I think it would make sense to display "Latest Rejections" in the same way as "Latest Additions", "Latest Revisions" on the main page. This way, all users can verify that the rejection is valid. Another thing one could consider is that owners should not be allowed to accept a correction without changing the entry. Nor should they be allowed to check the correction without offering some revision comment.
.. and a small nuisance. In the "file correction" page, it would be helpful if the title would be
and not simply
This is sometimes useful when filing corrections to muliple entries simultaneously. — matte 20 April 2005
When you say that
what do you envision happening if the rejection is not OK?
Also, if you're going to display Latest Rejections, it would make sense to also display Latest Corrections, wouldn't you say? --jcorneli Wed Apr 20 16:36:38 2005 UTC
I usually usually don't bother to file another correction if someone rejects a correction. However, if the latest rejections were displayed on the front page, they could at least be read by more than the owner of the object. You can currently read all the corrections at http://planetmath.org/?op=globalcors They are sorted by date. --matte 21 April 2005
I guess I'm pointing out that there is a "bug" in the PM design - but it is so obvious a bug that everyone treats it as if it was a feature - and indeed maybe it could be a feature, someday. But, for now, this "bug" is: people can just reject any correction! So, what's the point of even giving corrections, one might ask. Usually, people do accept them, which is good. So I guess that's the point. But still, I think the PM design could be made more robust vis a vis rejections. I think that the system you are talking about would actually help a lot, because people could be held accountable for their corrections and their rejections. If the rejection looks really dumb, probably someone else would submit a second correction.
This could go on forever (perpetual check :)) which would be stupid, but it is still an improvement over the current system.
So, I'm definitely behind this idea. I think that more work could be done to actually alleviate the bug (e.g. using the card-based system to slam people who reject reasonable corrections with a yellow card, for example), but your proposal - I think - should be part of any working solution.
And, PS, I know about the corrections page, but (a) I don't really like the interface; and (b) I think it would be nice to have one uniform style of "feed" for every useful kind of editing event that takes place on the site. But these sorts of layout issues are much more minor than actual data issues like the one you pointed out. --jcorneli Thu Apr 21 08:09:40 2005 UTC
Just to point an example why this is a good idea. I've been sending correctiosn that get rejected (GeraW and vmoraru). AS a particular example, GeraW has some entries where he defines or mentions things which the only references are his own papers, baptizing them with their smarandache friends names. I ask him for adding more references that support the use of such namings, but they get rejected,
Now, I'll keep filling them until he slips and object goes to the bin, but having such list would help me not to miss the day when he rejects my corrections. Perhaps it'd be useful if more people would send dupe corrections to these kind of entries so they can never get marked as clean. --drini
I don't really want to get involved in the dispute at this point, but maybe you should make a page over at the PlanetMath Writer's Club talking about the entries you find objectionable, and stating why you feel the way you do about them. I get the sense that there are many entries, and that submitting repeated corrections is not necessarily the most effective way to resolve any issues that there may be with these entries. A page describing the grievances could be quite useful for future reference. --jcorneli Thu Apr 21 22:10:50 2005 UTC
One cool idea would be to have new entries (maybe also corrected entries, new messages, and rejected corrections) available under RSS. This would be useful mainly for contributers. One would not need to load PM just to find that there are no new entries. --matte 07/2005
I like the idea of making rejections more visible. I'll think about how to pull this off. Unfortunately the next major PM thing I have to do is migrate the system to planetx. However we're getting close to being able to offer bounties, so maybe things like this can get coded up soon!
Another interesting idea might be to allow people to vote on corrections. Enough "yay" votes would somehow increase the criticality of the correction, while "nay" vote would decrease it. I'm not sure how this could manifest… maybe the more "yay" a correction is, the more it would be highlighted, and maybe with more "nay" than "yay" votes, it could be allowed to sit indefinitely (and hidden "below the line").
--akrowne Wed Jul 27 15:58:27 UTC 2005