are numerous typing errors and grammatical error. I think we should put together a crack team of cleanup moderators. The Valeyard 12:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- Generally, most people clean up articles when they edit them, and there are only a few people who usually edit - apparently me, Stardizzy, you, and occasionally some others such as Azes13 and Sichamousacoricothingmabob - so personally I don't believe we need any "crack [teams]" of anything, really. ~ Ghelæ -talk-contribs 16:51, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough. The Valeyard 20:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- you do have a good point, categories could use clean-up, too. the timeline section really needs work. in practice,though, we do have relatively new numbers of people who edit here. categories need clean-up, too. as for me, I will do a better job of proofreading myself and for that matter, other editors. --***Stardizzy*** 20:40, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
I can proofread others, however, I am dreadful at proofreading myself! The Valeyard 20:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- I've been tweaking stuff like typos and generally inelegant writing as and when I find it, as well as fixing stuff that seems screamingly dubious or factually incorrect... obviously there have been a few issues concerning style, but anyway... It seems bad manners not to fix stuff if you know it needs doing.
Archivist's notes[[edit source]]
Although the concept of copyediting never goes out of date, the environment of this discussion certainly has. This comes from a time on the wiki where there weren't many people around, so it got rejected simply on the basis that there weren't enough people to implement the proposal. It's certainly not the case that we now have copy editing "teams". But we do now have users like Boblipton, whose major focus is copyediting. It might be possible in the current environment to resurrect this idea.
On a fun note, I genuinely love that the original proposal for a "crack team" of people to correct typos itself has a typo.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 14:57:20 Mon 30 May 2011
