Forum:UnNews Audio, no edits allowed?
I found an interesting though frustrating situtaion on an article for which a User had made an "UnNews audio file". He revises any changes back to the version that matches his audio.
UnNews:National Federation of the Blond: "Dye your hair, you're in danger!" (the reversion in question)
- Did a bit of editing on the above bit. --Hin
Makes editing a bit pointless, and article doesn't get any improvement.
Not sure if this has been discussed, but would appreciate info on how this has been addressed previously.
Haze1956 14:21, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hmm, this is a hard one. See by the rule that anyone can edit you can make changes... but the writer should have control over their work.. So it's a bit hard to explain. —Braydie 16:04, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- While it is annoying that changes made after the audio is recorded mean that the page and the sound don't match, it's daft to avoid improvement (providing the post-audio edits were an improvement) simply to keep the two matching. To avoid conflicts of this nature, for the literally ones of pages that I've done the audio I just mumble "the song that never ends" for a couple of minutes. Or, if you want actual help; have you conversed with the page's creator on its talkpage?--Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 20:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Problem is original creator is not the person who made the Audio File. But it's not that terrific an article anyway so I'm not going to get into a revision war. Unless of course there is a vote by Congress which approves and/or demands it. Haze1956 01:41, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Given that your edits amounted to a complete rewrite of the page, in which case the audio would have been way off, I can see where Gustavo was coming from with the reversion. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that he was right. I recommend that you speak with him either by using his talk page or by taking it up on the article's talk page. Recording UnNews audios can be a pain in the arse--I should know, I used to do them. I can see how he'd be reluctant to re-record. —Major Sir Hinoa prepare for trouble • make it double? 16:51, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'll leave it there this time, I just didn't see either revision as being extraordinary so I didn't feel like re-recording. But if there needs to be a re-record then I guess I can. --love, gustav talk at menope 20:50, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Sorry I wasn't aware of this before. I never thought much about it before because of a dearth of readers, beside myself. In this new "information age", it seems we should think about this. In one or two cases, I've put both audio files up on the article page, in the list, and on podcast, because this is UnNews, after all. Do we need an Unpolicy? Lets have more discusion, if anyone cares. Cheers! 
Rev. Zim_ulator (Talk) I am the dirt under your rollers 00:32, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
I don't think audio and text absolutely need to match. Surely only incredibly anal-retentive people like me really want to read along with the audio, and who cares about us? If the text can be made better it should be, and screw the audioters (no offense to you and your corner, Zimulatificator!) -- Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 00:59, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
