Subject: EDQ #4: The Queue & the Editing Process
Posted by: agony
Date: Apr 19 13
Today I'd like to talk about the editing process - how it works, and what to expect from it. If you have a vision of the editors in an office, diligently working away at quizzes from nine to five -- well, that's not even close to reality.
I'll start with something that most of you know -- the staff at FT are volunteers. This means, yes, that we are not paid, but a more meaningful way to look at this is that we work here in our spare time. A few staff are retirees, some are students, but most of us have jobs. Many of us have children. We have lawns that must be mowed, dogs that must be walked, and significant others who expect a significant portion of our attention and time. We slip our work here into odd moments of our lives, just as the authors and players do. Some of us only get here once a week or so; others are here every day, but often only for five or ten minutes at a time.
The quizzes that you see coming online are only a fraction of the work the editors do. A large number of quizzes edited don't make it online - nearly half of created quizzes never get online. The vast majority of Correction Notes are for quizzes whose authors no longer visit the site, which means the editors are taking care of them. This often involves considerable research and/or extensive rewriting. Subcategories are always being created, quizzes moved around. There are constant discussions going on about practices and policies - the site is always under refinement, always being tweaked to make it work better.
The actual editing is not usually a simple process of ticking off a list of problems-- bad spelling, check; time dependency, check; titles not in quotation marks, check-- but can be very time consuming. It's not unusual for an editor to take from fifteen minutes to half an hour per quiz, especially those from new authors. A quiz with substantial problems can take an hour or more to edit. You will occasionally see a block of quizzes from one category go online in a short time, but those are almost always quizzes from experienced authors whose quizzes do just need a quick check, or resubmits (or re re re submits!) of quizzes that have already had a lot of time poured into them. If you only see one quiz from a category go online in a day, it does not necessarily mean that an editor popped into that category queue, put one quiz online in five minutes, and then left. It's a lot more likely that an hour or more was spent on that queue, but all that work only produced one publishable quiz.
Posted by: agony
Date: Apr 19 13
Today I'd like to talk about the editing process - how it works, and what to expect from it. If you have a vision of the editors in an office, diligently working away at quizzes from nine to five -- well, that's not even close to reality.
I'll start with something that most of you know -- the staff at FT are volunteers. This means, yes, that we are not paid, but a more meaningful way to look at this is that we work here in our spare time. A few staff are retirees, some are students, but most of us have jobs. Many of us have children. We have lawns that must be mowed, dogs that must be walked, and significant others who expect a significant portion of our attention and time. We slip our work here into odd moments of our lives, just as the authors and players do. Some of us only get here once a week or so; others are here every day, but often only for five or ten minutes at a time.
The quizzes that you see coming online are only a fraction of the work the editors do. A large number of quizzes edited don't make it online - nearly half of created quizzes never get online. The vast majority of Correction Notes are for quizzes whose authors no longer visit the site, which means the editors are taking care of them. This often involves considerable research and/or extensive rewriting. Subcategories are always being created, quizzes moved around. There are constant discussions going on about practices and policies - the site is always under refinement, always being tweaked to make it work better.
The actual editing is not usually a simple process of ticking off a list of problems-- bad spelling, check; time dependency, check; titles not in quotation marks, check-- but can be very time consuming. It's not unusual for an editor to take from fifteen minutes to half an hour per quiz, especially those from new authors. A quiz with substantial problems can take an hour or more to edit. You will occasionally see a block of quizzes from one category go online in a short time, but those are almost always quizzes from experienced authors whose quizzes do just need a quick check, or resubmits (or re re re submits!) of quizzes that have already had a lot of time poured into them. If you only see one quiz from a category go online in a day, it does not necessarily mean that an editor popped into that category queue, put one quiz online in five minutes, and then left. It's a lot more likely that an hour or more was spent on that queue, but all that work only produced one publishable quiz.
88 replies. On page 1 of 5 pages. 1 2 3 4 5
agony
|
More - There is no useful way to "play the system" – to select categories or editors where your quiz is likely to get online more quickly. Something as much out of your control or knowledge as the weather in an editor's town, or the state of an editor's marriage, can make big changes in who is editing when, and for how long. A long posted waiting time for a category may be due to something like one specific quiz that is holding things up (for many types of reasons) or it may be due to there being dozens of quizzes in the queue. The only reliable way to get your quizzes online quickly is to consistently submit high quality work, and to be co-operative. Authors who make a practice of having feuds with editors may find themselves waiting longer, as they may have to wait for an editor they have not butted heads with – we prefer that editors who have a bad history with an author not edit that author's work, to avoid accusations of bias. Once your quiz is submitted, please leave it alone. It IS possible to make changes to your quiz after submission, but usually going back in to pat this and tuck that and "improve" just a bit is highly counter-productive – every time you save your quiz after submission, it goes to the end of the queue. Only do this if you've noticed a real problem that would get your quiz rejected anyway, that you know how to fix. Once your quiz is submitted, trust us, we will get to it. "When will you edit my quiz" or "Why haven't you edited my quiz" notes are not appreciated, and will not get your quiz preferential treatment – rather the opposite. We do not reward the squeaky wheel. These notes interfere with editors getting their work done – they are answering your note, rather than editing your quiz - and will not do you any good. They are also very annoying. Personally, my policy is to never answer such a note, and I encourage the other editors to adopt the same policy. If you are not sure whether your quiz HAS been submitted, if you think you maybe misunderstood the submission process, you can check. Just go to "My quizzes – edit" from the drop down menu under "Me" on the Home Page. In the far right column, it will either read "online" "offline" or "submitted". If it says "submitted", you're good. I know it's hard to wait, but maybe work off your anxiety by starting your next quiz? On the issue of "disputes with editors" or 'authors on probation" or other situations where an author feels he/she is not getting a fair shake: If there are facts that you feel would make a difference to your case that the editors are not aware of, please present them to the editor in question, and, if necessary, to me or gtho4. Once all the facts are out, though, you can best advocate for yourself by showing that you understand what the problem was, and are doing your best to avoid it. The only way to remove restrictions imposed due to plagiarism, for example, is to submit quizzes free of copying. Authors do not lose privileges without documentation, and full discussion among the editors if there is any controversy or disagreement. A big part of "working well with the editors" is understanding that we have reasons for our policies, and accepting that. There's a lot more to say on aspects of this topic, especially on the subject of editor/author communication, but I'll step back now and let some of my colleagues add their two cents. Reply #1. Apr 19 13, 6:13 PM |
MotherGoose
|
"A quiz with substantial problems can take an hour or more to edit" May I just add that it has just taken me over an hour to edit a quiz because of the amount of plagiarism in it? And I only got as far as Q4 before I gave up! Such a time-waster! If I may add my two cents' worth - and I know this has been said on many occasions before - please, please, please, read the quiz submission guidelines for both category and quizzes in general, before submitting. I was taught at school - when all else fails, read the instructions! If you really care about how quickly you get your submissions online, this is probably the most important determining factor. So much time is wasted sending quizzes back for errors that would not have occurred in the first place had the author bothered to read the guidelines. In Literature, for example, you can tell as soon as you look at a quiz that the author has not read the guidelines when you see titles not enclosed in quotation marks. Speaking as an editor, it is really annoying to see this lack of preparation. It makes one think, why should I waste my time editing this quiz when the author hasn't bothered to do their part in the editing process? Reply #2. Apr 19 13, 7:58 PM |
looney_tunes
|
Many quizzes get submitted to a category which is not the best place for their quiz. This can be because they did not understand the category guidelines where they were submitting the quiz, or because they were not aware of the existence of the other category - this often happens with books, where some authors belong in Literature, and others are found in Books for Kids. When an editor sees this, they may reject the quiz with instructions to move it to the right place, or they may just move it, and let the editors in the new category handle it. The latter course, which seems like a helpful way to avoid delays in editing, can cause problems for authors participating in a challenge that has requirements regarding which category their quiz should (or should not) be in. That is one of the important bits of information you can provide in the "Submission note for editor" box on your template when you submit your quiz. An editor who sees that restriction will know that you would prefer to have the quiz rejected with instructions about how it could be amended to make it fit into the chosen category. The author would then be free to decide whether to change it or move it. The "Submission note for editor" box can be used to convey any relevant information that you think the editor would find useful as they edit your quiz. You do not need to tell them it's your first quiz, or that it's about your favorite movie. You may want to tell them why your title looks strange - a quiz on the work of e.e. cummings might make a conscious decision to avoid using proper title case, for example. While the editor might still disagree, at least they know that you are making a stylistic choice, and are not just unaware of the accepted form. Try to keep it brief, though - the message takes up a lot of space on my screen when I see a quiz in the editing queue, and frankly I feel a bit wary of tackling a quiz with a novel in the message box if I only have a short time available in an editing session - it will have to wait until I have more time, which might be a couple of days. If you think you need to discuss a quiz that has been sent back for more work, you should feel free to contact the editor with whom you have been working by clicking the link that says "Reply to Player who Sent Note" beneath the original message. Editors are happy to help you make sure you are clear on what is required - it saves everyone time if you actually make the necessary changes before resubmission - if the issues haven't been properly addressed, the quiz will come straight back to you. There is no need to let the editor know when you have resubmitted your quiz - if it has been submitted, it will appear in the queue, and will be edited in due course, as Agony said. This applies to resubmissions as well as first time submissions of a quiz. Reply #3. Apr 19 13, 8:47 PM |
salami_swami 
|
I'd like to say, as far as queue length goes... When you're antsy about the quiz getting online, a day feels like five. Be patient; it will be checked in due time. If you're like me, it is tempting to open the quiz to take a peak. Even without clicking save, it may affect the wait time. If an editor is editing your quiz, you will see it; it tells you. However, the editor will also see you are editing it. In my experience, editors have said they stop editing and let the player work on it if they see the name in there. So they will leave and edit it another time - sometimes in a few days. Also, it doesn't only show when you're looking at the quiz... But for about fifteen minutes after. I have taken a peak at my quiz when I see a quiz in the same category go online, and it has actually caused the editor to skip over my quiz and move on, delaying the editing process. I would like to suggest to other players not to even look at their quiz if they can help it unless they need to edit it. I've experienced this, and though not really big deal, it does save some time for those eager beavers. :) Reply #4. Apr 20 13, 12:44 AM |
rossian
|
It makes me wonder why anyone wants to be an editor! It's a lot of work, and the rewards seem minimal. I'm sure there is satisfaction in helping an author reach an acceptable standard but I don't think I could cope with the accompanying aggravation. I'm amazed to read that nearly half of quizzes don't even get on line. I admire you all for your patience and will try even harder to exercise that virtue myself in future. Reply #5. Apr 20 13, 1:51 AM |
SisterSeagull
|
When I first started writing quizzes I was forever flicking backwards and forwards to the home page to see whether or not I had a mail message telling me that my quiz was 'on-line'; I even looked forward to getting a correction note! (although fortunately I've had very, very few of those). As has been stated by the editors here, the best policy to adopt to get your quizzes on-line quickly is to ensure that you check your own work thoroughly before submission and, once submitted leave the thing alone! If you do get a correction note, don't take umbrage, don't take it personally and just do what has been requested and, as sure as eggs are eggs, you're work will be available to everybody so much more quickly. As an example, I had only written and had on-line about 20 quizzes, it may have been slightly less (I can't remember exactly) but I played ball with the editors and was surprised to discover one day, whilst creating another quiz, that I had been granted crossword authoring priviliges! The system does work if you play by the rules. I, for one, really appreciate the hard work that goes on behind the scenes. (Reading that back it sounds a little sycophantic! haha) Reply #6. Apr 20 13, 3:48 AM |
LadyCaitriona
|
I'd like to add my thoughts on what I think is the best way to make changes to your quiz after it has gone online. First of all: this should be done rarely. Major overhauls to online quizzes are discouraged, especially as time goes by and statistics (e.g. difficulty) accumulate for the quiz. This is why older quizzes become archived. However, let's say that a week or so after your Movies quiz goes online you notice that you'd made a typo in a date: Bela Lugosi died in 1956, not 1965! If you ever need to make changes to an online quiz, the best way to go about it is to send yourself a Correction Note on the quiz detailing the error you noticed and indicating that the error has been fixed. This way an editor will be alerted to the change and can review how the mistake has been fixed. If you've inadvertently caused another problem with the fix, we'd like to catch it right away, not when you get a flurry of CNs from other members. If you receive a CN on an archived quiz, please use the text box to give specific instructions to the editor on how to amend the quiz (if the CN is valid). This should be, "Replace the last line of the info with the following sentence...", not "The player is correct, please fix my quiz" or "The player is correct, but my quiz is archived so I'm not going to fix it." The better instructions you can give on how to amend your quiz, the easier it is for the editor to implement and the faster she or he can move on to edit another new submission (maybe it's yours!). Likewise, if you want to make a change to a single question submission, send a correction on your question with specific instructions on how you would like to see the question amended. Reply #7. Apr 20 13, 5:18 AM |
kyleisalive
|
Something that has been brought up here and which has been tossed around a lot recently is the idea of 'probation' and 'priority'. The editors don't deny either of these things, but I get the feeling that a lot of authors wouldn't really get the implications of either unless they take a trip behind the curtain and into the queue. I know that until I started editing, I never knew how many quizzes were actually waiting to be edited, or how it all really worked. I knew there was a line, sure, but there was no guarantee as to where I stood in it, or when things would be checked, etc. Well, if you were to step on this side you would see the twenty categories listed in order of how long their approximate wait is. That rough queue size list we tell you to take with a grain of salt? It kind of plays into that. If a queue is waiting for 5 days, it may come up as 5-8 on the size list; it might come up as 5-12. This number is literally made up of the timestamps of the quizzes in the queue and it is, admittedly, a deceiving number for authors. This could mean that there are two quizzes in the queue, one at 5 days wait and one at 8. It could mean there are twenty quizzes in the queue spanning 1 through 16 days wait. Regardless, rest assured that the editors are aware of their queues and how long quizzes are waiting; we know exactly when it was submitted-- to the minute. Sometimes, as Agony and others have said, life is life. We can't always be there and there are multitudes of reasons why a quiz sits in the queue (from being tagged for a specific editor to discussion amongst editors for various reasons, to simple time constraints). We want to clear the queues and will try our best. But anyways, that's kind of how the queue is structured. As for 'probation' and 'priority' in the queue, authors can kind of judge these things themselves-- and they do-- because while you can't see the size of a queue you can gauge your submissions. The issue I see with this most often is that authors tend to conflate the probation part. Some authors actually are on probation, but experience regular wait times; some authors feel like they're on probation when really they're not. Years ago we used to indicate probation using what we lovingly referred to as 'the green screen'. If your quizzes were not up-to-snuff you could open a new template and be greeted by a giant, green warning at the top of the quiz suggesting that you read the guidelines before submitting. We scrapped this after several years when we realized that no one was paying attention to it anymore. There are better ways of working with authors than sticking a note to their door. Now it's a bit more difficult to tell when you should be getting that note-- after all, it's not being posted. Let's put it this way. If you can only create one template, you're on 'probation'. This means that we want to work with your quizzes one at a time to ensure that they meet the expectations we hold for new submissions. We typically reserve this for plagiarism but it has happened for other authors who either have a poor grasp of the site or the English language. This does typically mean a longer wait in the queue because we need to be more meticulous in the editing process, but it does not guarantee it. It is also a position that a *lot* of our best authors have been in, and most (if not all) of our most prolific have bounced back from it. If you can submit more than one template, your priorities are higher than about 99% of authors we've had come through. At this point, your quizzes are usually error-free. In the queue, it's easier for us to look at the quiz, read through it, and simply put it online. As such your wait time will likely seem quicker, especially in categories which are already running quickly. Just like authors on probation, this can be taken away for the same reasons. Authors always have the potential to get here by working on their quizzes, working with the editors, and being creative. Those are the extremes of the spectrum. Most of our authors fall into the middle ground-- I'd say more than 99% are middle downward (but I don't have those numbers). This means that you are not on probation. It means that you are not priority. It does not mean your quizzes are bad; it does not mean we are punishing you or giving you special treatment. It means that your quizzes are being submitted to the queue and are subject to the same procedures and same wait times as everyone else-- even the probation/priority crowds. Bringing this back to the timestamp thing, once you submit a quiz to the queue, regardless of who you are, we know when it was submitted. The editors try to be fair; we've all been in the queue before (many of us still are; some right now). We wait just like you. Most editors will enforce the priorities and probations to encourage authors to constantly improve themselves but at the same time, it's only fair to work on the queue in order, as it is, because a submission waiting 16 days isn't really fair to leave by the wayside to put on a quiz waiting only 1. That quiz waiting 16 days is there for a good reason-- not because the editor thought 'let's let them learn a lesson'. Reply #8. Apr 20 13, 6:36 AM |
| agony
|
Rossian said " I'm amazed to read that nearly half of quizzes don't even get on line." ---------------------- That's considerably better than it was in the past - five years ago it was more like 70% that never saw the light of day. We've been working very hard to make sure our guidelines are clear and easy to follow, and have been trying in other ways to make the whole process easier. The authors have been working hard too - a big part of that improvement is due to you all here in the Lounge. Reply #9. Apr 20 13, 7:13 AM |
JanIQ
|
As a non-editor, I'd like to say something about correction notices. Whenever I feel the need to send a CN, I first check the facts. I might be wrongly remembering things. If I still go on to send a CN, I try and make the point as clear as possible. I might even suggest a better wording, if I've spotted a grammatical problem. I hope that everyone who sends me a CN, tries and follows this procedure too. It saves time for the author and especially for the editors who might have to respond in place of an absent author. Reply #10. Apr 20 13, 7:37 AM |
| kyleisalive
|
In two weeks our next EDQ will be about Correction Notices I believe. ;) Reply #11. Apr 20 13, 7:41 AM |
| LadyCaitriona
|
Sorry - I didn't mean to go into too much detail about Correction Notes, only that sending one to yourself is a great way to communicate with an editor. Reply #12. Apr 20 13, 10:51 AM |
suomy
|
It had not occurred to me to use the Correction Notes in that way - for making corrections to your own quizzes and single questions. It would be worth repeating in a couple of weeks when the CN topic comes up. It might be worth having these EDQs as a link in the Quiz Creation Guidelines for those authors wanting to short-cut the learning process. Reply #13. Apr 20 13, 2:21 PM |
George95
|
As many of us in the Lounge deal with on a constant basis, waiting for a quiz in the queue can feel like an eternity. Unless you hire everyone and their brother as editors, that time will never diminish. Would it be too much to ask to add a number on the quiz editor that tells the player. "Your quiz might be in the queue for a while. There are currently x number of quizzes with it." and/or "The last quiz in this category to go online was x". Something like that can satisfy stat junkies like me, and might cut back on the number of "squeaky wheel" complaints, as agony pointed out. The editors do have a lot on their FT plate other than editing. I just sent a CN on a question in Who's The Expert written by someone who has deleted their account. If a Geography ed wants to look at it.... ;) Reply #14. Apr 20 13, 4:05 PM |
| kyleisalive
|
The problem with giving a number to say 'your quiz is x in y total quizzes' is that it gives virtually the same arbitrary value as the current Rough Queue Sizes page. As I said, while editors do try to work on quizzes in order, this isn't always done. There's no guarantee that other quizzes aren't held back for editing reasons or that your quiz is held back for the same reasons. Reply #15. Apr 20 13, 4:39 PM |
| George95
|
Kyle, I understand an order is impossible, as editors don't have a set order. But my suggestion was more of "Your quiz is one of x number of quizzes in the queue". A round total, as opposed to a specific order. Reply #16. Apr 20 13, 8:04 PM |
| kyleisalive
|
Ah-- I misread it a little. In this case, I think it would put a bit more strain on the editors. One thing we're trying to achieve is a little bit more understanding of why quizzes have wait times and what actually goes on in the queues. At the same time, however, if we put 'your quiz is one in x amount of quizzes', and x turns out to be 1 or 2, relatively consistently for a week, then we'd probably have people asking "why isn't my quiz edited yet? It's the only one in there" when really it's saved for someone specific, being checked for a reason, or otherwise. In that time, if it is saved for a specific editor, dozens of quizzes could pass it by. There's no way of knowing. Reply #17. Apr 20 13, 8:36 PM |
| agony
|
Yes, we don't want to do anything that encourages more bean-counting and comparing, which I think this would do. Say you were told when you submitted that there were three quizzes in the queue. If five quizzes then go online in that category over the next two days, and none of them are yours, you're going to feel very anxious, especially if you play those quizzes and they are nothing special, from less experienced authors than yourself. However, what you wouldn't have a way to know is that these quizzes had all been through several rounds of editing, and now only needed one small change each, that took less than a minute to check. There are simply too many variables - it's impossible to tell what will happen with a queue. Better to just release the quiz once it is submitted. It will be gotten to - there is no way for a quiz to get lost. Reply #18. Apr 21 13, 12:49 AM |
| reeshy
|
Honestly, the best thing is just to learn to be patient! I know it's hard, and most experienced authors still wait rather anxiously when they have submissions in the queue, but I find the time goes much faster if I just try to work on other quizzes and questions while I'm waiting. (Yes, I do check the Question Queue like a maniac, I'll admit that!) As the editors say, your quiz and questions won't get lost. :) Reply #19. Apr 21 13, 9:09 AM |
| agony
|
Since I was quite clear on the type of note NOT to send your editor, it might be helpful to give an idea of the kind of note that editors are happy to answer. As Looney_Tunes said, we are always willing to discuss changes we have asked for. If you don't understand your rejection note, you can always ask. We're also happy to get those "I've got an idea for a quiz but I don't know if...." notes. We love innovation and a little discussion in advance can move that totally new idea from "uh, no, sorry" to "we can make this work". I hate to see an enormous amount of work put into an idea that I have to reject because of something the author didn't understand before starting the job. If you have an idea for a quiz unlike anything you've ever seen here, run the idea past an editor - you may be on to something great, or there may be a huge stumbling block right at your feet that you haven't noticed. Better to know this at the beginning than after putting days of effort into it. The bottom line would be - we want to share our expertise and experience with you. We want to guide you and advise you. We do not want to do your job for you ("Dear editor: please give a list of every word misspelled in my quiz, and exactly what all the punctuation mistakes were and what they should be instead") We want to interact with you as adults who understand that we are all part of a community where everyone's needs must be considered. As these EDQs show, editors love to talk about quizwriting, and sincere requests for guidance or advice are always welcome. Reply #20. Apr 21 13, 6:13 PM |
88 replies. On page 1 of 5 pages. 1 2 3 4 5
Legal / Conditions of Use
|
|
: