Talk:Sebastian Vettel takes pole for 2008 Italian Grand Prix
Latest comment: 16 years ago by Yuriybrisk
 |
Revision 691970 of this article has been reviewed by Brianmc (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 14:26, 13 September 2008 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: F1 nut authored, only minor corrections required after verifying correct and just non-native trivia issues The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer. |
Revision 691970 of this article has been reviewed by Brianmc (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 14:26, 13 September 2008 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: F1 nut authored, only minor corrections required after verifying correct and just non-native trivia issues The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer. |
--Brian McNeil / talk 14:22, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- As anyone checking the history will see, I made several changes to this - but none that actually changed the story the article tells. I think the biggest change was that the original author had used "podium" where they meant "pole", an easy mistake for a non-native speaker that can clearly be seen and corrected. Is this too much in terms of edits by the reviewer? --Brian McNeil / talk 14:29, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- I'd imagine technically it is, but I'm of the opinion that as the community is small we can use common sense instead of overdoing the regulations. They aren't major changes, and I feel that reviewers should be able to do that. I mean, half the point of review is to eliminate such errors. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 14:33, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- My concern is that it is a potential slippery slope, I'd rather see people worry as I have done above and err to caution than fix a BrockF5 special and review it. --Brian McNeil / talk 14:35, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- There's another level above sighted, isn't there? Reviewed, or something, you've got it, dunno bout anyone else. When we ultimatly bring it in part of the check can be for edits made by the reviewer and during the review. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 14:44, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, there is a reviewed level which only B'Crats can grant. It requires a reason and is a bit more than a rubber stamp. However, to be realistic we're not likely to be capable of using that until we're at 100+ regular contributors (WAG figure). I would then propose that some sort of mechanism be introduced to elect or otherwise appoint the people with the right. It should, I believe under such circumstances, be a use-it-or-lose-it privilege. --Brian McNeil / talk 14:49, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- Ok then, but regardless, to go back to the original point, I shouldn't worry too much. I think a little c/e is fairly par fr the course with a review. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 14:53, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- As a sole author of the F1-related issues for Wikinews, I agree completely... It's more important in case of newsworthiness to publish an article with a lesser delay and do a peer review lately. Especially in this particular case of a pole position which tomorrow (in a 24+ hours) will be of historical interest. --Yuriybrisk (talk) 17:09, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- Ok then, but regardless, to go back to the original point, I shouldn't worry too much. I think a little c/e is fairly par fr the course with a review. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 14:53, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, there is a reviewed level which only B'Crats can grant. It requires a reason and is a bit more than a rubber stamp. However, to be realistic we're not likely to be capable of using that until we're at 100+ regular contributors (WAG figure). I would then propose that some sort of mechanism be introduced to elect or otherwise appoint the people with the right. It should, I believe under such circumstances, be a use-it-or-lose-it privilege. --Brian McNeil / talk 14:49, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- There's another level above sighted, isn't there? Reviewed, or something, you've got it, dunno bout anyone else. When we ultimatly bring it in part of the check can be for edits made by the reviewer and during the review. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 14:44, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- My concern is that it is a potential slippery slope, I'd rather see people worry as I have done above and err to caution than fix a BrockF5 special and review it. --Brian McNeil / talk 14:35, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- I'd imagine technically it is, but I'm of the opinion that as the community is small we can use common sense instead of overdoing the regulations. They aren't major changes, and I feel that reviewers should be able to do that. I mean, half the point of review is to eliminate such errors. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 14:33, 13 September 2008 (UTC)