If you have had a question rejected for a good and suffucient reason, and you can see how to fix it, can you do so and resubmit, please?

I had submitted a question that was rejected and when I tried to send a revised edition of the same q, it said "you have already submitted that question"

I don't know if this is how it's supposed to work, but I presume the "delete" option was put in there for a logical reason... I deleted the q from my list of rejected questions and then submitted one in its new form. It got accepted.

Also, I would like to add that I've found it's a good idea to save your potential questions (especially the "extra info") in something like wordpad. That way if you have a minor revision such as changing the wording of the q or grammatical/spelling errors you don't have to dream up some "clever" blurb all over again.

That is a good tip Jakeroo - I've started to employ that strategy myself after having another question rejected.
You are also correct on having to delete a rejected question before editing and re-submitting - I am pleased to say that I have had a previously rejected question accepted upon edited re-submission

I think that when this "challenge" first started, many people submitted questions in a "rush" and perhaps did not keep a text record of them. It is possible that they did not remember the EXACT wording of their original q and therefore could not understand why on earth it could have been refused lol. "Rejected" is of course a rather harsh term for most of us to take, but I prefer to view that word as "Critiqued" instead. Editors just want to help you to be a better writer and if you have SAVED your questions, you can go back and try to look at them objectively (rather than as a personal "affront"). I find that pretending that someone else wrote the question and YOU are the editor helps immensely ... that, and deep breathing <giggles>
__________________________________________
Never rain on someone else's parade. Hope may be the only thing they own.

That's great, thanks. Seeing the 'delete' button next to my 'rejected' question, I saved it to notepad, and deleted it. Nice to know I can fix it and resubmit, delboy.

I must be honest and perfectly frank - after having a few rejected on what I felt was almost a 'witch hunt', I have re-evaluated my opinion of the editors since having a former rejection accepted after a few edits.

In all fairness, these guys are working thier socks (sox) off to get the BEST quizzes into the pool, and it's all UNPAID - they don't need arrogant buggers like me kicking up stink when they reject one hehehehe

Well said delboy. I was an Ed for a very brief time years ago and hardly distinguished myself in the field... But I learned enough to know that the sort of 'turn-around' in opinion you have shown, and bravely gone public with, means a lot...but I'm sure the Eds will speak for themselves!

I have to say, I was a bit irked to find, when coming across one of my own questions in the New Question Game, that the editor who approved it deleted about half of what I'd written in the interesting info. I know that this isn't like with quizzes where the editor writes to you and tells you what was wrong or what they changed, but it makes me wonder how many of my other questions were altered in ways that I don't know of. It's not a big deal, but I don't really like having my name attached to something that is not how I created it.

No gg, I wouldn't be happy in that case either. We accept as 'authors' that we are giving our work to FT, but we do so with the expectation that it will still be our work. I think it is a big deal - if there is a word limit for II, it should be stated. I think that all any of us ask for is consistency.

GG, it might have been me who did that. If so, there was a reason.

I had a question in Literature recently (can't remember whose it was or what it was about). Everything was fine except that the last sentence of the interesting information contained time-based information. That is, it was true today but might not be true at some point in the future if the author released more books in the series. I had the choice of either rejecting the entire question, or simply deleting that last sentence. Since the interesting information was just fine without it, I chose the latter.

Please be assured that when editors do make changes to quizzes or questions, there is always a good reason for it, even if it might not be apparent to you.

Further to what MG has said .. whatever is done in an edit is not done willy-nilly.

I had a question the other day about the NHL, of which I know zilch. All I know about ice hockey is Wayne Gretzky is The Great One, he wore 99, and it's retired by all teams. The Q concerned the Stanley Cup win last week by the Penguins, and the name of the team's captain; who became the youngest captain to hold the Stanley Cup. The Q and A were aok, everything was fine, but there was no mention of whose record he broke. I could've rejected it, but spent a few minutes with my friend Mr Google, and found it was Gretzky .. back in 84 when he was with the Oilers.

Authors will see 100% consistency on many quiz sites around the internet; where everything is automated via scripts and there are no humans reading everything before it goes online. On the other hand, we have 3 dozen or so editors in this place; which means it's wishful thinking to expect a homogeneous product.

MG and gtho, my last post was a result of a misunderstanding on my part.

I'm the last person to knock what the Eds do around here, I know what a thankless, frustrating job it is. The fault in my previous post was that I made the assumption that there actually wasn't a reason for the deletion other than length; obviously if there was time-dependent info (or any other glaring error) it had to go. For this half-cockedness I apologise. It's unrealistic for me to think that everyone is as obsessive as I am in making sure that kind of thing doesn't get submitted in the first place.

I know the Eds can't write an essay on each question and why it might be rejected/edited, but perhaps it would save some angst on all sides if there could be a pro-forma response for (major) edits as well as rejections.

I apologise again for my dumb assumption.

Hi folks, just to let you know, this topic is now closed.

I am writing up a very simple FAQ that will describe what types of questions we accept, and what criteria the editors use to reject / accept a question.

We simply don't need post after post of people complaining about the editors doing what they're supposed to do: EDITING. First the complaint is "they're rejecting too many questions". Next it's "they're fixing my questions and not rejecting them". When a question gets through that's too obscure it becomes "they're letting too many questions through". I mean, come on.

Our editors do what they feel is best for the site and for the enjoyment of all players, and that is that. Question quest is a little like a football game. As a participant, you agree from the outset that you will go along with what the referees say.