Non-Disc Record - XdragonboyX

Summary:

Unhelpful feedback, some incoherence

Non-Disc Record - XdragonboyX

Zyn 10 Feb 2016 03:23

New user XdragonboyX has given out some misleading feedback lately:

http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-1590479/revision-of-first-scp#post-2451838

It's not how many expungements, it's where you used them. When you use expungements, its a cheep place holder for unnecessary information. Remember, these files are for briefing agents. […]

http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-1593902/first-draft-of-new-scp#post-2454368

Concept-wise: Very, Very interesting. A keter class that does not have any intentions to hurt (or none at all, for that matter), but is still crazy dangerous and hard to contain. It doesn't involve any L337 POWERZ, but needs work.

Execution-wise: Weird sentence structure. The whole article is over-explanatory, and the containment procedures are extensive. However, it, with a few edits, is easily to restructure. […]

I like your idea, but it seems over-explained. With a few tweaks, this could be perfect, but it's not there yet.

I left explanatory posts on both. Of note, the second thread resulted in the author prematurely posting a work that is now sitting in the negatives rating-wise. Given that this user doesn't seem to have the best grasp of how feedback and editing a draft is supposed to work (here is their current draft thread), I say keep an eye on them.

Cease-and-desist/PM on next poor feedback infraction. Thanks to Dr Hysteria for helping compile posts.

Re: Non-Disc Record - XdragonboyX

Zyn 17 Feb 2016 18:30

Made two unauthorized edits to SCP-048, blackboxing the number designation of the O5 member. Crayne reverted and staffposted.

Re: Non-Disc Record - XdragonboyX

Zyn 27 Mar 2016 23:06

Today posted: http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-1653710/centipede-parasitoid-infection#post-2480119

+ show block

he area SCP-XXXX was found will be quarantined with everyone inside the area detained and tested for SCP-XXXX, anyone found infected with SCP-XXXX will be arrested and taken to a standard quarantine cell in our foundation. Security cameras are set inside the cells to detect escaping SCP-XXXX. Any SCP-XXXX that left the host will be killed or captured.

The Foundation doesn't have arrest privileges. Were an international covert intervention organisation, not a law enforcement agency.

'Our Foundation' is incorrect. The Foundation is not a building. It is a organisation.

Sentence: downvote

Needs some wor xenomorph666

You mentioned that the SCP-XXXX samples can shrink. How would a camera help prevent this?

Some of the points are correct, but I don't want to see this sort of low-effort feedback on the forums, especially when the draft contains far more glaring errors.

I'll C&D if this becomes an issue.

Re: Non-Disc Record - XdragonboyX

AdminBright 28 Mar 2016 04:02

Even if that just the ones that they noticed? I mean, not every post has to cover every flaw on an article, does it?

Granted, some of the points are incorrect, and those should be corrected, but over all, are we requiring all crit now cover all aspects of the articles flaws?

---

Admin, SCP Wiki

Re: Non-Disc Record - XdragonboyX

MrWrong 28 Mar 2016 11:45

For me, I find this to be the most low-quality aspect of the user's feedback:

Needs some wor xenomorph666

Is there a real need for the user to bolden "666"? It is alright for one to tell the other party to improve, but bolding a part of that party's handle feels slightly off to me. As if they're trying to emphasise on "666" 'cos reasons.

Also, it could help if the spelling for "wor" is correct. I assume they're saying "work"?

Beyond that, while the feedback is not extensive, I don't think we can fault users for giving partial feedback on drafts as they might not be able to go in-depth or does not know how much in-depth they ought to be. So long the feedback is valid and can probe OPs to change them for the better.

Last edited on 28 Mar 2016 12:19 by MrWrong Show more

Re: Non-Disc Record - XdragonboyX

Zyn 28 Mar 2016 17:24

Even if that just the ones that they noticed? I mean, not every post has to cover every flaw on an article, does it?

If those errors were the only ones that were noticed, it speaks to the lack of experience on the reviewer's part. We have had people post prematurely because they thought all they needed to fix was small details to make a piece mainsite-ready.

but over all, are we requiring all crit now cover all aspects of the articles flaws?

No. I actually would have been fine with this had there been some sort of "btw, you should get more feedback on this, since there are likely other issues that I didn't mention" disclaimer.

I'm totally fine with people just giving feedback on aspects of articles they're familiar with, so long as there's some acknowledgement to the author that it'd be wise to get further opinions.

Re: Non-Disc Record - XdragonboyX

Zyn 24 Oct 2016 18:18

Has been giving rather low-quality feedback lately, with a strange new format including a "Final Scentence:"/"Final Scentece" section.

http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-1952128/drafts-im-trying#post-2675425
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-1963787/scp-draft:special-funeral-accomodations#post-2676467
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-1964024/entropy-ornament#post-2676488

Re: Non-Disc Record - XdragonboyX

DrEverettMann 24 Oct 2016 18:30

I've given him an ultimatum. No more critique until he has a successful article. I hate doing that, since I don't think you should have to be a good writer to be a good critic, but nothing else has really worked. This will hopefully force him to actually listen to people when they give him criticism.

Re: Non-Disc Record - XdragonboyX

Zyn 24 Oct 2016 18:34

PM sent. Also of note, in response to being called out on the "final sentence" bit:

http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-1963787/scp-draft:special-funeral-accomodations#post-2676521

but that's kind of a bare minimum bar and not much to go off of unless there's a substantial difference in understanding/interpretation on the reader's part.

But if there was, that'd be the first thing I'd want to know. Because then they KNOW they need some work.

Dropped a closed mod post since that conversation was going nowhere productive. I'm also a little disappointed that they jumped right to "if there's a difference in interpretation, then it must be the author's fault".

ETA: They sent me a PM reply, "Acknowleged". They also replied to Mann's closed admin post with the same thing.

Last edited on 24 Oct 2016 18:39 by Zyn Show more