|
I remain hopeful he can offer a free alternative. Let's wait and see
Thanks Pete!
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
The Code Project
|
|
|
|
|
We have a lot of unedited articles. A boatload. What we don't have is hours in the day and so I was wondering how best to harness the awesome power of you guys in helping us get these articles a little lovin'
Years and years ago we had a fixed group of editors who had been tested, vetoed, and had been given The Power of Editing. It worked OK until these editors found a life, a job, maybe even a romantic interest, and ran out of spare time.
I'd like to resurrect this, but a little differently. My thinking was: anyone who is platinum can edit any article, no questions asked. To augment this we allow anyone who wishes to edit an article a chance, and if they pass a basic trial period they are let loose to go forth and edit. And earn rep points and also be in the running for outright bribes (prizes, software, gadgets etc)
How much interest is there in this?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I'd be willing to help out as time permits. I assume you must have some editing guidelines, right?
CQ de W5ALT
Walt Fair, Jr., P. E.
Comport Computing
Specializing in Technical Engineering Software
|
|
|
|
|
Yep - we have an old, dusty tome that provides the guidelines.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I'd be more than happy to help out. I have been a member on this site for a long time and always regretted for not having written an article. Editing the articles could probably be a first step in writing an article in the near future.
Let me know if my reputation qualifies me to take up the trial period test.
|
|
|
|
|
Chris - I'm sure I could find a minute or two to help you out if you need it. I like being bribed
"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
|
|
|
|
|
I'd be willing to help out in between providing technical answers to forum questions, and working on my external (unpaid) projects. I'm sure such a task would give us lots of opportunities to learn some new skills.
It's time for a new signature.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm sure I could help with editing articles, I would like to contribute a bit more, provided there were some guidelines (and not too many all at once! )
Ali
|
|
|
|
|
June is going to be busy month for me but after that I will be glad to be of any help. Coincidently I will be writing my PhD thesis at that time so I will be in writing and editing mode
-Saurabh
|
|
|
|
|
I would definitely be interested in editing articles, it may also help me to finish writing the article I have been working on for a while
Lloyd
^-^-^-@@-^-^-^
(..)-----;
||---||
^^ ^^
Moose.
|
|
|
|
|
Sure.
My email is larry_mintz@primus.ca
|
|
|
|
|
there is no need to publish your e-mail address, unless you need to test your SPAM filters...
There is a little widget under each message, which people can use to send you an e-mail through CP, then you can exchange whatever you want to exchange. It is optional though, check your checkboxes...
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
I only read formatted code with indentation, so please use PRE tags for code snippets.
I'm not participating in frackin' Q&A, so if you want my opinion, ask away in a real forum (or on my profile page).
|
|
|
|
|
Hi
I've also posted an article http://www.codeproject.com/KB/applications/HelpSystem.aspx
But it still says "Status - Composing". And in My Articles page, it is "Unfinished article".
Can someone please help?
Regards,
Vinit
VKS
|
|
|
|
|
when you try and edit your article, you might notice a tiny checkbox (right above or right below the edit box), something like "make public" or "publish" or "unfinished" or "don't publish yet" or whatever it is called nowadays. That is the one you should set appropriately.
I know, it isn't easy to spot right away. I wish they'd make it a lot bigger, red, and blinking.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
I only read formatted code with indentation, so please use PRE tags for code snippets.
I'm not participating in frackin' Q&A, so if you want my opinion, ask away in a real forum (or on my profile page).
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks much, Luc. It helped me a lot and now my article's status is changed to pending.
VKS
|
|
|
|
|
I am flattered to have been featured for such a long time, but in all fairness, there must be another recently posted article that is worthy of the asp.net editor's choice spot.
|
|
|
|
|
Fair enough. Should update in about 20 minutes
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
The Code Project
|
|
|
|
|
I'm writing an article at the moment which is attempting to explain some advanced concepts in a more beginner/intermediate way then they are usually presented.
As such, I'm finding that I have to dumb down some of the explanations to the point of slight inaccuracy - unfortunately many of the definitions within the subject area are recursive so without a slightly inaccurate definition which is later explained better it's hard to write something a lay-person would understand.
At the moment, I'm finding that in order to not appear just plain wrong, I'm having to justify my position with brackets. For example:
"Slightly wrong statement (I know this is slightly wrong, but trust me for now and I'll explain later.) Correct point that leads on from previous statement."
Since the explanation of why the point is wrong is helpful to people already familiar with the subject matter, but not helpful for beginners I was hoping there would be a nice way of doing it like I have seen in tech books, something like:
"
Slightly wrong statement. Correct point that leads on from previous statement.
Note:I know this is slightly wrong, but trust me for now and I'll explain later.
"
Obviously I don't actually want to use either tables or code blocks - can somebody suggest a neat alternative for formatting this?
Thanks,
Chris
|
|
|
|
|
I would change this around and have a link to the corrected version later in the document. Possibly mark this in a note that stands out like:
This definition is a simplification. As we cover more detail, you'll find that we revise this. If you want to see the full detail, you can find it here.
"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
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks - I like that idea. There are some places I'm not sure it will flow right still, but that certainly makes it tidier. I like the idea that they can jump to the fuller definition - very good as it will make it more readable for people who already know about it!
|
|
|
|
|
when you click on top articles it pulls up a list of articles that were updated from approx 1 year ago till now. The problem is that there are articles with higher popularity than the ones listed that have been updated since then. Did a policy change on the top ranked articles or a SQL query error?
Just curious.
Thanks for the quick response earlier with my other question.
Brad
Brad Barnhill
modified on Wednesday, May 12, 2010 9:48 AM
|
|
|
|
|
There are date filters that allow you to specify the range of articles in which to search.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Do they only get updated once a week or something? Just wondering because my article has recieved several votes this week so I plugged the numbers into an excel spreadsheet. I got 11.51 popularity instead of 11.42 and a rating of 4.87 instead of 4.83. Just got curious as to how often that gets updated and if my math is wrong.
Not a major issue ... I need to be utilizing my time better and working on the project a little more instead of worrying about ratings.
Thanks,
Brad Barnhill
|
|
|
|
|
AFAIK these numbers are updated immediately. However you can't duplicate the calculations involved as you don't have all the necessary information: all votes get a weight depending on the reputation color of the voter; I believe it is 8 for platinum, 4 for gold, 2 for silver, 1 for bronze/none.
If you give all votes a weight of 1 you would be off a bit. As your calculations lead you to higher numbers, the consequence is (at least) one of the colored guys has given you less than 5.
|
|
|
|
|
Colored people? Hahahahahahahahahaha.
Ok I had no idea about the weights of the individuals votes.
Thanks for your help explaining this to me.
Brad Barnhill
|
|
|
|