On pl.wikisource each correction level means that another person did the correction again. The green status means the page was corrected three times by three another persons.
Corrected, not read.
In my opinion Big Green Button Correction is useless. New users can click only for stats, not for proofreading. And nobody would check it again, because the book would be finished.
We are asking new users to validate the pages for the second time (from red to yellow level): new users can learn how the templates and raw codes are working, but when they do something wrong, an experienced user would check it one more time -- to make it green. If they would not edit the page, they would never know how the templates works. So they would not become a better editors...
We all can do only red pages, why not. We'll get a "perfectly readable and functional book" with some errors. But should we give its the same status as a proof-read three times book? Green status means "almost perfect". We shouldn't make green pages automatically, only to make our stats better.
Correction without correction is not a good idea. It's a lie.
Wieralee
2015-08-11 15:43 GMT+02:00 Nicolas VIGNERON vigneron.nicolas@gmail.com:
2015-08-11 15:21 GMT+02:00 zdzislaw zdzislaw.wiki@gmail.com:
2015-08-11 13:59 GMT+01:00 Nicolas VIGNERON <vigneron.nicolas at gmail.com>:
You're mixing a little bit « validation » and « perfection ». For example, if a page contains « word » or « wоrd » instead of « word », it's not perfect but it's valid as it invisible for 90% of readers and tools (plus, there is other tools to detect this specific
errors).
maybe... but, there's another concern about the BGB (mentioned by Ankry), the mental problem of new users - when they "validate" in edit mode or Visual Editor and notice a typo (or absence of comma) it is just a click to improve the text, but. .. in view mode, after noticing the error, you have to do IT all (which is such a inconvenience causing BGB proposal): enter to the edit mode, find again the same place in the text, place the cursor ... I'm afraid of thinking like: "Uh ... it's just one comma, I click right away in the BGB...
Z.
That a very good concern and I agree with you but how does the BGB will change anything in this situation? In fact, in this case, the problem is ni the edit mode, not in the BGB. And the solution is not to forbidden tool or edition but to explain to the user what to do and how to do it.
The BGB is not an idea of tool to improve correction but only to quicken the validation when there is no correction to do (and per se, validation is not an improvement at all ; the exact same text could be red, yellow or green and could be perfect or very bad, don't mix the metrics and the subject of the metrics).
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l