Official files that needs BFC

Re: Official files that needs BFC
Magnus Forsberg Wrote:I fully understand that our standards and the ability to review files have changed over time.
I just wanted to point out that if someone doesn't finish it today, someone else has to do it tomorrow. Someone who could have made a new part, instead of finishing an old. I fear that many part authors today spend their time correcting old files.

That's basically all I've been doing. I generally go onto the PT and look for held parts which I think I'm capable of fixing, and then do so. I generally lean towards smaller parts since they typically take less time to fix, but there aren't a lot of them on the PT. It would be nice if we had some sort of "quality indicator" (other than just "needs work") to describe parts. However, just setting up and creating such a system would be time-consuming, and that's assuming you could get people to agree on things like what constitutes a "good" part and what constitutes a "very good" part and how they differ, which I think may not be all that easy.

I guess for now, the easiest thing to do will be to keep an up-to-date list of parts that "need work" and parts that "need BFC," so that authors like me looking to fix parts can quickly and easily find the parts most in need of updating.
I'm theJude! So that's what you call me. You know, that or, uh, his Judeness, or uh, Juder, or el Juderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »

Messages In This Thread
Re: Official files that needs BFC - by Jude Parrill - 2013-08-21, 19:59

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)