|
Rather than adding attribution, you should use your own words. You were reported because you lifted whole chunks of text from other sources.
|
|
|
|
|
hi i got my mistake please activate my account to fix them.
|
|
|
|
|
When I open some questions(with useful answers), I'm getting the following message.
Quote: Sorry, the item you requested could not be found.
Yep, it's due to poor question. But here few reasons not to hide.
0) If Enquirer sees the same page when he opens his question, the above message is not useful for him. I don't think most of them checking their mail for notifications. So if we lock that question(like below), he could see the status there(with others comments).
Quote: Closed as [Poor question] by [Members]
After this, the question is only for viewing purpose.
1) When other people searching for similar questions they could see this(with answers)
2) Authorities could use the previous answer as reference for upcoming questions.
thatrajaCode converters | Education Needed
No thanks, I am all stocked up. - Luc Pattyn
When you're wrestling a gorilla, you don't stop when you're tired, you stop when the gorilla is - Henry Minute
|
|
|
|
|
I Agree completely. It is really annoying to get an email notification of a response to an answer or comment only to find that the question has been deleted.
Veni, vidi, abiit domum
|
|
|
|
|
Good suggestion, but I think it is a good idea to hide the question if it's marked as spam/abusive or off-topic, because then it really doesn't belong on CP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
A couple of things:
If you've been editing for a while and saving drafts, then you'll find you can't upload files, you need to go away and come back.
When I came back, some of my edits were gone, or munted
When you paste XML with self closing tags, it adds closing tags, ie <mytag/></mytag>
Christian Graus
My new article series is all about SQL !!!
|
|
|
|
|
The point with the self closing tags it is not only in articles, in the QA is often there as well.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
QuickTip: Oracle SQLPlus – (IF) Check for parameters to script[^]
Even the writer calls it "QuickTip"... but it is in the monthly competition for articles. Should it not be moved?
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Sadly we didn't receive a lot of database-related articles in December, so the net was cast a bit wider. We look for ten submissions for each month, but we could only make eight. We'd love to have so many database-related articles each month that there was a ferocious, thunderdome-like decision where 1000 articles enter, and only 10 articles leave.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
I am not complaining about it being in the competition. There are tips that are better/more usefull as some articles. I think they can compite together, no problem with that.
I was just asking if it should not be cathegorized /saved as a tip.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
I like the new profile popups, but who can tell at a glance what country is represented by that tiny little flag icon?
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Clicking on the member's name takes you to their profile page that has expanded info. There's only so much that can be crammed into that small popup.
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Clicking on the member's name takes you to their profile page that has expanded info.
 I should have figured that out!
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Even if do find the room to add it, please do not do so. Guessing the country for the flag is one of my favorite games. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think your IPv6 work is incomplete going by the "Your membership was initiated from the following IP address: 0.0.0.0" or you have another fault.
|
|
|
|
|
We don't use IPv6.
Can you please forward me the email and I'll hunt down the bug like the dog it is. To mix a metaphor.
|
|
|
|
|
I just got a Win 8 computer, updated to win 8.1. I set up the mail client and receive mail. But the CodeProject Daily News doesn't display most of the material. For today, I see:
CodeProject | Daily News - Apple denies working with NSA on iPhone backdoor
That is it. And even THAT isn't a hyperlink.
Anybody got a clue for me? Should it work?
(If I use a web browser to go to my mail provider, I see everything just fine).
|
|
|
|
|
I've been looking at this year's MVP list, I noticed Josh Smith on the list. It seems a bit counter-productive to include someone who hasn't posted in 2013 to the list of MVPs awarded on the basis of rep points gained in 2013. Wouldn't it be better if the MVP-er filters out members who haven't posted in the previous year (or some other, better, criteria, possibly rep gained on items posted that year - I suppose one problem would be people posting in December the previous year)?
Not wanting to pick on Josh in particular, - just he is a high-profile member who is also well known to not really have been active lately. I dare say there are others on the list like this.
|
|
|
|
|
It's always a question of "What makes a member valuable?" and for us we answered this question be tallying up the points that member received in the Author and Authority categories throughout the year.
The subtlety here is that points can still be awarded for content posted a previous year, but the truth is that of all members on CodeProject Josh's work help more people than 10,297,595 other members' work and so we consider him a Most Valuable Professional.
If we did it only on content posted during the year (which I'm happy to discuss) then you have a situation where those members who post stuff earlier in the year are unduly biased compared to those who post their stuff later in the year. At least with the current implementation if someone posts an absolute scorcher on Dec 31, their article will help contribute to their MVP tally for the following year.
|
|
|
|
|
I think you've missed the main tenor of my message, or I wasn't clear: That it is obviously a nonsense to award MVP status to someone who hasn't been active (by which I mean at least actually posting something) for a whole year. Does CP want to send the message that inactive members who've written articles in the past are "more valuable" than those who continue to contribute? It also makes it harder for newer members to get the status, which isn't good for an incentive/reward scheme. Only including content from a given year was a suggested improvement - I did point out at least one flaw even with this, I can't come up with a full criteria or weighting system as I don't know what CP wants, but I do think the debate should be opened up as rewarding lapsed users in favour of current ones seems futile to me.
Slightly off topic - the system also heavily favours article writing as these tend to keep accumulating points for ages, whereas Q&A is quite often a quick burst of activity & rep, than rarely to be seen again later. I've written enough (just) to know how much goes into an article, but this even this can be small compared to the effort consistent effort applied by some people in Q&A and forum answers over a given year, yet the "author" writer will continue to be rewarded for several years, the "authority" largely won't.
[Edit]
Fixed some of the wording, as though I meant what I wrote, I didn't write what I meant. Or something. I'm from Gateshead and went to a comprehensive school, so I'm doing well to be able to read frankly.
modified 2-Jan-14 12:11pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I do understand the main tenor of the message and am trying to explain the pros and cons. To your point about articles vs Quick Answers: CodeProject is primarily an article site and that was the focus of the MVP awards initially. However, the members who spend an inordinate amount of time helping out in the discussion forums and Quick Answers should also be rewarded and so we specifically choose MVPs separately from the top 20 article authors and the top 20 Authorities in the forums and Quick Answers.
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: However, the members who spend an inordinate amount of time helping out in the discussion forums and Quick Answers should also be rewarded and so we specifically choose MVPs separately from the top 20 article authors and the top 20 Authorities in the forums and Quick Answers.
I think you should add this as a preamble to the MVP page (or the criteria generally), it isn't clear that this is what happens, I though this was based on an amalgamated score from the technical parts of the site.
I do think the original point still stands taking authors into account as a separate category - we're not rewarding the addition of new work, which is a bad thing on a technical site. I'd suggest we weight against the freshness of the article, but even this is flawed, some things remain useful in IT for a very long time, others (generally technology-specific stuff) less so.
Ho hum.
|
|
|
|
|
Hey Keith,
Very often, authors continue to support older articles published years ago. Not saying this has happened for every author who got picked as MVP this year, but it does happen more often that you may imagine. Support may be offline across email, or through the article's forum, or even subtle code updates not mentioned in the article body or not visible as a version/date change. So it's not as if an author publishes his/her article and is then done with it. Thought I'd throw in this perspective as well.
There are also interesting aspects to consider. Example: someone asks a question in the Q/A section. Person-A answers it by posting a link to Person-B's article. The OP marks Person-A's response as the answer and upvotes him. Person-A gets credit here but really all he/she did was to point the OP to person-B's article. So they both have value - A and B, just that A's value stands out a little more here than B's because A's the active person in this context.
[edit] - typo-fix
modified 2-Jan-14 13:33pm.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
