Bad edits on VNDB and good editing practices

Posted in

#1 by Ezezin
2022-10-17 at 07:48
< report >Recently we are having more and more edits from new users and some older ones that more or less started editing again, which is a good thing, really, but what I'm currently seeing are very bad editing practices: descriptions with no sources, edits made by guessing stuff instead of taking the information directly from official sources, people who don't write anything in the edit summary, usually with "...","ok", "asdf", "edit", empty entries with no information on them (not even a release entry) and many others.

As I always say, we don't need to reach Wikipedia standards for adding stuff, but that doesn't mean we can do whatever we want.

I know we have a lot of rules (some of them are not even in the FAQs) and some other stuff are hard to figure out, but it is important to keep some kind of consistency and have good editing practices, so other users can easily point out mistakes and maybe fix them:

- If you are writing a description, you should always put the source the text was taken/translated from. At the very least, copy and paste the website/social media/blog url (text that was taken and later edited should have the source too) The only exception are self-made descriptions, which you can state in the edit summary that you wrote it.

- Use the edit summary, it exists for a reason. In most cases you don't need to write long sentences; one word stating the change is enough. For example, if you added a trait to a character, you can write "+1"; if you changed the release date, write "changed date".
If you are editing several fields, you can write "lots of changes" or "added some stuff". Of course, it is always recommended to state all changes you made, but in most long edits it is not necessary.

- Sources not related to descriptions should go in the edit summary, specially for important edits, like staff removal. There are some stuff that may not need sources, like some release information that can be completed from game files, screenshots taken from the game or character traits added from in-game information.
If those stuff were added from somewhere else, I personally recommend to link or write the source. Something like "traits based on character information from Getchu", "taken from e-hentai gallery", "from Getchu" or coping and pasting the link is more than enough.

- This is something I tend to see from time to time on social media: Keep in mind we don't usually put content warnings on VN descriptions or release notes. Doing so might get that part of the description/notes removed because of duplicate information and in some cases, unnecessary spoilers. We have tags for that and an option on users profiles to highlight them in a different color.

- Don't guess the information. Add/change stuff based on official sources (the VN itself is also considered an official source). Changing release dates based on a possibility or guessed based on development/translation updates instead of a confirmation from the developer or publisher, changing voice actors because they sound similar, etc. are not allowed and they will be reverted.

- When writing descriptions and notes, try to use a neutral point of view. Subjective adjectives like "good" or "bad" and opinions should be avoided if possible.
For producers and staff, information should be presented in a third person view ("me", "I am", "we are", etc. should not be added). If using a self-published source, skip or edit what can be considered propaganda, publicity or personal impressions.

- Read the FAQs. If you don't know something or are unsure about anything, you can ask in The How to Edit Thread. We may bark, but I assure you we don't bite too much.Last modified on 2022-10-17 at 07:49
#2 by Ileca
2022-10-17 at 08:33
< report >
people who don't write anything in the edit summary, usually with "...","ok", "asdf", "edit"
lol welcome to vndb. It's infuriating but good luck changing their way.
It could be easily solved by showing in the history which fields were added/modified, letting us fill the edit field only with relevant information (sources, reason for editing someone).

Also, I would like to ask to write in RED from the FAQ "Only specify direct relations. If one game 1 is listed to have a relation with game 2, and game 2 has a relation with game 3, then game 3 does not have to be added as a relation to game 1. This may sound a bit confusing at first, but you will understand when you look at the relation graphs." above Database relations:Related VNs because this is the number one cause of reversion. I don't know how many times I had to revert relations added to scifiADV VN.
#3 by NaioHoras
2022-10-17 at 10:18
< report >
...above Database relations:Related VNs because this is the number one cause of reversion.
not sure will the mess that is vn relation graph. at this point, we have two options: (1) abolish the vn relation graph; (2) make a complete reform for it

and day by day, I'm more inclined to do the former...
but that does not mean I don't have any idea how to solve it though, tho not sure how effective it will be. will give it a try later.
#4 by diabloryuzaki
2022-10-17 at 13:30
< report >Well, edit description is needed if added trait is complex, hidden deep in a route but that route is damn long or that vn have new FD or sequel in more than 2 titles and new trait come from that

But you don't have to write edit description if you only add eyes color, haircut or common trait that you can find in trial, prologue or first half of common route

Of course it is different thing if someone suddenly add absurd like rape trait in a vn with zero extreme sexual content
#5 by beliar
2022-10-17 at 14:45
< report >
Well, edit description is needed if added trait is complex, hidden deep in a route but that route is damn long or that vn have new FD or sequel in more than 2 titles and new trait come from that
People can still write "traits" in the edit description, instead of nonsense like "ok" or "qwerty". It's just common courtesy to let everyone know what was changed.
#6 by Ezezin
2022-10-17 at 18:33
< report >
It's infuriating but good luck changing their way.
You know how Wikipedia handle this issue? First they tell their users how to use the edit summary. Sometimes several times until they get it right.
If they still keep doing it, they issue a warning or two that the account may be locked for editing with a link to the edit summary guidelines.
If the user keeps repeating the same behavior, an administrator soft locks the account (locked for editing articles, but still can make changes on other places) for 24 hours or 3 days , depending on the gravity of the situation.

While I'm aware new users never read the FAQs, I made this post mostly for regular users, so instead of creating a new long thread on their profiles every time this happens, I can link to this thread instead. Not sure how much it will help, but I have to start somewhere.Last modified on 2022-10-17 at 18:39


You must be logged in to reply to this thread.