lost reviews
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements
Forum Name: Report bugs here
Forum Description: Help us improve the site from a tech standpoint
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=22106
Printed Date: March 01 2025 at 10:24
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: lost reviews
Posted By: Sean Trane
Subject: lost reviews
Date Posted: April 21 2006 at 05:40
|
Hi everyone
I had suspiscion of some reviews being lost in the recent shuffle of the database, where had to re-submit the Family's Anyway review>> thanffully I had a copy ofit
But this time, I have lost the VDGG review of Still Life and the one appearing on the Godbluff and World Record are the first ones I posted, both were re-written and that version seems lost. >>> and I do not have a copy
I am afraid to look in the rest of my reviews to find further damages.  ------------- let's just stay above the moral melee prefer the sink to the gutter keep our sand-castle virtues content to be a doer as well as a thinker, prefer lifting our pen rather than un-sheath our sword |
Replies:
Posted By: Ricochet
Date Posted: April 21 2006 at 05:44
must be hard for you with the fabulous amount of reviews you have...
------------- 
|
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: April 21 2006 at 05:47
|
Collaborators Only Excluding ratings without reviews
http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=325 - Prog-Folk Specialist
Joined date: 4/29/2004 | Posts: 3724| Last visit: 4/21/2006 5:38:50 AM EST Reviews: 1583
from these two counts, there could be as much as 69 reviews lost ------------- let's just stay above the moral melee prefer the sink to the gutter keep our sand-castle virtues content to be a doer as well as a thinker, prefer lifting our pen rather than un-sheath our sword |
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: April 21 2006 at 09:18
|
Hugues,
The difference of 69 represents ratings without reviews. This of course means reviews with less than 200 characters (NOT words). They are not lost, they just don't appear because they are too short.
The database has not been changed AT ALL, just the way the information is displayed from it. I remember PM'ing you some time ago (before any changes were made to the site) to say that your review of "Still life" was listed as a rating only, as it was too short. I thought this was odd, as your other VDGG reviews were quite lengthy. It looks like your update never actually reached the site.
Unfortunately, there is no quick way of identifying which of your reviews are the 69 which don't appear due to their length. I suspect I have sent some to you by PM, but you'd need to check through your reviews manually to find the short ones.
|
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: April 21 2006 at 09:31
^^^
that's right, Bob!! I do remember this
 . and I am sure a good deal of those are too short (I still have not attacked the last two list you sent me ) >> looks like I will soon Where would have those re-written reviews gone, then!?!?!? I remember re-writing them and sending them at the same time as I had re-written the Hammill reviews around mid 05. The ones showing for GB, SL and WR date from early 04 >> not surprising they are so short (and awful
 ) I am certain I sent them in!!! ------------- let's just stay above the moral melee prefer the sink to the gutter keep our sand-castle virtues content to be a doer as well as a thinker, prefer lifting our pen rather than un-sheath our sword |
Easy Livin wrote:Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: April 21 2006 at 09:36
|
Do you check when you're updating your reviews Hugues that they have updated OK? If I am updating, I have two windows open, one to do the update, and one to check the result on the album page. It seems to me like the updates have never actually reached the database for whatever reason. There is no way an older version of a review could be restored once it has been updated.
A general question, has anyone else updated a review and found later that the older one is still there?
|