When we get to a certain point level, our reviews no longer go through the proofreading process, and we are expected to proofread for ourselves. It seems likely, however, that this magic number does not automatically make everyone capable of catching and correcting their own grammar and typographical errors. Should ALL reviews go through the proofreading process, regardless of a person's rank?
Should ALL reviews go through the proofreading process?
12/18/2011
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
I think it would be nice to have the option 'Submit to editor' or 'Post review'. I don't think having every review be proofread is necessary.
12/18/2011
I wish there was at least the option. I know I would like to have mine be proofread. I've gotten past the point where it is required, but I still think it would be good because I know I occasionally miss stuff.
12/18/2011
Quote:
I think all post should have corrections made like spelling and grammar issues. It should not matter if you are at the top of the to-dumb pole or the bottom. A mistake is a mistake. Honestly the better it looks the smarter you look.
Originally posted by
Silverdrop
I think it would be nice to have the option 'Submit to editor' or 'Post review'. I don't think having every review be proofread is necessary.
12/18/2011
Quote:
Some of the most intelligent people in the world have the worst grammatical skills known to man-kind.
Originally posted by
CrystaCat
I think all post should have corrections made like spelling and grammar issues. It should not matter if you are at the top of the to-dumb pole or the bottom. A mistake is a mistake. Honestly the better it looks the smarter you look.
That being said, we all make mistakes. There's a rule of thumb that states the spoken or written sentence that corrects another's error usually contains an error of its own.
Not all of us are natural born writers, not of all of us speak English as our first language but every single person has an opinion and they should be given the opportunity to voice that opinion without being forced to submit to an editor. Same goes for the mentor program---it's extremely helpful, but it should never be mandatory.
I like the suggestion of having the option to submit to an editor if someone would like. This would solve two problems; the first: that errors in live reviews would occur less and the second: there would be more in the pool for editors to proofread.
But, I'm pretty willing to bet if we all ran our reviews through a word processor at least once, a large portion of mistakes would be caught before the author submitted the review.
12/18/2011
I like the idea of having the option of having someone look over our review before publishing. But the last 4-5 reviews I submitted needed no changes so I think you do get do a point where you don't need the editor as much and it just makes an extra step and extra time.
12/18/2011
I think that, rather than base your need for having a proofreader on rank, it should be based on how many errors are generally in your reviews. But then again, I see a lot of reviews that have been proofread that still come out with tons of mistakes.
I think most reviews should go through proofreading, unless the person has consistently submitted many reviews that needed no corrections.
I think most reviews should go through proofreading, unless the person has consistently submitted many reviews that needed no corrections.
12/18/2011
Quote:
I was going to say something to this effect. I think it should be an option if you want to have your reviews proofread once you get to a certain rank, however if you consistently make errors then proofreading would be best regardless of rank.
Originally posted by
indiglo
I think that, rather than base your need for having a proofreader on rank, it should be based on how many errors are generally in your reviews. But then again, I see a lot of reviews that have been proofread that still come out with tons of
...
more
I think that, rather than base your need for having a proofreader on rank, it should be based on how many errors are generally in your reviews. But then again, I see a lot of reviews that have been proofread that still come out with tons of mistakes.
I think most reviews should go through proofreading, unless the person has consistently submitted many reviews that needed no corrections. less
I think most reviews should go through proofreading, unless the person has consistently submitted many reviews that needed no corrections. less
12/18/2011
Instead of using your rank, why not use a certain number of reviews?
Example: 0-25 Proofreader
26-50 Option of proofreader
51+ You are either on your own /or/ request a mentor
Example: 0-25 Proofreader
26-50 Option of proofreader
51+ You are either on your own /or/ request a mentor
12/18/2011
I see proofing errors all the time. A lot of confusing "too" with "to". Drives me nuts. And this is from high level reviewers.
12/18/2011
I think it would be good if all the editors let people know what edits they make to their reviews (like Antipova does). Otherwise, how are people supposed to learn from their mistakes? If they don't know what they are doing wrong, how are they going to be able to fix their own reviews once they reach the level where they are on their own? How will they know they have even made mistakes in the past?
12/18/2011
I think it should be a choice, but really, more reviews should be proofread.
12/18/2011
Quote:
An option to have it go through the proofreading process wouldn't be bad.
Originally posted by
Ms. N
When we get to a certain point level, our reviews no longer go through the proofreading process, and we are expected to proofread for ourselves. It seems likely, however, that this magic number does not automatically make everyone capable of
...
more
When we get to a certain point level, our reviews no longer go through the proofreading process, and we are expected to proofread for ourselves. It seems likely, however, that this magic number does not automatically make everyone capable of catching and correcting their own grammar and typographical errors. Should ALL reviews go through the proofreading process, regardless of a person's rank?
less
12/18/2011
Quote:
But see, I think even that wouldn't catch all of them. I see reviewers with upwards of 100+ reviews and their reviews are LOADED with errors, be they grammar, spelling, punctuation errors, etc. So maybe a certain number of correct reviews would be the best way to go.
Originally posted by
js250
Instead of using your rank, why not use a certain number of reviews?
Example: 0-25 Proofreader
26-50 Option of proofreader
51+ You are either on your own /or/ request a mentor
Example: 0-25 Proofreader
26-50 Option of proofreader
51+ You are either on your own /or/ request a mentor
But then again, maybe I'm anal retentive.
I mean, most of the reviewers here are not professional writers, and most of the proofreaders are not professional editors.
12/18/2011
So far, this is 91% for having at least the possibility of proofreaders for higher ranked reviewers.
12/18/2011
I wish I had the option of using an editor still even outside of having a mentor. I always worry that Ill miss something. I can be kind of dyslexic at times and leave out words or letters and reread it 5 or more times and read it the correct way but my mind doesnt catch the error until its pointed out. I could swear I typed it the right way because of my problem. So having that fall back would be nice.
12/18/2011
Quote:
Once again, you've stolen most of my words.
Originally posted by
Ansley
Some of the most intelligent people in the world have the worst grammatical skills known to man-kind.
That being said, we all make mistakes. There's a rule of thumb that states the spoken or written sentence that corrects another's ... more
That being said, we all make mistakes. There's a rule of thumb that states the spoken or written sentence that corrects another's ... more
Some of the most intelligent people in the world have the worst grammatical skills known to man-kind.
That being said, we all make mistakes. There's a rule of thumb that states the spoken or written sentence that corrects another's error usually contains an error of its own.
Not all of us are natural born writers, not of all of us speak English as our first language but every single person has an opinion and they should be given the opportunity to voice that opinion without being forced to submit to an editor. Same goes for the mentor program---it's extremely helpful, but it should never be mandatory.
I like the suggestion of having the option to submit to an editor if someone would like. This would solve two problems; the first: that errors in live reviews would occur less and the second: there would be more in the pool for editors to proofread.
But, I'm pretty willing to bet if we all ran our reviews through a word processor at least once, a large portion of mistakes would be caught before the author submitted the review. less
That being said, we all make mistakes. There's a rule of thumb that states the spoken or written sentence that corrects another's error usually contains an error of its own.
Not all of us are natural born writers, not of all of us speak English as our first language but every single person has an opinion and they should be given the opportunity to voice that opinion without being forced to submit to an editor. Same goes for the mentor program---it's extremely helpful, but it should never be mandatory.
I like the suggestion of having the option to submit to an editor if someone would like. This would solve two problems; the first: that errors in live reviews would occur less and the second: there would be more in the pool for editors to proofread.
But, I'm pretty willing to bet if we all ran our reviews through a word processor at least once, a large portion of mistakes would be caught before the author submitted the review. less
I think it would be great to have the option and I do certainly think that we can all use an extra of eyes, but I don't think it should be mandatory.
12/19/2011
I still think it would be worth it. Infact, I think we should have the option to work with an editor kind of like we work with mentors, but just a few stylistic changes can really change a review.
12/19/2011
The proofing process can always help find a few errors, and also makes sure another person reads the review and information the way you intended. That said, for consistency's sake we wish you could choose whom to submit to. This not only helps establish a relationship, but also allows the ratings of the reviewer and editor to be more accurate.
12/19/2011
I'd love to have my work proofread, there's always a chance to have little typos. BUT, I want to add one more step, have the proofreader relay back to me what they've corrected, so I'll know what I've missed.
12/19/2011
Quote:
This makes sense to me. But that's only my own opinion.
Originally posted by
js250
Instead of using your rank, why not use a certain number of reviews?
Example: 0-25 Proofreader
26-50 Option of proofreader
51+ You are either on your own /or/ request a mentor
Example: 0-25 Proofreader
26-50 Option of proofreader
51+ You are either on your own /or/ request a mentor
I can think of very few people who always do 100% perfect grammar/punctuation reviews. At least there's the option of proofing your review for up to two weeks.
12/19/2011
Quote:
I read my review several times before submitting it. I am sure I still miss things here and there. I think all review should go through editing process just so that there's another set of eyes catching mistakes.
Originally posted by
Ms. N
When we get to a certain point level, our reviews no longer go through the proofreading process, and we are expected to proofread for ourselves. It seems likely, however, that this magic number does not automatically make everyone capable of
...
more
When we get to a certain point level, our reviews no longer go through the proofreading process, and we are expected to proofread for ourselves. It seems likely, however, that this magic number does not automatically make everyone capable of catching and correcting their own grammar and typographical errors. Should ALL reviews go through the proofreading process, regardless of a person's rank?
less
12/20/2011
I think they should be able to choose.
At a certain rank, they're probably good on not needing to be edited, but some people, like me sometimes make a few mistakes. It'd be nice to have an editor to help us.
At a certain rank, they're probably good on not needing to be edited, but some people, like me sometimes make a few mistakes. It'd be nice to have an editor to help us.
12/21/2011
Quote:
The problem is that some people don't know that they have made mistakes that need to be fixed, even if they do read back through what they have written. Many people write the way they speak, which may be good in setting the tone of the review, but it may lead to errors.
Originally posted by
El-Jaro
This makes sense to me. But that's only my own opinion.
I can think of very few people who always do 100% perfect grammar/punctuation reviews. At least there's the option of proofing your review for up to two weeks.
I can think of very few people who always do 100% perfect grammar/punctuation reviews. At least there's the option of proofing your review for up to two weeks.
12/21/2011
Higher rank on Eden has no bearing on the person's grammatical skills. At all. I've seen more errors than I can count. But who's gonna point out errors to one of the "big dogs" for one of their self-published reviews? Not me, I don't want to risk them having a vendetta against me when I submit my own and they're my editor.
12/22/2011
Quote:
You should never worry about another member, higher ranking or not, having a vendetta against you. If any editor messes with your reviews, you can and should report them for it. If any member deliberately downvotes your reviews or sends mean spirited messages, you can and should report them for it. You're of course not obligated to point out errors you find, but most of us are ok with being told that we've made a mistake in our reviews. And anybody who goes out of their way to "get you back" for pointing something out will be handled by Kristi.
Originally posted by
karay123
Higher rank on Eden has no bearing on the person's grammatical skills. At all. I've seen more errors than I can count. But who's gonna point out errors to one of the "big dogs" for one of their self-published reviews? Not me, I
...
more
Higher rank on Eden has no bearing on the person's grammatical skills. At all. I've seen more errors than I can count. But who's gonna point out errors to one of the "big dogs" for one of their self-published reviews? Not me, I don't want to risk them having a vendetta against me when I submit my own and they're my editor.
less
12/22/2011
Quote:
My reviews are no longer sent to an editor but I would like that option. I often make small gramatical mistakes and am more confident having my reviews published after someone has proofread it.
Originally posted by
Ms. N
When we get to a certain point level, our reviews no longer go through the proofreading process, and we are expected to proofread for ourselves. It seems likely, however, that this magic number does not automatically make everyone capable of
...
more
When we get to a certain point level, our reviews no longer go through the proofreading process, and we are expected to proofread for ourselves. It seems likely, however, that this magic number does not automatically make everyone capable of catching and correcting their own grammar and typographical errors. Should ALL reviews go through the proofreading process, regardless of a person's rank?
less
12/22/2011
Quote:
I like this!!!
Originally posted by
js250
Instead of using your rank, why not use a certain number of reviews?
Example: 0-25 Proofreader
26-50 Option of proofreader
51+ You are either on your own /or/ request a mentor
Example: 0-25 Proofreader
26-50 Option of proofreader
51+ You are either on your own /or/ request a mentor
Can I second this nomination?
05/19/2012
On the whole, I wish it were an option. I'm hesitant to say all reviewers need it, because I've read tons of well-written reviews by highly-rated reviewers, but I've also read some that were not so good. I'm sort of a grammar snob, so as much as I try to tune out typos, I know that they influence my opinion of the review (for the worse). I feel like some people don't even proofread what they write, because it's not even always a case of incorrect grammar--sometimes it's obvious mistakes like left-out words, no spaces, etc. However, I'm not sure that people who don't take the time to edit what they write would take advantage of such a system. It's frustrating, because while I'm still .1 away from having my reviews auto-publish, I always proofread what I write before sending it to the editor, and I'd like to think others would do the same.
05/21/2012
I would like to have the option again. Sometimes when I spend too much time on a review I can't catch everything because I've already caught so much.
05/25/2012