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 stararmy@gmail.com or talk to me on Discord for help. Sometimes the server hits our limit of emails we can send per hour.
I've created a new guide for reviewing submissions, that is focused on giving a good experience and explains what should and shouldn't be in each submission.
Here's what I have so far. Please review it and let me know what you think about it.
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.)
Thereโs a little known rule where you have to have prose after every header. Itโs been enforced a handful of times and honestly itโs kinda...just not necessary. Such as the speed and nomenclature sections. For the nomenclature you just give them nomenclature. Easy. Whereโs 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 โarchaicโ they may end up biting us in the butt when we remove them.
And no entry for โis it too powerful for its caliber.โ
Itโs 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 โ but so is the road to hell.
@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... >.<
Iโm sorry, I may have been looking at yours in comparison to Zackโs and mistook yours for the old article and Zackโs 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)