Stats 2 September 2008
Rank : 85. Urkel
Level : 85
Percentage : 16.04% (+1.67) Forum Posts : 3,203 (+1)
Submissions Reviews
Accepted : 59505 (+44) Shows : 1
Pending : 2 (-24) Episodes : 2
Denied : 193 People : 0
Total : 59700 Total : 3
Edited Guides Trusted Contributor
233 Shows 2 Shows
Have you seen the new ProblemEditor guidelines? There are long-established Editor Guidelines setting out good practice and rules for editors, but some editors sometimes fall short of the required standards. It's been possible to request the removal of an editor who no longer visits the site, or to ask staff to investigate apparent gaming, but until now there hasn't been much you could do about an editor who is very poor at the job, or who is abusing his position to deny legitimate submissions or to stifle discussion in the show forums. For the first time, the site has set out a protocol to be followed if you feel that an editor is not treating submissions fairly, or is approving or making suspect submissions, or is otherwise breaking the rules.
Staff have now started working through reports. They will take a look at any and all allegations, and, if they are substantiated, they will take appropriate action, whether it be a quiet word with the editor or more rigorous sanction. Some editors have expressed concern that the process could be use to make spurious complaints about a particular editor, but we should be confident that staff will handle each report with the rigour it deserves. I think it is a good thing that we have an avenue to express concerns and a formal process for staff to follow.
Two of the things that editors are required to do is to accept "submissions to add or correct data, including credit transfer submissions, and necessary punctuation, capitalization, and spelling" and to provide "at least a brief explanation of the reason for rejection". When I got home last night I checked submission approval PMs against show guides — as you do — and noticed a familiar name was shown as retired. That led me to a guide he once worked on, and I was pleased to see that the editor of that guide had (been) retired. I submitted a credit consolidation submission to the guide, transferring a credit from a duplicate ID to the true one, in August 2006. The editor rejected the submission, without cause, and failed to provide an explanation. He also failed to respond to a PM I wrote him, querying both actions. If the new procedures had been in place two years ago, he could have been asked to shape up or ship out.
Of the several editors to have refused to accept a legitimate credit consolidation submission from me over the past three years, he had been one of the last three to retain editorship of the show guide in question. Two years on from the original rejection, I have resubmitted the rejected details, together with four other credit consolidations for the guide that I had been sitting on for two years. It's a bit late in the day, but the credits attached to the duplicate guides have finally been corrected. Like an elephant, I never forget.