Historical Events Database - Coordination

[Mikey]

Edit: Which Source ID are you referring to?

ID: 47

ADDED:

But maybe you can add into the Notes field that you got this book from your library? It might save someone in the future from a futile online search.

I cannot update the notes field at this time. I read this book at Perkins/Bostock Library (one of Duke University Libraries in Durham, NC) during Feb 2014.

But Source#47 has a scanned PDF uploaded, and I could find all quoted texts in it. I thought you said it wasn't available online?

I've just gone over some of your entries that you've set to Reviewing. Basically: good job, and only small things to fix. Suggestions:

Event#324 (Earthquake of 365) and Event#283 (Tsunami of 365) seem to be the same event (earthquake causes tsunami), and should be merged. Both even share the same excerpt.

Another request for all Editors: Please don't submit more than a small number of Events for Review per day (e.g. no more than 5 in one package), and wait until I have either passed all of them or returned them back to you. I currently barely can catch up with zadiussky's speed. It's appreciated :) but my brain is already boiling , so I'll proceed tomorrow.

 

[Zadius Sky]

But Source#47 has a scanned PDF uploaded, and I could find all quoted texts in it. I thought you said it wasn't available online?

I just looked at it - I didn't realize that it was already uploaded. I couldn't find it anywhere online. As far as I know, that's the only book that I read on hand at the library. So, my apologies for the noise.

I've just gone over some of your entries that you've set to Reviewing. Basically: good job, and only small things to fix. Suggestions:

Thank you. They are really helpful - I'm now getting the hang of it. Some that I already put in Reviewing are similar problems to be corrected.

Event#324 (Earthquake of 365) and Event#283 (Tsunami of 365) seem to be the same event (earthquake causes tsunami), and should be merged. Both even share the same excerpt.

I think, last year, it was discussed to separate events, even if they occurred at the same time and includes same text for each. So, I guess we can merge them?

I currently barely can catch up with zadiussky's speed. It's appreciated :) but my brain is already boiling , so I'll proceed tomorrow.

Sorry about that. :/

I have so much going on and I just wanted to get started as much as possible. Thanks, Data, for putting up with me. :)

 

[shijing]

Another request for all Editors: Please don't submit more than a small number of Events for Review per day (e.g. no more than 5 in one package), and wait until I have either passed all of them or returned them back to you.

Thanks for mentioning this, Data -- I was wondering about that when I was revising entries last night. I have a question -- in my present schedule, I'll probably be able to work on the database about 3 or 4 days a week, and I'll be unavailable to do it the other half of the week. Given that, would it be better for me to double my entries on the days that I can work (i.e. up to 10 a day) to make up for the ones I can't, or would you prefer for me to still do only 5 a day for now?

 

[Dirgni]

I uploaded The "Chronicle of Fredegar" until page 35 into appropriate source object. This includes the introduction from Wallace-Hadrill and contains all events before 600 AD. I will scan the rest asap.

Another request for all Editors: Please don't submit more than a small number of Events for Review per day (e.g. no more than 5 in one package), and wait until I have either passed all of them or returned them back to you. I currently barely can catch up with zadiussky's speed. It's appreciated :) but my brain is already boiling , so I'll proceed tomorrow.

You are the best, Data. What would we do without you guiding us through this. Thanks and take care of yourself!

 

[seek10]

Nice Job Data in creating the new DB. It's Cool.

As a initial sample, I edited some of my entries for sources and texts. After the feedback, that I will update the remaining.

sources

1. {removed link}/sources/442/edit & souce 489.
Added the pdf to this source, changed Loeb Classic library to The Loed Classic Library. If these entries are correct, I can upload all the remaining Dio's books pdf's
Events:

1. I updated these following events. 654, 655, 656, 659. they belong to same multi-faceted event. I assigned it to Data for review.

I want to make sure multi-faceted events has enough context without duplicity of the content.

 

[seek10]

I have couple of more questions. I appreciate any conformation.

1. I put the Page number field in the Event section as the page number of the book, not the page number in the pdf.
2. I uploaded one pdf I uploaded for source (S#498). This is Dio's History of Rome Book 4.

It says Translated by Earnest Cary Foster On the basis of versions of Herbert Baldwin Foster Ph.D.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Baldwin_Foster

Herbert Baldwin Foster wrote the first complete translation of the historical work of Cassius Dio in English. She appeared in four volumes under the title of Dio's Rome (1905-1906). After his death Earnest Cary Foster took translation as a template for its bilingual edition in the Loeb Classical Library (nine volumes, 1914-1927). The version of Cary has since become the most widely used in the English-speaking world.

I put the translated by as Earnest Cary Foster and I put the "On the basis of versions of Herbert Baldwin Foster Ph.D." in the notes section of Source.

Hope that is fine.

 

[Palinurus]

Data, I've found your feedback on Event E#1471 and have made the changes you required. Then I updated the preview for a visual check and saved all the changes and the replies given by me to you.

I didn't see much altered after refreshing the Event Index and the item is still in review_failed mode. How can I be certain you got all that I sent you? Is there any confirmation at once possible of having received the corrections? It would enable me to log out and close the tabs, of which I'm a bit uncertain now whether I can do that.

 

[Dirgni]

Data, I've found your feedback on Event E#1471 and have made the changes you required. Then I updated the preview for a visual check and saved all the changes and the replies given by me to you.

I didn't see much altered after refreshing the Event Index and the item is still in review_failed mode. How can I be certain you got all that I sent you? Is there any confirmation at once possible of having received the corrections? It would enable me to log out and close the tabs, of which I'm a bit uncertain now whether I can do that.

After including the changes in your events, you just resend it with "Send Feedback" and "Reviewing."

On the HED entry page (tab name: Application Startup) or on each HED tab on the right side on the top there is a link called Feedback. When you go there you can check "show addressed to me only". After doing this and clicking button filter you see all feedback entries/objects assigned to you.

When doing a search for feedback entries/objects sent from you, you find 6 of them - one of type "Reviewing" the others of type "comment".

What I still have to get used to is this - after including changes in the entry then I click save. When I want to send feedback I have to click "send feedback" beside the feedback. This is very logic but it seems I managed to try to send feedback with the save button on the buttom . So I usually checked feedback to see if I sent what I intended to send to Data.

I hope this helps.

[Mod note: Removed links]

 

[Palinurus]

Hey Dirgni, thanks for explaining. I checked what you described and got all my answers. Evidently, you are already better steeped in this technical stuff than I am ATM.

What I still have to get used to is this - after including changes in the entry then I click save. When I want to send feedback I have to click "send feedback" beside the feedback. This is very logic but it seems I managed to try to send feedback with the save button on the buttom . So I usually checked feedback to see if I sent what I intended to send to Data.

I think the Save button is designed to act as a general fail-safe solution for all cases where anyone should have forgotten to activate each and every return message with their individuated feed-back buttons. Regularly checking all the feedback in overview seems an adequate security against missing out on anything important.

Thanks again.

 

[Mikey]

I think, last year, it was discussed to separate events, even if they occurred at the same time and includes same text for each. So, I guess we can merge them?

Yes, I've left feedback stating so.

I have so much going on and I just wanted to get started as much as possible. Thanks, Data, for putting up with me. :)

It's alright ;D

Thanks for mentioning this, Data -- I was wondering about that when I was revising entries last night. I have a question -- in my present schedule, I'll probably be able to work on the database about 3 or 4 days a week, and I'll be unavailable to do it the other half of the week. Given that, would it be better for me to double my entries on the days that I can work (i.e. up to 10 a day) to make up for the ones I can't, or would you prefer for me to still do only 5 a day for now?

I think from now on I'll post here about when to submit entries for Review. You can work on your entries all the time, but I have to be finished with other work in order to be able to process Reviews. I'm working since 6 hours, still catching up with yesteraday's Reviews.

I uploaded The "Chronicle of Fredegar" until page 35 into appropriate source object. This includes the introduction from Wallace-Hadrill and contains all events before 600 AD. I will scan the rest asap.

Thanks for the uploaded scan, it really is valuable, since I'm able to check quotations much faster!

1. I put the Page number field in the Event section as the page number of the book, not the page number in the pdf.

Yes, this makes more sense.

2. I uploaded one pdf I uploaded for source (S#498). This is Dio's History of Rome Book 4.

There are a couple of problems with S#498. Look at how I've created Livy's book series. I'll give you additional feedback to this Source as soon as you get one of Dio's entries into Review.

I put the translated by as Earnest Cary Foster and I put the "On the basis of versions of Herbert Baldwin Foster Ph.D." in the notes section of Source.

Yes, put the translator which had the last 'word' so to say.

I didn't see much altered after refreshing the Event Index and the item is still in review_failed mode. How can I be certain you got all that I sent you? Is there any confirmation at once possible of having received the corrections? It would enable me to log out and close the tabs, of which I'm a bit uncertain now whether I can do that.

You can be certain that I see all changes as long as you press the Save button. After pressing the Save button, you can close the tabs safely.

Sending and replying to a Feedback doesn't require the Save button, just use the "Send Feedback" and "Reply" links. But be aware that if you send Feedback, the Event will not be saved with it. You still have to click the Save button.

 

[Mikey]

A few general announcements for all Editors:

First of all, thanks for getting on board with the new HED and doing your best in following the outlines and stricter rules that we had to set up to get this project into the next stage. The fact that you are able to use the new HED, and the fact that we already have about 30 'passed' Events in just one week, and that you seem to discover the fun part of doing it, is already a good success and even a milestone in my opinion.

As you are aware, I had to fail many Reviews that you submitted. I felt sorry every time I had to do it, and I hope that you don't see it as failure. It's just a way to establish a close and immediate feedback loop whose only purpose it is to learn what exactly is needed, and I hope over time you will know exactly what to do, and I will be able to 'pass' more and more entries at the first submission. Hopefully in the future, someone else will be able to support me with doing the Reviews.

More and more I get the impression that we are facing a multi-year project. Apparently nobody has ever surveyed ancient literature for the things we are looking for, but even if someone did, our networked approach with collaborators distributed around the globe, with a customly created software at the center, most certainly is a first. Because of that, nobody knows how -- and if -- we will be able to 'lift it', and it probably will be necessary to change the course of action several times.

For the immediate future, I'd like to add a few more 'rules' for collaboration (as if we hadn't enough rules already :/):

1. I will be announcing days when Reviews can be submitted. The reason is that I've worked on Reviews more than 9 hours every day for the past week or so. I'll not be able to sustain that kind of stress for a long period of time. So, the first of these announcements is: All editors can (but don't have to) submit a maximum of 5 entries this Thursday Feb 26. All pending Reviews will be done (either failed or passed) by Friday night. On Friday, I'll announce another day for the next round of Reviews, and so on. We can adapt numbers and time periods according to how it goes.

2. I've spent most of my Reviewing time trying to locate the actual citations in PDFs or online sources. I've located two or three additional PDFs for Reviews that were available online, but haven't been uploaded (e.g. John of Worcester's Chronicle, and Annals of The Kingdom of Ireland). Thus new rule: Before submitting an entry for Review, please EITHER locate a PDF in the internet and upload it and input the PDF URL, OR write into the notes field of the Source that the source cannot be located online. If you have a private copy, leave a note like this: "EditorX: have a local copy" or "EditorY: I have used this source in libray Z". I will fail Events which either don't have the PDF, or which don't have a note.

Don't hesitate to ask more questions here, or bring ideas, or voice concerns. :)

 

[Zadius Sky]

I think, last year, it was discussed to separate events, even if they occurred at the same time and includes same text for each. So, I guess we can merge them?

Yes, I've left feedback stating so.

We may have a bit of work on that year of 365. While I have two event IDs, as you mentioned to merge, but there are other entries on that same event by different owners. 9 in all.

I just attached the snapshot of the filtered event for 365. It was a BIG event. So, how would we merge all event IDs into one?

 

[shijing]

More and more I get the impression that we are facing a multi-year project. Apparently nobody has ever surveyed ancient literature for the things we are looking for, but even if someone did, our networked approach with collaborators distributed around the globe, with a customly created software at the center, most certainly is a first. Because of that, nobody knows how -- and if -- we will be able to 'lift it', and it probably will be necessary to change the course of action several times.

I agree, but I think this is fine. I think that if all of us try to set an even weekly pace (in the same way that most SOTT editors probably do) and keep plugging away, that we'll make good progress, even if it takes a couple of years (or more) -- less mistakes will be made if we don't feel like we have to rush to get everything entered as soon as possible. I love the new format you've developed for the project -- it's a lot easier visually than the old system was, and makes it a lot easier to keep track of things and check for errors.

1. I will be announcing days when Reviews can be submitted. The reason is that I've worked on Reviews more than 9 hours every day for the past week or so. I'll not be able to sustain that kind of stress for a long period of time. So, the first of these announcements is: All editors can (but don't have to) submit a maximum of 5 entries this Thursday Feb 26. All pending Reviews will be done (either failed or passed) by Friday night. On Friday, I'll announce another day for the next round of Reviews, and so on. We can adapt numbers and time periods according to how it goes.

I have a question about this: in my current schedule, I won't be available to work on the database Wednesday through Friday, but should be available to do it Saturday through Tuesday. In a case like this (submitting on Thursday), can I submit ahead of time (say on a Monday or Tuesday) since I can't do it on Thursday?

I was planning on submitting some more entries today, but given what you said above, I'll probably just work on fixing the most recent batch of failed events and wait until next week to submit new events for review -- does that sound good?

 

[Mikey]

I was planning on submitting some more entries today, but given what you said above, I'll probably just work on fixing the most recent batch of failed events and wait until next week to submit new events for review -- does that sound good?

Yes, fix the review_failed first before you submit new ones.

Actually, when thinking about different times of availability, which are certainly not the same for everyone, can I change what just wrote above...

All editors can (but don't have to) submit a maximum of 5 entries this Thursday Feb 26. All pending Reviews will be done (either failed or passed) by Friday night. On Friday, I'll announce another day for the next round of Reviews, and so on.

... to this:

Editors can submit a maximum bunch of 5 Events at any time, but they have to wait until all 5 have been reviewed by me before they can submit more. Does this sound better to everyone?

 

[Mikey]

I just attached the snapshot of the filtered event for 365. It was a BIG event. So, how would we merge all event IDs into one?

If you want, I could assign all these Events to you, and merge them for you. If not you, maybe someone else, or I do it.