Re: Rate editorial review quality

Subject: Re: Rate editorial review quality
From: Kathleen MacDowell <kathleen -dot- eamd -at- gmail -dot- com>
To: Peter Neilson <neilson -at- windstream -dot- net>
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 13:48:31 -0500

What I finally began doing was to highlight areas I had questions about and specifically pointing them out to the reviewers in the correspondence.in general Iâve found it almost impossible to get feedback otherwise, as theyâre often very busy in addition not wanting to review. Iâd just send a short note saying Iâve highlighted areas I have questions about to help limit your time. If they wanted to look at anything else that was fine.

But, to more directly answer your question, the first cue of a bad review is nitpicking only. There are bound to be writing/word preferences, esp. important for a boss, but it doesnât hurt to check one hasnât boohooed in the interest of efficiency. After that, the fewer comments or more off the wall ones (where it seems that the reviewer just caught a sentence and didnâtât look into it further) there are, the less likely that the review was thorough.

So an important issue is how many good reviews does one need to be relatively sure something meets your criteria for use? What do you do if you donât meet that? Good things to bring up with the boss or the board or whoever.

My question is, what is an editorial review? It sounds to me like its a matter of structure and language rather than content, which requires the previous two, but also needs accuracy and logic, at least in the realm of technical writing. My approach was for technical content where I often had to read between the lines of the information I was given originally, and in many cases the accuracy was vital.

Best

Kathleen

> On Aug 2, 2019, at 8:30 AM, Peter Neilson <neilson -at- windstream -dot- net> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 02 Aug 2019 00:33:38 -0400, Dawson, Ayesha (Nokia - IN/Bangalore) <ayesha -dot- dawson -at- nokia -dot- com> wrote:
>
>> I'm looking for ideas on how I could measure the quality of an editorial review. Not the quality of the content that was reviewed, but the review itself.
>> Any thoughts?
>
> The thought that immediately comes to mind is something that programmers call "bebugging". That's not debugging, removal of bugs, but insertion of them. Slip in some deliberate errors of the kind the editors are expect to find and correct. Some people may consider this technique unethical. Also, it fails to detect problems that were not considered beforehand.
>
> In the larger view, you can look for matching certain objective standards. If, for example, the review is supposed to find major blunders in presentation, such as "incorrect audience" or "missing explanations" but instead focuses solely upon nit-picking the grammar, it ought to be considered a poor review. If you have a sufficiently astute bunch of people to read the reviewed material, they might be able to perform a subjective analysis: "Wow! This is so tremendously better than the original! The editor deserves five stars. *****"
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Visit TechWhirl for the latest on content technology, content strategy and content development | https://techwhirl.com
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as kathleen -dot- eamd -at- gmail -dot- com -dot-
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>
>
> Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
> http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/ for more resources and info.
>
> Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online magazine at http://techwhirl.com
>
> Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Visit TechWhirl for the latest on content technology, content strategy and content development | https://techwhirl.com

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com


Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/ for more resources and info.

Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online magazine at http://techwhirl.com

Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives


Follow-Ups:

References:
Rate editorial review quality: From: Dawson, Ayesha (Nokia - IN/Bangalore)
Re: Rate editorial review quality: From: Peter Neilson

Previous by Author: Re: What do you call these little triangles?
Next by Author: Index program suggestion
Previous by Thread: Re: Rate editorial review quality
Next by Thread: RE: Rate editorial review quality


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:


Sponsored Ads