What's new
  • If you were supposed to get an email from the forum but didn't (e.g. to verify your account for registration), email Wes at [email protected] or talk to me on Discord for help. Sometimes the server hits our limit of emails we can send per hour.
  • Get in our Discord chat! Discord.gg/stararmy
  • 📅 April 2024 is YE 46.3 in the RP.

Approved Submission New Guide for Reviewing Submissions

This suggestion has been implemented. Votes are no longer accepted.
Overall it looks good! I do want to know though, since (to me) this seems to be replacing the old/current(?) guide to submission review, should the checklist - perhaps an updated version - make its way into this? (I'll think about more things to talk about in a little while, most likely after work.)
 
Yes, I plan to implement a new version of the checklist. @Zack has offered to come up with a prototype so I'm waiting on that.
 
FrostJaeger said:
Looking over the checklist, I honestly don't see anything that would - in my opinion - qualify as "excess."
Click to expand...

There’s a little known rule where you have to have prose after every header. It’s been enforced a handful of times and honestly it’s kinda...just not necessary. Such as the speed and nomenclature sections. For the nomenclature you just give them nomenclature. Easy. Where’s the prose needed in that? We want concise as possible articles and that rule just ends up making giant walls of text.
 
Good point, @META_mahn - and @Wes, might I ask that @Zack publicly work on his checklist via making a discussion thread for it or something? I ask because something that affects the entire community should, in my opinion, be open to feedback from the community prior to being submitted for approval.
 
Addendum: At the same time whatever we eliminate or add, we should be checking why they were or were not there before. If we deem some rules as “archaic” they may end up biting us in the butt when we remove them.

Edit: Frost is a ninja boi
 
And no entry for “is it too powerful for its caliber.”

It’s a little too liberal for my tastes. Too concerned about the nuances and fluff, too little focus on the meat and crunch. A well-intentioned checklist — but so is the road to hell.
 
I'm currently writing up my own take on a new checklist; will post once I've sorted out all of the kinks.
 
Last edited:
i haven't looked at the new checklist but i kinda liked having text after every header, and now that im used to it im not likely to stop
 
Several problems that I see with Zack’s version;
  • Uses the same header over and over and over.
  • Contains no section on what is not allowed (Nothing about not using bombastic language)
Now here’s one you both did:
  • Links to the Drv3 quick guide rather than the comprehensive one.
 
@Alex Hart - Not to be rude, but which section I link to the quick reference guide in? Searching for the word "quick" via Ctrl+F didn't bring up any results... >.<
 
Last edited:
I’m sorry, I may have been looking at yours in comparison to Zack’s and mistook yours for the old article and Zack’s for your version. That site makes it very difficult to tell.
 
"For these types of submissions where are would help immensely..." (art)

Link "Wes" to your userpage.

"Historical information including the Yamataian Calendar years of things like when the item was created, if applicable" (dropped period)

"copyrighted content and trademarks that aren't ours to use, and the names of real people
content copy-pasted from other articles on Star Army or other RP sites
Excessive profanity or any obscenity (outside of the nsfw: namespace)" (Capitalize start of bullet points)

"Other common issues are the unnecessary use of forced line breaks." (Can you explain this or link to something that does?)

"Reviewers should correct any spelling and grammar mistakes they find instead of pointing them out. This is the job of the submitter and the reviewer and whoever finds a problem first should fix it then and there." (I definitely disagree with this but I see where you're coming from. If I don't tell people the mistakes they are making, they may make those mistakes again. If you are heavily attached to this, adding that reviewers should tell submitters the mistakes they fixed would be helpful. Your call.)

"If the submission contains images... images still in the WIP namespace." (Can this have its own small header within the WIP Namespace header titled like "WIP Images"?)

"Please don't radically alter other people's works-in-progress unless you get their permission first." (I think the word "radically" is unnecessary here)
 
I've updated the article based on Ame's feedback.
 
I've added a brief checklist, which may be updated/tweaked based on usage and feedback.
 
RPG-D RPGfix
Back
Top