|
You can simply click the revisions link in your article to see what has changed. I will admit that we don't display all changes (such as title or attributes) but editors typically go into articles such as yours as a second set of eyes.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I know and I do, but I don't like it much. It would be somewhat better if there were a personal message, not just a boiler-plate e-mail.
|
|
|
|
|
I will ask Deeksha to be a little more personal with the hundreds of emails she sends out a week. Maybe throw in a little "I cleaned up the formatting only" kinda thing?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Is it supposed to hightlight the differences? I looked for highlighting, but didn't see any.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think there are plenty of blatantly poorly edited articles to fix, (like for anyone who isn't a native English speaker), and mine shouldn't even be on the radar.
Maybe she does mine because there are so few errors that it doesn't take much time to "fix", and thus artificially drives up her "what-I've-done-today" work item quota.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
The editors work on the top rated and the worst of the worst in parallel. The top rated should be polished as fast as possible, and the worst of the worst should be at least readable.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: like for anyone who isn't a native English speaker
I would appreciate if my text itself were improved (made more clear, more fluent, whatever), that way I would be offered an opportunity to learn from it and improve my writing style.
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: Maybe she does mine because there are so few errors that it doesn't take much time to "fix", and thus artificially drives up her "what-I've-done-today" work item quota.
That doesn't seem fair. I don't mind all articles being reviewed by a professional editor. I think CP needs two queues, a high-priority one with articles that are interesting but need editing badly, and the other, with everything else, chronologically.
What I don't like is the editing being pretty late, the mail being impersonal (it mimics the original mail which one gets when submitting an article, but results in quite a different feeling somehow), and authors having to figure out what has changed (using two small text boxes). While the initial mail is an encouragement, the second one surely is not.
PS: and I hate to think what would happen when many people were given editing rights; so I always restrict those rights where ever I can, and I would like to see them stated explicitly, however they are absent in the article's header.
|
|
|
|
|
I shall attend to your unedited articles ASAP then.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Onyx
|
|
|
|
|
That is very kind of you sir; right now I have only one unfinished article on CP, and all it has so far is a title. My stock of articles-to-be isn't on-line at the moment.
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: That doesn't seem fair.
It was a sarcasm, delivered with my typical lack of an emoticon.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
Sarcasm? Wait and see what the CP editor collective does to your next article. You'll remember and regret this thread when your see it (i.e.the article) being turned upside down and inside out, with every single word turned into a hyperlink pointing to Merriam-Webster Online, Wikipedia, MSDN, Dilbert, the CP guidelines, and then some.
|
|
|
|
|
John is armed. Sean actually puts on a vest when he opens up the editor on John's stuff.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Fear is an acceptable substitute for respect.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
The theory goes that edited articles receive better attention from users. A number of the best authors have articles that are so good it doesn't seem to matter
But, the general impression is that most authors want their articles to be edited. We also keep a list of authors who don't want to have their articles edited.
We could add you to there?
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
The Code Project
|
|
|
|
|
Sean Ewington wrote: We also keep a list of authors who don't want to have their articles edited.
Sean,
John already has editor rights on his articles - means he does not post to the unedited section like others do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I have edit rights on that. When I notice misspellings or weird phraseology, I typically go back and edit it when I have a chance. Most of my articles have multiptle versions because of this. My articles go straight to the published section.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
Can you make it and "Edited" article?
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
The Code Project
|
|
|
|
|
It already is an "Edited" article, and I'm the only person that's edited it (there are three versions).
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
This could be tricky to describe.
The bottom of the article indicates the person who last accessed the article who has article editing rights, and each article has a status (Pending, Composing, Edited, Unedited Contribution).
Code Project editors only change the status of an article if it is in Unedited Contribution status once they've gone through and fixed all the grammar, spelling, and formatting.
You only have one more article with an Unedited Contribution status, we can leave it be if you like
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
The Code Project
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know if I'm an official CP Editor, and I don't really know why only two of my 43 articles are showing up in the Unedited Contributio section. I can't honestly recall doing anything specal regarding article status for any of my stuff. I figured it was all automatic. If y'all want to do whatever is needed to move them out of that scetion, be my guess, because I don't know what to do about it otherwise.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
observation from an outsider: confusion exists. "Edited" has different semantics to different people (and maybe also over time). Maybe there is too much state. Quite likely whatever state exists isn't sufficiently visible all in one place.
Personally I would like to see the "who is allowed to edit" choice (present in the Article Wizard) also visible in the article's header (with clarification who is editor: the CP editors? others too?)
|
|
|
|
|
I think I know what's causing the confusion. Chris authorized certain users with the ability to directly post edited articles. Means when they use the wizard the article by default will have the edited status set. John's recent articles, that he submitted himself through the wizard, are all set to edited without him doing anything.
But this edited status is only available to editors. But for new articles it doesn't matter since it's set to Edited automatically (for certain authors only).
This particular article is old and when John submitted it, he didn't have the direct submission permissions yet and so its edited status is set to unedited. Now only an editor can reset it to edited.
Chris or Sean should be able to confirm this.
|
|
|
|
|
I tend to agree, however, even your message is a bit ambiguous if not bizarre:
Nishant Sivakumar wrote: Now only an editor can reset it to edited.
using "editor" without clarifying if that is "anyone who can edit" or "CP staff editor". I favor short sentences with a person and a verb in there, "owner can edit", "staff has edited", things like that. With only a noun or verb, different people tend to read different meanings.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
