Article Writing

Pete O'Hanlon19-Jul-16 3:14

19-Jul-16 3:14

It depends on the reviewer. If you get good reviewers, they generally look to make sure that it fits the site guidelines and that it seeks to address what you say it should address. If they have domain knowledge, they will generally offer practical advice if necessary. If you get a bad reviewer, they will either criticise your submission without really reading it or they will approve it when it needs work done on it.

This space for rent

shash kant19-Jul-16 3:22

19-Jul-16 3:22

Thanks Pete for your quick response. I understand, depending on the kind of reviewer he may choose to ignore it but what is expected from the reviewer? Is he supposed to do a technical review also or it is left to his discretion?

Pete O'Hanlon19-Jul-16 3:28

19-Jul-16 3:28

As I said, it's best if the technical review is done by someone with domain knowledge. So, while I will read through and approve (or not) articles on F#, as an example, I am in now way an F# expert so it's pointless me trying to correct you technically unless there is something that really jumps out at me. If, however, you're writing about something like C# or WPF, then as I have extensive experience in these, I will generally look deeper in the content.

This space for rent

Richard MacCutchan19-Jul-16 3:17

Richard MacCutchan

19-Jul-16 3:17

Article reviews are carried about by any CodeProject member with the required permission levels. It will first be a format/presentation review, and if that is all satisfactory then the reviewer will check it for technical merit.

shash kant19-Jul-16 3:24

19-Jul-16 3:24

Thanks Richard, this answers my query.

modified 23-Jul-16 2:41am.

Jochen Arndt19-Jul-16 3:32

Jochen Arndt

19-Jul-16 3:32

The general process of approving is described at "23. Why is there content moderation at the CodeProject?" in the Code Project Article FAQ[^].

Because pending articles are reviewed by different persons, it depends on them what they do. It would be fine if articles are also technical reviewed. I for example will not approve articles where I did not know much about the topic hoping that others with more knowledge can evaluate the technical aspects.

There are actually also members approving articles even without checking for basic requirements like formatting and external images (see the post below).

But in general the author is responsible for being technical correct. He should be familar with the subject and invest some time for research if necessary. If there are technical errors, articles will usually get corresponding comments and may be voted accordingly. So any author would be well advised to be technical correct.

shash kant22-Jul-16 20:42

22-Jul-16 20:42

Thanks Jochen

Nelek20-Jul-16 21:26

20-Jul-16 21:26

Speaking about me (and only about me)...

When I review the queue I usually go for the visible part. What (for me, non-english speaker) means: Easy to read, complete sentences, a certain continuity in the text, no misspellings, code snippets ok, indention and things like that.
I am not so deep in many of the topics, so I prefer not to judge the technical content.

M.D.V.

If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.

shash kant22-Jul-16 20:43

22-Jul-16 20:43

Thanks Nelek, this is helpful.

Nelek23-Jul-16 4:53

Wave of approved articles

23-Jul-16 4:53

You are welcome

M.D.V.

Nelek19-Jul-16 1:59

19-Jul-16 1:59

In the "latest articles" on main page there is some (already approved) articles where pictures are missing, code with double carriage return, wrong indentations and so on...

On the other hand (it might be just a funny coincidence), most of those articles have the same owners.

@Sean-Ewington can you please have a look, it might be worth to check for "friendly approvals" or sucket puppets?
If not... at least to mark them for correction Smile | :)

On the other hand... I raise another time the suggestion of making visible for a certain group of people the list of who approved the different apportations. I think it can help to get a bit of quality back.

M.D.V.

Sean Ewington19-Jul-16 4:12

19-Jul-16 4:12

Which articles?

Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject

Nelek19-Jul-16 4:21

19-Jul-16 4:21

Now I am on hurry and I won't be online for one or two days... I will search the links in my history and post them to you.

They were on the time I wrote the message in the "latest articles" list. One of the guys has answered me about the format and is already correcting them

M.D.V.

Nelek19-Jul-16 21:38

19-Jul-16 21:38

Hi Sean,

the users have reacted to my messages and corrected the format in some of the apportations.

The articles are:
Create a custom report for displaying SSRS report usage details in SharePoint 2013[^]
SharePoint Search - Content Processing fails intermittently[^]
Tutorial | Quick start-up for .NET core on Windows and Linux[^]
JTable as HTML <select> element[^]
Changing JTable Layout[^]
JTable Spring Hibernate Demo[^]

M.D.V.

Sean Ewington20-Jul-16 5:06

20-Jul-16 5:06

I've touched up the formatting on a couple that were out of sorts. It looks like a few others did it for themselves and there's a plagiarist in there that I deleted Smile | :)

Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject

Pete O'Hanlon20-Jul-16 5:28

20-Jul-16 5:28

You deleted the plagiarist? Sean, I like this new more assertive approach.

This space for rent

Nelek20-Jul-16 21:22

20-Jul-16 21:22

As I said, two of the guys corrected the articles quite fast.

My point is... how they did get approved having such format problems?

In my opinion... Last time articles are being approved quite fast and quality is being reduced. And I don't speaking about the technical contents only about the visible form (format, indention and things like that).
That's why I told another time about the suggestion of the "approvals list", as we say in germany "we could give them one on the between the ears" for blind "OK" votes.

M.D.V.

Sean Ewington21-Jul-16 3:04

21-Jul-16 3:04

I've asked Chris to make some changes to address this exact problem, but until he does we're going to have to chase things around after the fact.

Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject

Nelek21-Jul-16 3:54

how to delete subcribe code project mail?

21-Jul-16 3:54

I guess this has no high position in the ToDo Smile | :)

I'll continue opening my eyes as always Wink | ;)

M.D.V.

mahou8218-Jul-16 22:23

mahou82

18-Jul-16 22:23

y mail address have full enough mail of code project. can i delete subcribe mail?

Re: how to delete subcribe code project mail?

Pete O'Hanlon18-Jul-16 23:14

Daily build mail didn't enlist my article

18-Jul-16 23:14

I'm sorry but you have posted this in the wrong forum. Your question has to do with the site and how you interact with it, so the place to ask is in the Bugs and Suggestions[^] forum.

This space for rent

Rasik Bihari Tiwari18-Jul-16 21:11

Rasik Bihari Tiwari

18-Jul-16 21:11

I wrote a new article available at below mentioend URL. It came online this sunday (17th July). Since then I checked both the build mails received on Monday and today but it didn't list my article. My article's URL is as below. Can someone help me in getting this resolved.
Tasks and Task Parallel Library (TPL) : Multi-threading was never this easy in .Net[^]

Re: Daily build mail didn't enlist my article

Sean Ewington19-Jul-16 4:04

Re: Daily build mail didn't enlist my article

19-Jul-16 4:04

Looking at the revision history, is the 17th the first time it ever went live? The way our newsletter works is that it looks at the creation date. If you create an article outside of the week / day of a newsletter, it won't include it.

What I can do is go and mark your article as updated and it will be in tomorrow's daily build as an update. Would that be acceptable?

Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject

Rasik Bihari Tiwari19-Jul-16 14:29

Rasik Bihari Tiwari

19-Jul-16 14:29

Sure! That will be great. Thank you so much for your quick response. Appreciate your kind consideration for this issue.

Re: Daily build mail didn't enlist my article

Sean Ewington20-Jul-16 3:51