| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| SixFourian |
Posted - 20/05/2008 : 09:25:45
I just had a review approved, but Skulduggery had been changed to Skullduggery (which is the second spelling cited in the dictionary), so I have had to resubmit it. Of course I make occasional spelling mistakes, but let's face it, in reviews especially I am fairly careful. Therefore, please at least look the spelling up in a dictionary if you really think I have made an error! |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| SixFourian |
Posted - 26/02/2012 : 21:23:34
I submitted the fifth one here with U.S.A. but the MERP for some reason changed it to USA. Benj, please will you change it back? |
| SixFourian |
Posted - 27/01/2012 : 07:59:34
I submitted this with an ellipsis (...) at the end, but it has for some reason been changed to a question mark, which makes no sense. Please can it be changed back to the correct version as soon as possible? Thanks. |
| MguyX |
Posted - 24/03/2011 : 06:39:25
YOU should change it because it bothers YOU, as it doesn't seem to bother anyone else.
What is mildly amusing, however, is that you've made it such a big deal that you are now a prisoner of your own stubbornness. It is quite apparent that all you want to accomplish is the goal of making benj change the review instead of changing it yourself, like everyone else does (I changed my "Barbarella" review last week and it got reapproved within a day).
But you are not winning that battle. Indeed, you have lost, as we approach the review's anniversary.
And now that you've brought constant attention to the matter, you cannot change it yourself, because that would mean giving in and acknowledging that the rules apply to you just as well. What is worse, however (for you) is that you also cannot change it for fear that the MERPs will forever reject it out of sheer spite for your inapt insistence on making this review an issue. Maybe they will re-approve it instantly; maybe they won't. But you will never find out, because you are frozen by that fear, while the review, and this thread, stand as self-made monuments to your failure.
Godspeed little Dandy.  |
| SixFourian |
Posted - 23/03/2011 : 22:23:49
quote:
Originally posted by mguyx
YOU can change it whenever you want. But you won't.
(1) Why should I have to waste a quota slot changing it back to the correct form that I submitted it in in the first place?
(2) More importantly, I have often made a minor change (that couldn't possibly affect the validity), only for the MERP to reject the review. I don't want to risk losing this one: it was hard enough getting one review through for this film.
This is a reasonable request filed away in a clearly titled thread that is now in the correct section: it is not being forced on anyone and no one should feel the need to object to its presence. |
| MguyX |
Posted - 22/03/2011 : 19:13:58
YOU can change it whenever you want. But you won't. |
| SixFourian |
Posted - 26/02/2011 : 10:30:32
quote:
Originally posted by TitanPa
now your just getting annoying
What a helpful comment.
I've only had to ask again and again because this MERP error has still not been fixed. It's understandable that the MERPs make mistakes (although not really this one), but such mistakes should be amended, not just left for ever. It would only take Benj a few seconds, which is nothing in comparison to all the time he has spent excluding genuine films lately. |
| TitanPa |
Posted - 26/02/2011 : 03:31:54
now your just getting annoying |
| SixFourian |
Posted - 25/02/2011 : 23:37:22
quote:
Originally posted by Cracovian
quote:
Originally posted by Cracovian
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by Cracovian
quote:
Originally posted by Cracovian
quote:
Originally posted by Cracovian
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
I've had another occurrence of this. The gangmembers' names are all anglicised in various ways for the subtitles. Dandi becomes Dandy. The first part of my explanation was "Dandy is the English name for one of the main criminals." The review doesn't now work. It still describes the same plot element (although even for that I'd rather use the anglicised name since that reflects my viewing experience), but the image that I was playing on (a Regency fop whoremongering) has been lost.
I've had a typo in a review approximately once. You can trust me to be submitting spellings intentionally. Benj, please can this review be changed back to my original form? I'd really rather not use up another quota slot on it. Thanks.
And another reason for not wanting to resubmit it is that the MERPs have more than a few times rejected already-approved reviews that have been resubmitted with only minor changes to spelling &c.
Is this ever going to get corrected, Benj?
I've just noticed that two of the other three reviews for the film have a correct anglicised name, so it's even more annoying now.
|
| SixFourian |
Posted - 07/02/2011 : 03:10:26
Benj, thanks for moving this thread. However, please could you also reverse the MERP's error detailed above?
|
| SixFourian |
Posted - 06/02/2011 : 15:19:49
quote:
Originally posted by Catuli
Just a lexicographic observation based on what I was once told by someone who actually works on dictionaries, the order of spellings listed for a given word does not indicate spelling preference. Obviously, one has to be listed first.
I'm afraid I'm not convinced about that, although it may well apply to your friend's particular dictionary. Apart from the fact that there isn't any other logical basis for a non-alphabetical order within an entry, I've used dictionaries nearly every day of my working life and all my experience is in favour of a preference order. We may just mean different things by preferred: for most words in most dictionaries, it will be synonymous with most widely used. |
| Catuli |
Posted - 06/02/2011 : 14:00:15
quote:
Originally posted by Cracovian
quote:
Originally posted by aahaa, muahaha
Hmmm, AFAICT, skulduggery is the proper spelling. in fact, this is the first time ever that I have come across the spelling skullduggery. May be it is a UK/ US thingie? I learnt UK English but use US English now-a-days. May be it is skullduggery in US?
Both spellings are valid, but the single L version has always been listed first in any dictionary that I have used. I seem to remember that the double L version was influenced by the word skull, but that isn't verified by my own dictionary here. I considered using the double L one since my review is indeed punning on Skull, but I decided that it was not necessary and so used the spelling I would personally normally use.
Just a lexicographic observation based on what I was once told by someone who actually works on dictionaries, the order of spellings listed for a given word does not indicate spelling preference. Obviously, one has to be listed first.
|
| SixFourian |
Posted - 05/02/2011 : 06:41:09
quote:
Originally posted by Cracovian
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by Cracovian
quote:
Originally posted by Cracovian
quote:
Originally posted by Cracovian
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
I've had another occurrence of this. The gangmembers' names are all anglicised in various ways for the subtitles. Dandi becomes Dandy. The first part of my explanation was "Dandy is the English name for one of the main criminals." The review doesn't now work. It still describes the same plot element (although even for that I'd rather use the anglicised name since that reflects my viewing experience), but the image that I was playing on (a Regency fop whoremongering) has been lost.
I've had a typo in a review approximately once. You can trust me to be submitting spellings intentionally. Benj, please can this review be changed back to my original form? I'd really rather not use up another quota slot on it. Thanks.
And another reason for not wanting to resubmit it is that the MERPs have more than a few times rejected already-approved reviews that have been resubmitted with only minor changes to spelling &c.
Is this ever going to get corrected, Benj?
I've just noticed that two of the other three reviews for the film have a correct anglicised name, so it's even more annoying now.
|
| randall |
Posted - 02/01/2011 : 22:51:39
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by randall
Feel free to elaborate. 
You've just done so. |
| SixFourian |
Posted - 02/01/2011 : 22:47:10
By the way, Benj, after you have eventually addressed this spelling wrongdoing by the MERP, please could you move this thread to the Site Maintenance section? I'm sorry that I posted it here in error. |
| SixFourian |
Posted - 02/01/2011 : 22:39:19
quote:
Originally posted by randall
Feel free to elaborate. |
