Rejected edits and site advancement

[retromangia]

Hey Folks,

So I just wanted to make a small observation about rejected edits. As a member of this community for over 10 years, I take a lot of pride in this site along with everyone else involved. Every time I log in it's like coming home after a long day's work and finally getting to sit down at the dinner table. At this point the site itself is almost as nostalgic as some of my beloved games. It's comfort food really.

Over the past few recent years however I've noticed many of my edits being rejected. I honestly feel this is hindering the progress and maturation of the site, which relies heavily on user submitted information. I put a lot of time and care into researching accurate information before submitting it to the site, and often times it still gets rejected.

More times that not I'll be reading the back of the box in my hands while comparing that to the source of information I find on the web, just to make sure everything lines up 100%. Sometimes I even boot up the game just to make sure the developer and publisher logo's coincide with the facts as well. I genuinely take this very seriously, but with the amount of rejects I receive it's just not worth spending the time anymore.

At the end of the day, I just want to see this site grow and flourish into the best damn video game database in existence.

Thank you for your time,
-Retromangia
 

[dhaabi]

I believe that most of our users would agree that no information is better than incorrect information. I will also point out that for over 99% of the items DB staff respond to, we do not own them nor have them in-hand. So, with that said, we are relying upon other databases or online classifieds many times to verify information. At times, verifying information is difficult given these circumstances. It is not typical of me, but I will sometimes message a user for more information if I cannot verify it myself.

On that note, just because an edit submission has been rejected does not mean that it is the be all, end all. Users are free to post any relevant concerns to the Error Listings and rejected edits thread.

Concerning recent issues you may have had, I believe it relates to Battleship for Game Boy [NA], if I remember correctly. You provided December 22, 1989 Release Date information. As I noted in the provided Admin Comments, this is incorrect information, as that date is for the JP release. The NA release is December 1992 according to GameFAQs. Looking back, I should have approved your edit submission for the Month field, but I was focused on the entire date overall in that moment, so that rejection is human error. If GameFAQs is reporting incorrect information themselves, then providing a credible source to verify any differing information is certainly accepted.

[fazerco]

Hey Folks,

So I just wanted to make a small observation about rejected edits. As a member of this community for over 10 years, I take a lot of pride in this site along with everyone else involved. Every time I log in it's like coming home after a long day's work and finally getting to sit down at the dinner table. At this point the site itself is almost as nostalgic as some of my beloved games. It's comfort food really.

Over the past few recent years however I've noticed many of my edits being rejected. I honestly feel this is hindering the progress and maturation of the site, which relies heavily on user submitted information. I put a lot of time and care into researching accurate information before submitting it to the site, and often times it still gets rejected.

More times that not I'll be reading the back of the box in my hands while comparing that to the source of information I find on the web, just to make sure everything lines up 100%. Sometimes I even boot up the game just to make sure the developer and publisher logo's coincide with the facts as well. I genuinely take this very seriously, but with the amount of rejects I receive it's just not worth spending the time anymore.

At the end of the day, I just want to see this site grow and flourish into the best damn video game database in existence.

Thank you for your time,
-Retromangia

If they reject my changes, no chance that i do that again on that item. Looks more like the 2 mods want to do everything themselves and we are just bothering them with our changes.

[tripredacus]

Looks more like the 2 mods want to do everything themselves and we are just bothering them with our changes.

There are 9 people who go through the edit queue. I can't speak for everyone eles, but I try to use the comment section on the reject if possible.

[dhaabi]

If they reject my changes, no chance that i do that again on that item. Looks more like the 2 mods want to do everything themselves and we are just bothering them with our changes.

It's a shame you feel that way. Numerous other site members regularly contribute detailed information, and it is approved without concern because it is correct. Personally, if I am rejecting any edit submissions, I generally go ahead and update that same field the edit was for because I have already taken the time and effort in verifying that same information.

I can't speak for everyone eles, but I try to use the comment section on the reject if possible.

The same can be said from me. I supply feedback for at least 95% of all edit rejections.

[fazerco]

Btw, dont worry about it, i dont.

[ignition365]

There are whole fields I never touch because I know it'll always get rejected.

[dhaabi]

There are whole fields I never touch because I know it'll always get rejected.

I can't think of a single field where edits are near universally rejected or even one field that has a notable percentage of its edit submissions being rejected. As noted above, the recent Admin Comments update allows for rejections to be even more easily explained. So, if a user's edits are consistently being rejected, then that is almost guaranteed to be a result of the user being unfamiliar to the style guide or not following admin suggestions which are regularly provided.

As much as it may seem otherwise, DB staff want to approve your edits. But we will not approve them at the cost of their being inaccurate.

[zappman]

There are whole fields I never touch because I know it'll always get rejected.

+1

[jason]

I'm sorry. There have been many failing on my part. For a long time the Developers and Publishers especially ended up giving phantom entries where it would send blank edits for the Admins. These would end up showing as rejections unintentionally.

Also, I'm hoping that our new admin feedback options that display on the notifications page will allow for more transparency into why submissions get rejected.

As we heavily rely on User Generated Content, we greatly appreciate the efforts of everyone who submits content and don't want to further deter people. So many people have made contributions over the years and those contributions should not be understated. We really appreciate all the help from everyone to be where we are today.

We also attempt to keep the quality of the entries to the highest standard as well. I know we don't all agree with how all the entries are handled, but we try to make what decisions we think would be the best for all.

Please feel free to reach out here or DM me to further discuss ways to make things better overall.