Barrie, Something along the lines of POSSIBLE ALIAS ENTRY with a link to the TKB section explaining the warning. We already have a warning for page numbers in the format of D/123 which links into the TKB. If this was possible then coordinators could ask individual members to check their file management. It was just something off the top of my head, wasn't really sure if it was possible. Thanks Keith On 27/03/2012 08:26, "Barrie" <freebmd@myarcher.net> wrote: > What would the warning say? > > Barrie > > On 19:59, Keith Simpson wrote: >> Allan, >> Suggestion. >> Would it be possible to add an additional WARNING message to the FILE >> MANAGEMENT PAGE. >> This would save the transcribers and coordinators having to scroll through >> the large list. >> Would this be possible? >> Keith >> >> >> >> On 25/03/2012 02:27, "Allan Raymond" <allan_raymond@btinternet.com> wrote: >> >>> This is a general plea to all our transcribers regarding the Suspect File >>> list >>> at: http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFilesComments.html >>> >>> Please do not start checking your files against the list or even run >>> the report until advised to the contrary by your Coordinator. The file is >>> quite large and it would be more appropriate for Coordinators to carry out >>> random check of files within their Syndicate to see if the report >>> is significantly reporting more erroneous files than non erroneous files in >>> the report. >>> >>> Personally I have just checked 7 files at random from different transcribers >>> and from different syndicates and the report correctly identified the files >>> were erroneous. >>> >>> If transcribers wish to ignore this advice then any abortive work they spend >>> in checking their files shouldn't be blamed on the report. >>> >>> Time precludes me at the moment in checking more random files but I will >>> continue this exercise later today and supply some of the problems the >>> report >>> is flagging up by giving some examples.. >>> >>> Allan Raymond >>> FreeBMD Coordinator of Syndicates >>> >>> >>> From: Allan Raymond <allan_raymond@btinternet.com> >>>> To: philip clarke <pr.clarke@talktalk.net>; "freebmd-admins@rootsweb.com" >>>> <freebmd-admins@rootsweb.com> >>>> Sent: Saturday, 24 March 2012, 23:01 >>>> Subject: Re: Suspect File List >>>> >>>> Phil >>>> >>>> Coordinators were advised there was a problem with the report dated 23 >>>> March >>>> and it was quickly taken down. >>>> >>>> Details of this new reporting system was only communicated to coordinator >>>> in >>>> the first instance so that hopefully and bugs could be reported back to >>>> improve the criteria used to identify possible errant files. >>>> >>>> Unfortunately a number of transcribers come up with their own novel >>>> ideas on inserting #COMMENT or THEORY lines, if they did it correctly then >>>> there would have been no need for the report to be produced >>>> >>>> A lot of effort is being taken by my colleague who looks after this side of >>>> FreeBMD to identify possible errors in files. Whilst the report of 23 March >>>> included files which weren't proper to be include on the flip side they >>>> included many files which were erroneous and would have been hidden away >>>> except for the fact the report system picked them up. >>>> >>>> Emailing QA-Coordinator is the correct approach where correctly >>>> transcribed >>>> files are erroneously shown in the report. >>>> >>>> Perhaps you can advise exactly how you would 100% correctly identify all >>>> erroneous files regarding the use of #COMMENT or #THEORY lines but at the >>>> same time exclude all non erroneous files? >>>> >>>> Allan Raymond >>>> >>>> >>>> From: philip clarke <pr.clarke@talktalk.net> >>>>> To: 'Allan Raymond' <allan_raymond@btinternet.com>; >>>>> freebmd-admins@rootsweb.com >>>>> Sent: Saturday, 24 March 2012, 9:30 >>>>> Subject: RE: Suspect File List >>>>> >>>>> Allen, >>>>> >>>>> I had five files listed as suspect on the first list. I checked them and >>>>> agreed that I'd made errors, corrected then and resubmitted them prior to >>>>> Handoff. They will be updated in time, so I have no problems with them >>>>> reappearing in the second list. They will (should) disappear after the >>>>> database has been updated. >>>>> >>>>> However, in the second list, the one dated 23/3/12, I had about 315 files >>>>> of >>>>> mine listed, which is about 75% of what I've submitted. So I started to >>>>> check them newest first. I don't accept that the first four were invalid, >>>>> but I could be wrong, so I emailed QA-cood as stated in the list, stating >>>>> that I regarded them as valid. >>>>> >>>>> On that limited sample of four files, it looked like valid statements such >>>>> as #COMMENT handwritten amendment of crossed out entry, etc, were being >>>>> tagged as erroneous. Possibly a #COMMENT(3) handwritten addition of >>>>> surname. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> If I do have another 311 files with erroneous use of #COMMENT in them I >>>>> will >>>>> gladly correct them, but why should I have to manual check that number of >>>>> files just to validate the FreeBMD software. >>>>> >>>>> The facility to check files for invalid use of #COMMENT lines is >>>>> incredibly >>>>> useful/valuable to the project. I fully accept its value. However, it >>>>> aught >>>>> to be reasonably reliable/accurate. >>>>> >>>>> Philip >>>>> >>> FreeBMD-Admins mailing list - archive >>> http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/freebmd-admins >>> >>> FreeBMD http://www.freebmd.org.uk/ >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> FREEBMD-ADMINS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- > FreeBMD-Admins mailing list - archive > http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/freebmd-admins > > FreeBMD http://www.freebmd.org.uk/ > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-ADMINS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message