Helping \"glossary-cleaners\"
Thread poster: Andy Watkinson

Andy Watkinson
Local time: 02:24
Catalan to English
+ ...
Mar 4, 2003

In order to ease the workload on the people who are working on and improving the glossaries, would it not be possible to include each day a list of links to a series of questions (5? 10?....nº to be decided) taken from the glossary to be re-assessed by everyone? A section could be included on the KudoZ page itself perhaps, or the main page, wherever....

(NB. if any of this is actually possible...I know virtually nothing about the details of how websites are set up and maintained and the work involved, and can already sense an icy shudder running through whoever would be responsible for any of this)

One need would be to decide which items are posted for review. So as not to trail through the entire glossary itself, items reviewed could be limited by gathering them from different sources and “marking them”:

a) Members who, perhaps from glancing over their past answers / questions (for whatever reason), would often spot ones they remember disagreeing with: there could be some kind of checkbox to “mark” entries for review.

I don’t mean people wading wearily through everything; if each person only supplied one item now and again that would be more than enough.

b) KudoZ answers which members see going into the glossary at the time the “crime” is being committed could immediately “mark” it as pending review (in a relatively short time I’ve seen more than one answer being chosen when even the answerer themselves had said they were mistaken –No apologies for using the plural). I know a system like this obviously creates the danger of unhappy answerers objecting as a matter of course...– one possibility, of course, would be to bar any of the original answerers from “marking” anything– why not leave it to impartial bystanders who have nothing to gain from choosing one option or another)?

c) Members, or other askers, who use the glossary before asking others for help, who come across suspect entries. (suspect, or plainly absurd)

d) i) Other ways could include those answers awarded just one or two points - perhaps indicating an answer which wasn’t 100% convincing (??).

ii) Those having one or more “disagrees” – I know that neither this nor the previous “filter” is anything like a reliable method, as some perfectly respectable answers are occasionally lumbered with one or more disagrees or two or fewer points.... but it does at least increase the likelihood of the answer being questionable.

iii) Those answers chosen automatically.

iv) Anything else anybody can think of.

A second need would be how to decide which answer(s) stand and which are rejected.

Members would simply vote for their choice of translation. If one answer is overwhelmingly chosen (percentage to be decided), it would replace the existing term.

There would obviously be no KudoZ or BrownieZ points, gold stars, gift tokens, free Big Macs or similar, so only those genuinely interested in improving the glossary would take part.

Well, that’s probably spoilt someone’s breakfast somewhere.

T’is an idea.

Saludos a todos,



Parrot  Identity Verified
Local time: 02:24
Spanish to English
+ ...
I really appreciate your suggestion andy Mar 4, 2003

And I\'m sure this will be kept in mind by the programmers. Until such a mechanism or a similar one is set up, though, I have two suggestions I hope people will take up.

1. Before entering a kudoz question, check the glossary to see if the entry exists. After four years of operation we have tens of thousands of possibilities.

If you don\'t find an entry that fits your context, to go ahead and ask the question.

This way, glossary entries will be tested against real needs and mistaken or badly-entered responses will be ferreted out as an initial step.

2. This is a measure being implemented in the Polish section. When a mistaken entry is discovered, an appropriate posting with the corresponding URL is put up in the language forum concerned with the heading \"Arbitration\". Members then come out of the woodwork to opine on the proper entry.

Certainly it\'s not the same or as convenient as a completely automated tool, but in the meantime, it would go some way to glossary cleaning.

Thanks again,

icon_smile.gif Cecilia


To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator:

You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request »

Helping \"glossary-cleaners\"

Advanced search

Protemos translation business management system
Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!

The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.

More info »
PerfectIt consistency checker
Faster Checking, Greater Accuracy

PerfectIt helps deliver error-free documents. It improves consistency, ensures quality and helps to enforce style guides. It’s a powerful tool for pro users, and comes with the assurance of a 30-day money back guarantee.

More info »

  • All of
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search