A Conversation for Editorial Feedback

'Is there newer, better information available that should be included?'

Post 1

RFJS__ - trying to write an unreadable book, finding proofreading tricky

This quotation is from the Update Forum; my query is whether 'newer, better' necessarily means 'newer AND better', or whether it means 'newer AND/OR better'. As stated in Post 25 of F48874?thread=415936&post=5281817#p5281817 , I think it's doubtful that A412543 has the breadth and detail that now tend to be asked for in Peer Review, and, while meaning no offence to its creator -- who has left the building -- worry that the first interpretation of the title sentence would lead to FF7's receiving markedly sketchier coverage than is present in A665228 and the in-development A2593262 simply because an Entry on it already exists. With further FF-related Entries planned (see the linked-to thread) it would seem odd that existing coverage could be updated or replaced so as to fit current conceptions of what's required only if 'newer' information is included; but the wording could be taken either way.


'Is there newer, better information available that should be included?'

Post 2

Number Six

My smiley - 2cents is that it means newer and/or better. Part of the reason for the update scheme in the first place was that early EG articles wouldn't have a prayer of getting in these days, and are in desperate need of updating.

But then I'm not really an authority on these matters - hopefully one will be along shortly smiley - cheers

smiley - mod


'Is there newer, better information available that should be included?'

Post 3

Smij - Formerly Jimster

That is deliberately kept vague, it helps ensure we can be as flexible as possible on a case-by-case basis.


'Is there newer, better information available that should be included?'

Post 4

RFJS__ - trying to write an unreadable book, finding proofreading tricky

Okay; so the appropriate course of action would be to attempt the Entry and submit it to Peer Review?


'Is there newer, better information available that should be included?'

Post 5

Smij - Formerly Jimster

What we've been discussing is using the Update Forum as a mini-Peer Review. In cases where the original entry is still a part of the rewrite, it makes sense to keep that out of Peer review and effectively critique just the new material. Another form of 'update' is to rewrite an entry to that it more closely matches the current style of Edited Entry. In the case of an out-and-out rewrite, then Peer Review is the best route, so long as it's flagged to us that it's a rewrite rather than a new entry.


'Is there newer, better information available that should be included?'

Post 6

Number Six

Hey, look, an authority! smiley - bigeyes

smiley - mod


'Is there newer, better information available that should be included?'

Post 7

RFJS__ - trying to write an unreadable book, finding proofreading tricky

Okay; cheers, everyone. smiley - cheers I think (and have mentioned in F48874?thread=415936&post=5282780#p5282780 , Post 28) that trying to interweave information into the structure of the existing Entry would be more trouble than it would be worth, so I'll be opting for the full-rewrite-and-Peer-Review route.


Key: Complain about this post