Just yesterday I must have spotted five or six reviews that had numerous errors. On one of them, the very first word of the review was 'Teh' rather than 'The'.
Do you think that the Editor/Proofreading Program is Effective?
06/04/2011
I think it's minor, because of the particular individuals proofreading them. Sometimes, the edits are great, and others are just shockingly full of mistakes like you mentioned in your question. It's effective enough, but it needs a few kinks worked out.
06/04/2011
I have seen a couple of editors who need checking into!
Yes, people make mistakes but when they fail to correct a few things, that's not acceptable! They are getting points for not doing the job properly.
I think the editors rank should be much higher - in the 7's. Some reviewers can gain a 5.0 with a couple of reviews.
And if a reviewer puts 'i' instead of 'I', wouldn't it be the editors job to correct it?
Yes, people make mistakes but when they fail to correct a few things, that's not acceptable! They are getting points for not doing the job properly.
I think the editors rank should be much higher - in the 7's. Some reviewers can gain a 5.0 with a couple of reviews.
And if a reviewer puts 'i' instead of 'I', wouldn't it be the editors job to correct it?
06/04/2011
Quote:
I don't think that rank should matter all that much, just that people prove they can do the job. Some of us may never achieve a rank as high as 7 because we can't pump out that many reviews due to a lack of time or space for toys in our house. I don't think people should be pushed away from opportunities to get involved because of that.
Originally posted by
Shellz31
I have seen a couple of editors who need checking into!
Yes, people make mistakes but when they fail to correct a few things, that's not acceptable! They are getting points for not doing the job properly.
I think the editors rank ... more
Yes, people make mistakes but when they fail to correct a few things, that's not acceptable! They are getting points for not doing the job properly.
I think the editors rank ... more
I have seen a couple of editors who need checking into!
Yes, people make mistakes but when they fail to correct a few things, that's not acceptable! They are getting points for not doing the job properly.
I think the editors rank should be much higher - in the 7's. Some reviewers can gain a 5.0 with a couple of reviews.
And if a reviewer puts 'i' instead of 'I', wouldn't it be the editors job to correct it? less
Yes, people make mistakes but when they fail to correct a few things, that's not acceptable! They are getting points for not doing the job properly.
I think the editors rank should be much higher - in the 7's. Some reviewers can gain a 5.0 with a couple of reviews.
And if a reviewer puts 'i' instead of 'I', wouldn't it be the editors job to correct it? less
06/04/2011
Quote:
I agree. There are many editors who do a great job yet have a ranking below 7.0. Also, just because someone has a ranking above 7.0 does not mean s/he is proficient at grammar. When editing spots open up, the most important criterion should be to determine the quality of the applicant's grammar from his or her forum posts and reviews.
Originally posted by
Dusk
I don't think that rank should matter all that much, just that people prove they can do the job. Some of us may never achieve a rank as high as 7 because we can't pump out that many reviews due to a lack of time or space for toys in our
...
more
I don't think that rank should matter all that much, just that people prove they can do the job. Some of us may never achieve a rank as high as 7 because we can't pump out that many reviews due to a lack of time or space for toys in our house. I don't think people should be pushed away from opportunities to get involved because of that.
less
However, now that the editing program is in place, it is more difficult for admin to determine the quality of newer contributors' grammar. I think it might be a good idea to allow current editors to vouch for certain applicants if they are familiar with the applicant's writing skills. (You must have a good grasp of grammar and good writing skills yourself if you want to effectively proof someone else's work.)
That said, if an editor *consistently* allows blatant errors to be published, I think s/he should be warned by admin. If s/he does not do a better job, then admin can decide where to go from there.
But as I stated in my earlier post, since the editor is penalized for any error the contributor places in the review post-editing, I wish editors would receive notification anytime the review is changed by the contributor after publication. If editors are to be penalized for any changes made to the originally published review, then they should be given the heads-up to check those changes.
06/04/2011
Are editors able to see the reviews up for editing before selecting one? I can understand how hard it is to merely copy-edit a paragraph that's made of all one sentence, and I've often wondered whether editors are able to pick and choose which reviews they work on.
I've seen a few reviews with pretty egregious errors ("I" not capitalized, twice, in the two-sentence summary) and I've wondered whether the editor just left things as they were submitted as a throwing-their-hands-u p-in-the-air gesture. We all make mistakes, but I can't imagine not capitalizing "I," twice. And I definitely can't imagine a reviewer not noticing. What's even weirder: the editor for this review got three excellent votes, two good votes, and only one poor vote.
To be honest, even now that my rank is >5.5 and my reviews can auto-publish, I wish every review was sent to an editor. I check my work three times before I publish it, but it's so easy to miss mistakes in my own writing. I would feel a lot better if someone looked over my reviews after I'd submitted them, just to make sure my fingers weren't working more quickly than my brain.
On the whole, I would say the editing system is good, but maybe the quality control of editors should be a little more strict. I do think it would be good if all reviews were submitted to editors, no matter the rank of the reviewer (as long as we can find enough editors to do thorough work.) Or perhaps at least an option, because I know I'd take the opportunity to hear a second opinion on my grammar if one was offered.
I've seen a few reviews with pretty egregious errors ("I" not capitalized, twice, in the two-sentence summary) and I've wondered whether the editor just left things as they were submitted as a throwing-their-hands-u p-in-the-air gesture. We all make mistakes, but I can't imagine not capitalizing "I," twice. And I definitely can't imagine a reviewer not noticing. What's even weirder: the editor for this review got three excellent votes, two good votes, and only one poor vote.
To be honest, even now that my rank is >5.5 and my reviews can auto-publish, I wish every review was sent to an editor. I check my work three times before I publish it, but it's so easy to miss mistakes in my own writing. I would feel a lot better if someone looked over my reviews after I'd submitted them, just to make sure my fingers weren't working more quickly than my brain.
On the whole, I would say the editing system is good, but maybe the quality control of editors should be a little more strict. I do think it would be good if all reviews were submitted to editors, no matter the rank of the reviewer (as long as we can find enough editors to do thorough work.) Or perhaps at least an option, because I know I'd take the opportunity to hear a second opinion on my grammar if one was offered.
06/04/2011
I agree that rank, whether it be 5.0 or 10, should not matter as much as ability. I was accepted when I was a 5.6ish, and (as far as I know) I've done as well as any other editor. A high rank doesn't necessarily mean good grammar and spelling.
06/04/2011
Quote:
We see the titles and the reviewers only, along with whether it's a full review or a follow-up.
Originally posted by
Antipova
Are editors able to see the reviews up for editing before selecting one? I can understand how hard it is to merely copy-edit a paragraph that's made of all one sentence, and I've often wondered whether editors are able to pick and choose
...
more
Are editors able to see the reviews up for editing before selecting one? I can understand how hard it is to merely copy-edit a paragraph that's made of all one sentence, and I've often wondered whether editors are able to pick and choose which reviews they work on.
I've seen a few reviews with pretty egregious errors ("I" not capitalized, twice, in the two-sentence summary) and I've wondered whether the editor just left things as they were submitted as a throwing-their-hands-u p-in-the-air gesture. We all make mistakes, but I can't imagine not capitalizing "I," twice. And I definitely can't imagine a reviewer not noticing. What's even weirder: the editor for this review got three excellent votes, two good votes, and only one poor vote.
To be honest, even now that my rank is >5.5 and my reviews can auto-publish, I wish every review was sent to an editor. I check my work three times before I publish it, but it's so easy to miss mistakes in my own writing. I would feel a lot better if someone looked over my reviews after I'd submitted them, just to make sure my fingers weren't working more quickly than my brain.
On the whole, I would say the editing system is good, but maybe the quality control of editors should be a little more strict. I do think it would be good if all reviews were submitted to editors, no matter the rank of the reviewer (as long as we can find enough editors to do thorough work.) Or perhaps at least an option, because I know I'd take the opportunity to hear a second opinion on my grammar if one was offered. less
I've seen a few reviews with pretty egregious errors ("I" not capitalized, twice, in the two-sentence summary) and I've wondered whether the editor just left things as they were submitted as a throwing-their-hands-u p-in-the-air gesture. We all make mistakes, but I can't imagine not capitalizing "I," twice. And I definitely can't imagine a reviewer not noticing. What's even weirder: the editor for this review got three excellent votes, two good votes, and only one poor vote.
To be honest, even now that my rank is >5.5 and my reviews can auto-publish, I wish every review was sent to an editor. I check my work three times before I publish it, but it's so easy to miss mistakes in my own writing. I would feel a lot better if someone looked over my reviews after I'd submitted them, just to make sure my fingers weren't working more quickly than my brain.
On the whole, I would say the editing system is good, but maybe the quality control of editors should be a little more strict. I do think it would be good if all reviews were submitted to editors, no matter the rank of the reviewer (as long as we can find enough editors to do thorough work.) Or perhaps at least an option, because I know I'd take the opportunity to hear a second opinion on my grammar if one was offered. less
And if you're interested in having someone read over your reviews, why not join the mentor program? Many mentors would be happy to help you to edit your spelling or grammar, if that's your sticking point! And there's no "cap" on being mentored, either.
06/04/2011
Quote:
I actually am right now, but my mentor's computer's been broken lately. Thanks for the pointer, though! Once she's up and running I'll have somebody watching my back again.
Originally posted by
DeliciousSurprise
We see the titles and the reviewers only, along with whether it's a full review or a follow-up.
And if you're interested in having someone read over your reviews, why not join the mentor program? Many mentors would be happy to help ... more
And if you're interested in having someone read over your reviews, why not join the mentor program? Many mentors would be happy to help ... more
We see the titles and the reviewers only, along with whether it's a full review or a follow-up.
And if you're interested in having someone read over your reviews, why not join the mentor program? Many mentors would be happy to help you to edit your spelling or grammar, if that's your sticking point! And there's no "cap" on being mentored, either. less
And if you're interested in having someone read over your reviews, why not join the mentor program? Many mentors would be happy to help you to edit your spelling or grammar, if that's your sticking point! And there's no "cap" on being mentored, either. less
06/04/2011
i think it is
06/04/2011
Well then, perhaps people who apply for editoring SHOULD be checked out more thoroughly cause there are some who clearly aren't doing it completely!
06/04/2011
Quote:
See this confuses me because it is so hard to get into the program in the first place.
Originally posted by
Shellz31
Well then, perhaps people who apply for editoring SHOULD be checked out more thoroughly cause there are some who clearly aren't doing it completely!
I don't understand how they can be so picky, yet somehow there are editors getting in who are "lacking", so to speak, in terms of their grammar. I thought the voting of the editors was to determine whether or not they could stay in the program.
06/05/2011
Quote:
Writing well and editing well are different skills. Yes, you need to know proper grammar rules to edit well. However, many times it's a matter of style versus whether or not it's correct. Additionally, it can be difficult to edit someone else's review when their style is very different from your own. I'd say that reviews are about 50/50 currently, meaning 50% are well written and need very little editing, and 50% are very poor and take quite a bit of effort to rehabilitate into a legible piece of writing that maintains the writer's voice and is grammatically correct.
Originally posted by
cherryredhead88
See this confuses me because it is so hard to get into the program in the first place.
I don't understand how they can be so picky, yet somehow there are editors getting in who are "lacking", so to speak, in terms of their ... more
I don't understand how they can be so picky, yet somehow there are editors getting in who are "lacking", so to speak, in terms of their ... more
See this confuses me because it is so hard to get into the program in the first place.
I don't understand how they can be so picky, yet somehow there are editors getting in who are "lacking", so to speak, in terms of their grammar. I thought the voting of the editors was to determine whether or not they could stay in the program. less
I don't understand how they can be so picky, yet somehow there are editors getting in who are "lacking", so to speak, in terms of their grammar. I thought the voting of the editors was to determine whether or not they could stay in the program. less
And rank has little to do with grammatical skills. I would almost suggest that everyone should have a separate grammar rank above which you can bypass the editors, but that's just not worth the effort.
06/05/2011
Quote:
Good point, Kindred.
Originally posted by
Kindred
Writing well and editing well are different skills. Yes, you need to know proper grammar rules to edit well. However, many times it's a matter of style versus whether or not it's correct. Additionally, it can be difficult to edit someone
...
more
Writing well and editing well are different skills. Yes, you need to know proper grammar rules to edit well. However, many times it's a matter of style versus whether or not it's correct. Additionally, it can be difficult to edit someone else's review when their style is very different from your own. I'd say that reviews are about 50/50 currently, meaning 50% are well written and need very little editing, and 50% are very poor and take quite a bit of effort to rehabilitate into a legible piece of writing that maintains the writer's voice and is grammatically correct.
And rank has little to do with grammatical skills. I would almost suggest that everyone should have a separate grammar rank above which you can bypass the editors, but that's just not worth the effort. less
And rank has little to do with grammatical skills. I would almost suggest that everyone should have a separate grammar rank above which you can bypass the editors, but that's just not worth the effort. less
Writing well and editing well are not the same, and assuming that rank is a good measure of editing skill doesn't make much sense. ( I know a professional copy-editor, and her writing voice is fine but on the bland side for my tastes. She sure can copy-edit, though, so it's good that her finer skills are put to use in her work.)
So how do we know who makes a good editor before they're selected into the program? It's kind of tough. (Has anybody read this Malcom Gladwell article on quarterbacks and teachers?) I think the best solution is to let people try it out, but then actually using the excellent, good, and poor voting to keep stricter quality control. If a 'good' or 'poor' vote is given, the editor should get an automated message and go back and re-edit the review, and if a few 'poor' votes are given then maybe the editor should step down.
We also might change the 'excellent,' 'good,' and 'poor' to be 'no errors,' 'one error,' and 'several errors,' so that voters don't have to read the pop-up to vote correctly. I know when I first joined, I voted a few editors 'good' because I thought 'good' was the standard and 'excellent' was for above-and-beyond work. Now that I've read it I know better, but it wouldn't be hard to switch the wording to make it foolproof.
06/05/2011
I've noticed that some of my reviews have gotten a good look-over, but others have just gotten a skim. I can write a couple at the same time and get a lot of feedback about how I write, and others are simply "approved". If someone would have given me more critique on my earlier reviews, they would have been better, seeing as I was inexperienced and didn't know exactly what to write.
My mentor has helped me out a lot, though!
My mentor has helped me out a lot, though!
06/05/2011
Quote:
I've edited a few reviews for students and that didn't seem to matter when I applied for the program again. If the votes aren't really doing anything, then what is the point of having the option?
Originally posted by
cherryredhead88
See this confuses me because it is so hard to get into the program in the first place.
I don't understand how they can be so picky, yet somehow there are editors getting in who are "lacking", so to speak, in terms of their ... more
I don't understand how they can be so picky, yet somehow there are editors getting in who are "lacking", so to speak, in terms of their ... more
See this confuses me because it is so hard to get into the program in the first place.
I don't understand how they can be so picky, yet somehow there are editors getting in who are "lacking", so to speak, in terms of their grammar. I thought the voting of the editors was to determine whether or not they could stay in the program. less
I don't understand how they can be so picky, yet somehow there are editors getting in who are "lacking", so to speak, in terms of their grammar. I thought the voting of the editors was to determine whether or not they could stay in the program. less
06/05/2011
Quote:
I wish my students would respond to me and give me feedback like that LOL!
Originally posted by
Elaira
I've noticed that some of my reviews have gotten a good look-over, but others have just gotten a skim. I can write a couple at the same time and get a lot of feedback about how I write, and others are simply "approved". If someone would
...
more
I've noticed that some of my reviews have gotten a good look-over, but others have just gotten a skim. I can write a couple at the same time and get a lot of feedback about how I write, and others are simply "approved". If someone would have given me more critique on my earlier reviews, they would have been better, seeing as I was inexperienced and didn't know exactly what to write.
My mentor has helped me out a lot, though! less
My mentor has helped me out a lot, though! less
06/05/2011
Quote:
When I edit a review, I may or may not comment, depending on the situation. I'm supposed to be editing for grammar and spelling, not necessarily giving advice. Not everyone wants advice on reviewing and whatnot.
Originally posted by
Elaira
I've noticed that some of my reviews have gotten a good look-over, but others have just gotten a skim. I can write a couple at the same time and get a lot of feedback about how I write, and others are simply "approved". If someone would
...
more
I've noticed that some of my reviews have gotten a good look-over, but others have just gotten a skim. I can write a couple at the same time and get a lot of feedback about how I write, and others are simply "approved". If someone would have given me more critique on my earlier reviews, they would have been better, seeing as I was inexperienced and didn't know exactly what to write.
My mentor has helped me out a lot, though! less
My mentor has helped me out a lot, though! less
If a review has no errors and doesn't really need work, I simply approve it. I think editing is generally just proofreading. If I was mentoring, I'd also give advice on the review itself, but I'm unfortunately not yet.
I'm rambling. Haha. Basically, I will give advice if someone wants it or really could benefit. Otherwise, I just edit and approve, sometimes with reasoning for the edits when necessary.
06/05/2011
If the review is just too riddled with typos and misspellings, send it back as RR. If they don't make the changes after you've asked them to fix them, send it to admin.
If the review is on a toy that arrived broken, broke during the first use, or seems to be possessed, transfer to admin and email me or Gary.
If it's an off-site review and it doesn't go to the review, revision require it back to them.
If it's a story and not a review at all, send it to admin. I've actually seen this happen.
If you're not sure whether to send it to an admin or not, email me and I'll help you the best I can!
If the review is on a toy that arrived broken, broke during the first use, or seems to be possessed, transfer to admin and email me or Gary.
If it's an off-site review and it doesn't go to the review, revision require it back to them.
If it's a story and not a review at all, send it to admin. I've actually seen this happen.
If you're not sure whether to send it to an admin or not, email me and I'll help you the best I can!
06/06/2011
Most reviews are edited well, and much faster than they used to.
06/06/2011
Quote:
I very rarely leave commentary on reviews; my job is to be an editor, not a mentor. I go through and correct the spelling and grammatical mistakes, and usually leave sentences alone, unless there is something significantly wrong with them, as I don't want to disturb the writer's voice.
Originally posted by
Elaira
I've noticed that some of my reviews have gotten a good look-over, but others have just gotten a skim. I can write a couple at the same time and get a lot of feedback about how I write, and others are simply "approved". If someone would
...
more
I've noticed that some of my reviews have gotten a good look-over, but others have just gotten a skim. I can write a couple at the same time and get a lot of feedback about how I write, and others are simply "approved". If someone would have given me more critique on my earlier reviews, they would have been better, seeing as I was inexperienced and didn't know exactly what to write.
My mentor has helped me out a lot, though! less
My mentor has helped me out a lot, though! less
If someone asks me in the comments to tell them what I've corrected, I do, but otherwise I just correct and approve. Like Zenaida said, this is editing, and not everyone wants mentoring advice on how to improve their reviews.
06/06/2011
Quote:
This is pretty much what I do. I do my editing and move on. I occasionally leave a comment, but it's pretty rare. Commenting is more of a mentor's job, rather than a proofreader's.
Originally posted by
DeliciousSurprise
I very rarely leave commentary on reviews; my job is to be an editor, not a mentor. I go through and correct the spelling and grammatical mistakes, and usually leave sentences alone, unless there is something significantly wrong with them, as I
...
more
I very rarely leave commentary on reviews; my job is to be an editor, not a mentor. I go through and correct the spelling and grammatical mistakes, and usually leave sentences alone, unless there is something significantly wrong with them, as I don't want to disturb the writer's voice.
If someone asks me in the comments to tell them what I've corrected, I do, but otherwise I just correct and approve. Like Zenaida said, this is editing, and not everyone wants mentoring advice on how to improve their reviews. less
If someone asks me in the comments to tell them what I've corrected, I do, but otherwise I just correct and approve. Like Zenaida said, this is editing, and not everyone wants mentoring advice on how to improve their reviews. less
In 90% of reviews, I just go through and fix the occasional spelling, grammar, and punctuation mistakes. (I think punctuation mistakes are the most common.) I click "approve review" and I'm done.
In about 5% of reviews, there are issues that require sending the review back to the writer (most often a missing or broken URL in an offsite review), and in about 5% of reviews there are no errors at all, which is great, but a bit boring for the proofreader.
06/06/2011
I always leave explanations for the editing changes I have made. I do this by copying and pasting the original sentence (shown as Before) and then paste it again to show the grammar corrections (shown as After). Above that, I briefly mention what change(s) was (were) made and then link to a web page on a reputable grammar site that explains the specific grammar rule.
I don't think I am doing the work of a mentor because any explanations I make revolve solely around grammar. I do this to help the contributor in case s/he is interested in improving his or her grammar. After all, once the contributor reaches a certain rank, s/he will no longer have someone to look over his or her review before publishing. The linked grammar sites I provide would be an invaluable resource to anyone willing to spend a few moments looking over them. Granted, not everyone is interested in improving his or her grammar, but I have received enough appreciative feedback to know that at least many of the contributors welcome the information.
If the contributor tends to make a certain grammar error repetitively, wouldn't it be beneficial to him or her to know about it? If the contributor is not aware of making a specific error, s/he may not notice that it has been corrected. And on the flip side, if I correct it without a brief explanation and a link to a site explaining the grammar rule (a grammar rule of which the contributor may be unaware), then the contributor will not have learned anything or may think that a correction was gratuitous. Additionally, once the contributors being edited reach a certain rank, the site will just have that many more reviews with grammar errors if they are not helped along the way during the time period when they are receiving editing services.
That's how I view what I do: a service not only to benefit the readers but a service to benefit contributors as well. I want each review that I edit to be as grammatically correct as I am capable of making it, and I want to provide the tools to help the contributor grammatically correct and polish his or her own reviews as well. As the saying goes: If you want to feed a man for one day, give him a fish. If you want to feed him for a lifetime, teach him to fish . . . or something like that! I just want to provide the resources contributors could use to improve the grammar in their future reviews (not to mention how much these resources might help them in all the other areas of their lives in which written communication is required).
I don't think I am doing the work of a mentor because any explanations I make revolve solely around grammar. I do this to help the contributor in case s/he is interested in improving his or her grammar. After all, once the contributor reaches a certain rank, s/he will no longer have someone to look over his or her review before publishing. The linked grammar sites I provide would be an invaluable resource to anyone willing to spend a few moments looking over them. Granted, not everyone is interested in improving his or her grammar, but I have received enough appreciative feedback to know that at least many of the contributors welcome the information.
If the contributor tends to make a certain grammar error repetitively, wouldn't it be beneficial to him or her to know about it? If the contributor is not aware of making a specific error, s/he may not notice that it has been corrected. And on the flip side, if I correct it without a brief explanation and a link to a site explaining the grammar rule (a grammar rule of which the contributor may be unaware), then the contributor will not have learned anything or may think that a correction was gratuitous. Additionally, once the contributors being edited reach a certain rank, the site will just have that many more reviews with grammar errors if they are not helped along the way during the time period when they are receiving editing services.
That's how I view what I do: a service not only to benefit the readers but a service to benefit contributors as well. I want each review that I edit to be as grammatically correct as I am capable of making it, and I want to provide the tools to help the contributor grammatically correct and polish his or her own reviews as well. As the saying goes: If you want to feed a man for one day, give him a fish. If you want to feed him for a lifetime, teach him to fish . . . or something like that! I just want to provide the resources contributors could use to improve the grammar in their future reviews (not to mention how much these resources might help them in all the other areas of their lives in which written communication is required).
06/06/2011
Quote:
I'm very appreciative of how Selective Sensualist does her editing. She taught me the difference between a hyphen and an em dash. I've learned a lot from Eden, but that lesson might be the only one that's carried over to my professional life.
Originally posted by
Selective Sensualist
I always leave explanations for the editing changes I have made. I do this by copying and pasting the original sentence (shown as Before) and then paste it again to show the grammar corrections (shown as After). Above that, I briefly mention what
...
more
I always leave explanations for the editing changes I have made. I do this by copying and pasting the original sentence (shown as Before) and then paste it again to show the grammar corrections (shown as After). Above that, I briefly mention what change(s) was (were) made and then link to a web page on a reputable grammar site that explains the specific grammar rule.
I don't think I am doing the work of a mentor because any explanations I make revolve solely around grammar. I do this to help the contributor in case s/he is interested in improving his or her grammar. After all, once the contributor reaches a certain rank, s/he will no longer have someone to look over his or her review before publishing. The linked grammar sites I provide would be an invaluable resource to anyone willing to spend a few moments looking over them. Granted, not everyone is interested in improving his or her grammar, but I have received enough appreciative feedback to know that at least many of the contributors welcome the information.
If the contributor tends to make a certain grammar error repetitively, wouldn't it be beneficial to him or her to know about it? If the contributor is not aware of making a specific error, s/he may not notice that it has been corrected. And on the flip side, if I correct it without a brief explanation and a link to a site explaining the grammar rule (a grammar rule of which the contributor may be unaware), then the contributor will not have learned anything or may think that a correction was gratuitous. Additionally, once the contributors being edited reach a certain rank, the site will just have that many more reviews with grammar errors if they are not helped along the way during the time period when they are receiving editing services.
That's how I view what I do: a service not only to benefit the readers but a service to benefit contributors as well. I want each review that I edit to be as grammatically correct as I am capable of making it, and I want to provide the tools to help the contributor grammatically correct and polish his or her own reviews as well. As the saying goes: If you want to feed a man for one day, give him a fish. If you want to feed him for a lifetime, teach him to fish . . . or something like that! I just want to provide the resources contributors could use to improve the grammar in their future reviews (not to mention how much these resources might help them in all the other areas of their lives in which written communication is required). less
I don't think I am doing the work of a mentor because any explanations I make revolve solely around grammar. I do this to help the contributor in case s/he is interested in improving his or her grammar. After all, once the contributor reaches a certain rank, s/he will no longer have someone to look over his or her review before publishing. The linked grammar sites I provide would be an invaluable resource to anyone willing to spend a few moments looking over them. Granted, not everyone is interested in improving his or her grammar, but I have received enough appreciative feedback to know that at least many of the contributors welcome the information.
If the contributor tends to make a certain grammar error repetitively, wouldn't it be beneficial to him or her to know about it? If the contributor is not aware of making a specific error, s/he may not notice that it has been corrected. And on the flip side, if I correct it without a brief explanation and a link to a site explaining the grammar rule (a grammar rule of which the contributor may be unaware), then the contributor will not have learned anything or may think that a correction was gratuitous. Additionally, once the contributors being edited reach a certain rank, the site will just have that many more reviews with grammar errors if they are not helped along the way during the time period when they are receiving editing services.
That's how I view what I do: a service not only to benefit the readers but a service to benefit contributors as well. I want each review that I edit to be as grammatically correct as I am capable of making it, and I want to provide the tools to help the contributor grammatically correct and polish his or her own reviews as well. As the saying goes: If you want to feed a man for one day, give him a fish. If you want to feed him for a lifetime, teach him to fish . . . or something like that! I just want to provide the resources contributors could use to improve the grammar in their future reviews (not to mention how much these resources might help them in all the other areas of their lives in which written communication is required). less
06/06/2011
Quote:
It is hard for me not to put suggestions in for the reviewers, but as a few others have said, there is a difference between the editors and the mentors. If I have comments that I feel are important or that the reviewer may like to know, I will leave them on the review after I publish it.
Originally posted by
Elaira
I've noticed that some of my reviews have gotten a good look-over, but others have just gotten a skim. I can write a couple at the same time and get a lot of feedback about how I write, and others are simply "approved". If someone would
...
more
I've noticed that some of my reviews have gotten a good look-over, but others have just gotten a skim. I can write a couple at the same time and get a lot of feedback about how I write, and others are simply "approved". If someone would have given me more critique on my earlier reviews, they would have been better, seeing as I was inexperienced and didn't know exactly what to write.
My mentor has helped me out a lot, though! less
My mentor has helped me out a lot, though! less
I wish I knew who wanted feedback and who didn't!
06/06/2011
Quote:
That's what I don't get. I thought the whole point in the voting was so that they could weed out the editors who aren't doing their job. And I don't mean one vote here and there, I mean the ones that are consistently down voted. Plus it doesn't seem like many vote on the editor's part anyways (at least from what I have seen).
Originally posted by
VieuxCarre
I've edited a few reviews for students and that didn't seem to matter when I applied for the program again. If the votes aren't really doing anything, then what is the point of having the option?
I had something else to say but I forgot Damnit!
06/06/2011
Quote:
So am I. I've seen how she's written almost whole pages of comments letting people know what she fixed and why. It's awesome. I don't think I'd have the patience for all that. Haha.
Originally posted by
Antipova
I'm very appreciative of how Selective Sensualist does her editing. She taught me the difference between a hyphen and an em dash. I've learned a lot from Eden, but that lesson might be the only one that's carried over to my professional life.
And what the hell is an em dash? Haha. And what's the difference?
06/07/2011
Quote:
Hyphen -
Originally posted by
ZenaidaMacroura
So am I. I've seen how she's written almost whole pages of comments letting people know what she fixed and why. It's awesome. I don't think I'd have the patience for all that. Haha.
And what the hell is an em dash? Haha. ... more
And what the hell is an em dash? Haha. ... more
So am I. I've seen how she's written almost whole pages of comments letting people know what she fixed and why. It's awesome. I don't think I'd have the patience for all that. Haha.
And what the hell is an em dash? Haha. And what's the difference? less
And what the hell is an em dash? Haha. And what's the difference? less
En Dash –
Em Dash —
Em Dashes are for pauses in thought, parenthetical statements, or afterthoughts (I told you that I didn't want—)
En Dashes are for range (He reigned from 1969–1982)
Hyphens are for word breaks and hyphenations (T-Rex, post-production)
06/07/2011
Quote:
Awesome! Thank you! I'll try to remember that.
Originally posted by
DeliciousSurprise
Hyphen -
En Dash –
Em Dash —
Em Dashes are for pauses in thought, parenthetical statements, or afterthoughts (I told you that I didn't want—)
En Dashes are for range (He reigned from 1969–1982)
Hyphens are for word ... more
En Dash –
Em Dash —
Em Dashes are for pauses in thought, parenthetical statements, or afterthoughts (I told you that I didn't want—)
En Dashes are for range (He reigned from 1969–1982)
Hyphens are for word ... more
Hyphen -
En Dash –
Em Dash —
Em Dashes are for pauses in thought, parenthetical statements, or afterthoughts (I told you that I didn't want—)
En Dashes are for range (He reigned from 1969–1982)
Hyphens are for word breaks and hyphenations (T-Rex, post-production) less
En Dash –
Em Dash —
Em Dashes are for pauses in thought, parenthetical statements, or afterthoughts (I told you that I didn't want—)
En Dashes are for range (He reigned from 1969–1982)
Hyphens are for word breaks and hyphenations (T-Rex, post-production) less
06/07/2011
Quote:
Huh. I thought hyphens and en dashes were the same thing. I can't make sense of an em dash though, I didn't hear of that in any of my ENG classes.
Originally posted by
DeliciousSurprise
Hyphen -
En Dash –
Em Dash —
Em Dashes are for pauses in thought, parenthetical statements, or afterthoughts (I told you that I didn't want—)
En Dashes are for range (He reigned from 1969–1982)
Hyphens are for word ... more
En Dash –
Em Dash —
Em Dashes are for pauses in thought, parenthetical statements, or afterthoughts (I told you that I didn't want—)
En Dashes are for range (He reigned from 1969–1982)
Hyphens are for word ... more
Hyphen -
En Dash –
Em Dash —
Em Dashes are for pauses in thought, parenthetical statements, or afterthoughts (I told you that I didn't want—)
En Dashes are for range (He reigned from 1969–1982)
Hyphens are for word breaks and hyphenations (T-Rex, post-production) less
En Dash –
Em Dash —
Em Dashes are for pauses in thought, parenthetical statements, or afterthoughts (I told you that I didn't want—)
En Dashes are for range (He reigned from 1969–1982)
Hyphens are for word breaks and hyphenations (T-Rex, post-production) less
You learn something new everyday! Thanks Delicious!
06/07/2011