h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

The "Liver" article was mentioned as an example of an edited entry in dire need of updating. Here's another one I just discovered.

A68492 - Traffic.

Just shows how our editing standards have changed over time.

Woodpigeon

This made me think of something...

Is the updating system there for:

* People to reccommend that entries are updated (ie. 'This traffic entry ought to have more in it'), but without volunteering themselves OR..
* For people who can see how an entry should be updated (ie. 'You should have mentioned this referance, and that paragraph needs changing this way').

These seem to me to be two distinctly difference uses and functions.

Well, there is a small similarity - no (or relatively little) investment on the part of the person recommending the update. Somebody else still has to do the work. The first point you make is clearly the lazy man's option and should be ignored by the update volunteers.

Expanding on your point however, what if there was a little checkbox on a forum posting page ("Post to a Conversation") against edited entries that should be ticked if you want your comments on further editing to be noted by an Update Volunteer? Therefore the comment can be posted in the entry's forum, but the message is also put into an update queue for the Updaters to decide yay or nay?

I agree the first point takes a lot less effort than the second, but I think the first point is the one that's mainly being proposed in the proposal. The idea is that you nominate the entry to be updated, and it's then done by people in the UN forum...

I think your other idea is a bit clumsy, and requires people to already be familar with the forums. A simple 'update page' button on each edited entry would be a lot more user-friendly IMO.

>>>I think the first point is the one that's mainly being proposed in the proposal.

I agree - if that is what is being proposed, it will be a unfortunate. More substantiation is definitely needed, but I don't know how anyone can differentiate between a properly commented recommendation and a lazy-man's recommendation.

If the Update Page button brought someone straight into the Guide ML of the entry, and gave people the opportunity to make the change themselves (into an unedited copy, of course), would that work? Then, the updaters could see the new page, and compare it to the old page, and decide if the changes are worthwhile. Just a thought...

Yeah that was the kind of thing I was thinking of. Good idea.

Looks good, I remember reading a terrible article about deodorent, will go and look it up, as the author didn't know much

Hi Everyone,

Sorry I've let this discussion slip over a number of weeks. I've now read all discussions here relating to the proposed updating scheme and I've responded in the forums of entry A760402 (an excellent entry summarising the themes raised here, put together by Frankie Roberto). It would be great to see you there and hear your thoughts on the next proposal.

Thanks
Anna