6 Replies Latest reply on Feb 12, 2019 10:52 PM by suzanne piecuch

    Review/edit contradiction?

    Sharon McKinley Wayfarer

      I'm looking back at pages I submitted for review. At the top it says: "Check this transcription thoroughly. Accept if correct!"  At the bottom it says: "You submitted this transcription...." Seems a bit contradictory! And if I edit someone else's transcription, I then have to re-submit it for review. Is this correct? Or am I doing something wrong?

        • Re: Review/edit contradiction?
          Lauren Algee Adventurer

          Hi Sharon! The text above the transcription window is a very recent addition -- part of the update we released just this week-- and appears on every item based on its current "status" (either not started, in progress, needs review, or completed)  The explanation below the window, explaining to the person who submitted that they are only able to edit (not approve), is also part of that update.  We're excited about both of these changes, but failed to notice the contradiction you point out that exists for users looking at a transcription they submitted.  Thanks for bringing it to our attention!  I just created a ticket to address this problem, but it will probably take a few weeks for the change to show up.  You can see that ticket here and track it's progress - https://github.com/LibraryOfCongress/concordia/issues/808

           

          To clarify, if you submit an item you are not able to approve it.  And yes, if you are reviewing and edit someone else's transcription you do have to re-submit it for review and another person will have to approve it.

           

          I hope this helps!

          • Re: Review/edit contradiction?
            suzanne piecuch Adventurer

            Hi Sharon,

             

            I had similar confusions when I started out, but things get ironed out, as Lauren said.... and you get used to the anomalies in the meantime.

             

            It's rather exciting to be involved in the evolution of this new project, and I think the conversations that happen here are helpful and embracing, problems are shared, solutions or suggestions bandied about.

             

            At the moment I am thrilled to have the option to edit pieces I've submitted--- that is a new feature that many of us were eager to see added.

             

            Have fun!

            Suzanne.

            • Re: Review/edit contradiction?
              Sharon McKinley Wayfarer

              Suzanne;

              Oh, I fully agree. I've just been a bit confused. I hope I don't sound grumpy.

               

              If someone has changed something, it looks like I can re-edit...of course, I don't want to over-agonize about things, but I've found that if I go back, I often see something and say, ":how did i get THAT out of it?! It's obviously thus-and-so!" Mary Church Terrell's German stuff is fascinatingly mundane. And let me tell ya, tracking down famous singers is an entertaining, time-consuming (and possibly not particularly valuable) exercise, not to mention Clara's Civil War contacts. It's been so much fun to do this! And it's great to be in on the development of the process. Thanks for inviting us all in!

               

              Oh, one more question. When I started, I screwed up following the line lengths and such. If I find others like those (usually run-on paragraphs), which iI have, is it worth the effort to fix them?

                • Re: Review/edit contradiction?
                  suzanne piecuch Adventurer

                  Sharon,

                   

                  Yes, the research is a BLAST. You track down famous singers, I track down newspapers, editors, and whatever odd terms I find that end up being historically significant.

                   

                  I just started in December, and I think all of us volunteers have had those D'Oh! moments of not seeing things at first pass; it's been itchy to touch back on those, but I've let go of so many in these weeks I can only hope people were generous when they reviewed them.

                   

                  As for the line lengths, there have been several posts where Lauren and/or Virginia clarified that following the lines as written is not mandated, but it does makes for easier reviewing and for following along with the document.

                   

                  I think in general, if that's all that is "wrong" with a transcription, it's not worth opening it up just to fix those, but if i have to make other edits, I fix the line endings too, and throw in an extra return between paragraphs.

                   

                  I like your "fascinatingly mundane" comment. I recently read (for fun, not review) "A Midwife's Tale: The Life of Martha Ballard, Based on her Diary, 1785-1812," and the author manages to flesh out the culture of healing, hardship, life  -- and business transactions -- from very sparing notations made by this midwife in Maine; it was really quite the effort of cobbling bits and pieces to illustrate her life. I imagine the author is also one who is fascinated by the mundane!

                   

                  Nice chatting,

                  Suzanne.

                  1 of 1 people found this helpful