I have no answer to Anthere's questions concerning what to do about
Quarto/3. I am simply writing to clarify two statements I made in my email.
First, I let both Anthere and Sj, the Editor-in-Chief of Quarto, know that I
had to stop copyediting Quarto/3, a while ago (probably around May 26,) due to
medical problems. I have no desire to share the nature of these problems.
Second, the examples, which I cited from Quarto/3 were exactly that...examples.
If it were simply a question of correcting a few sentences, of course, I would
have done it. Unfortunately, these examples were a few of many, many, errors
that remain in Quarto/3.
I hope this corrects the impression, which I seem to have given, that
there were 2 or 3 remaining errors left in Quarto/3. And, that I chose ot point
them out, rather than correcting them.
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Anthere <[email protected]>
> I think it would have been more efficient Rose, if you
> had directly copyedited the few points you mention
> here, rather than take the time to explain them here
> and we wait for someone to fix them.
> I frankly do not know what to do. We rely on volunteer
> work entirely. If people do not do something, there
> are only three options
> * We close our eyes and keep what is poorly done this
> way. We just sigh and move on. The consequences being
> mostly we appear like jerks, leaving typos,
> inconsistencies ...
> * We decide to stop the whole stuff, wait for no one
> to come and do the job and end up not publishing
> anything. The main consequence would here typically to
> hear again that the board communicate nothing of what
> it does, and act in a non transparent way. This is
> essentially what has been happening for the whole
> month. Editing has been finished for several weeks and
> we have been waiting in hope people help. No
> proofreading was done. At some point, that means
> either no one is ready to do the job, so what is the
> point waiting ? or that means the whole content is
> * We do the job ourselves, even if non english, even
> if proofreading is a job we know nothing about. Sorry,
> I will not do that. I do not have the time.
> I am perplex about what to do. I had *hoped* that this
> quarto could be published last month. It was delayed.
> I had hoped it could be published during board
> candidacies. It was delayed. I had hoped it could be
> published during elections. It was delayed. It makes
> little sense to publish things 6 months after they
> Currently, the proofreading process is the one working
> the least. All steps are difficult, but this one is
> the most difficult one, because we wait for things to
> improve and nothing happens.
> I frankly do not know what to do. I just know I am all
> for the board giving more information to the community
> and making it available widely. But this requires help
> from many people. If information is never given before
> 6 months each time, I think we should give up hoping
> to give information this way entirely.
> I really hope someone can give me some insight on this
> --- [email protected] wrote:
> > Hi Members,
> > I know that I have been unable to copyedit much
> > of the current version of Quarto. I am truly sorry
> > about this. Unfortunately, I have been dealing with
> > some rather serious medical problems.
> > I did read both Sj's and Anthere's remarks on
> > the state of WQ/3 and their plans to announce
> > publication this Monday. I, immediately, went to the
> > site, in hopes that someone had done some of the
> > copyediting/proofreading, which I have been unable
> > to get to. Unfortunately, other than the removal of
> > some material, I see neither copyediting nor
> > proofreading done on the English version.
> > Therefore, there remain numerous proofreading
> > errors and some copyediting errors. Further there
> > are numerous references to events, etc. after March
> > 31.
> > I really think you should reconsider whether
> > publication at this time is appropriate. The Quarto,
> > in a way, represents Wikimedia. To publish it full
> > of errors does nothing to improve our image.
> > Further, I feel that no task should depend on
> > the availability of one member. I did contact
> > everyone, who signed up as a copyeditor. As far as I
> > can tell, there are no other active English
> > copyeditors. This is a bad situation.
> > I am including just a few errors, to give you
> > an idea of the sort of problems that still exist in
> > this edition.
> > Page 3 - Overview
> > With the collected money, we already purchased some
> > technical equipment
> > (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Hardware) in 2005.
> > Last orders were done in january
> > and may
> > Less purchases were done than expected early 2005
> > due to the numerous hosting proposals we received.
> > The donator of the first french squids donated three
> > additional ones, soon to be hosted by Lost Oasis for
> > free. In early april, the Wikimedia Foundation
> > signed an agreement with Yahoo ! (see special report
> > below).
> > Page 3 - Caches Installed near Paris
> > The caches work as follows: if they hold the
> > requested page in their local memory, they serve it
> > directly; otherwise, they forward the request to the
> > main Florida servers, and memorizes the answer while
> > passing it to the browser of the Wikipedia user.
> > The Paris servers, on the other hand, have much
> > smaller rountrip times from the countries they
> > serve.
> > I, sincerely, hope you will reconsider your
> > decision. I think all contributing members, who
> > speak English, should read the English version and
> > express their opinions.
> > As Ever,
> > Ruth Ifcher
> > --
Quarto-l mailing list