⚠️ Warning: This is a draft ⚠️
This means it might contain formatting issues, incorrect code, conceptual problems, or other severe issues.
If you want to help to improve and eventually enable this page, please fork RosettaGit's repository and open a merge request on GitHub.
{{Vptopic |topic=Review templates |summary="Needs review" templates }} So it looks like we need to review the review templates. Recently a new user ([[User:Russell|Russell]]) added a task to a "lang examples needing review" category because the example accomplished the task, but not as well as it could have. I think this is a valid reason for review, but none of the templates really fit. Here are the current templates: *[[Template:Clarified-review-example]] *[[Template:Example-needs-review]] *[[Template:Needs-review]] Which should be used for what? Do any need to be removed/changed? Am I crazy? --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 23:07, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
For my part what I felt was missing was a "incomplete" or "inelegant" template. Many of the programing tasks have multiple goals to reach, e.g. [[Reversing a string]] and [[Closest pair problem]]. For both of those, since I'm not an expert with R, I picked the low hanging fruit. But each had a slightly more complex goal that was somewhat out of my reach. I knew that if I marked it as being "done", I'd have sold the capacities of R somewhat short. I wanted to be sure that others still knew there was work to be done on that problem. [[User:Russell|Russell]] 23:14, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
For my examples, I have often just directly written
Hi, I think that as stated, it may be a good idea; but it could be open to abuse - i.e. writing the barest of attempts at too small a part of a problem. People need to know that it if the task is written as a series of sub-tasks then it might be good to use the templates if an entry attempts most of the sub-tasks; but it might be best to not have an entry at all if you are attempting only a few subtasks?
Their is also the case of what happens if an entry has the template on for "a considerable time" and clearly does not complete the task or a significant part of the task? Maybe we should also have a "completion needed" flag so someone could mark an entry for completion or deletion after a reasonable period? I guess I would not like to see RC filled with mere place-holder entries, (that is not the case at present). Just my thoughts --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 03:19, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
==expand the template==
Could the ''needs-review'' template to be expanded to include a reason (explanation), much like the ''incorrect'' template has? That would make it much more usefull instead of just stating it ''may be incorrect due to a recent change in the task requirements ∙∙∙''.
Adding an ''explanation of the problem'' thingy to the template would really help in elaborating the why and whyfor of the flagging. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 14:44, 18 March 2014 (UTC)