Proofreading level

Comments about LibriVox? Suggestions to improve things? News?
Post Reply
brownrottger
LibriVox Admin Team
Posts: 8984
Joined: May 11th, 2021, 5:00 pm
Location: Westford, Massachusetts USA

Post by brownrottger »

I suggest that the Standard level include the following:
Please follow along with the text and listen for any word changes that affect the meaning of the text.

I noticed this used as a Special instruction by Scarbo in Mauprat and I think it should be Standard in honor of the integrity of each author's work.
Thank you for this forum in which to express my opinion.
Availle
LibriVox Admin Team
Posts: 22422
Joined: August 1st, 2009, 11:30 pm
Contact:

Post by Availle »

Sounds good in theory, in practice, not so much.
It would remove quite a few proof listeners who are not (or don't want to be) in front of a computer while they are proofing. Me for example (not that I do a lot of PLing though). Or visually impaired ones.

Also, our standard proof listening level already includes a "note things that make you go 'huh'?" I would assume that such things would change the meaning of the text.

If you are concerned with the integrity of the author's work (which, by the way, can only be true for the books in the original language; no translator can be certain of that), you can always proof listen to your own recordings before you submit them.

And in your own projects, you can choose "word perfect", our most stringent proof listening level.

However, it may be a bit more difficult to find readers on that level of accuracy in a group project. Unless this was a science text with lots of math or other important formulae in it, I personally would not read for such a project. Reading is much more fun than editing. :D
Cheers, Ava.
Resident witch of LibriVox, channelling
Granny Weatherwax: "I ain't Nice."

--
AvailleAudio.com
schrm
Posts: 4210
Joined: February 10th, 2018, 11:02 am
Location: Austria

Post by schrm »

read along the text is more special pl level than standard, and the reasons for that are explained in our wiki and our faq:
https://wiki.librivox.org/index.php?title=Guide_for_Proof-listeners#Levels_of_Proof-listening
Levels of Proof-listening
Always check the first post for the level of proof-listening requested, or post in the thread to ask. Please do not offer feedback beyond the level requested.

In general, we ask for standard listening -- repeats and gaps:
Listen for repeated words or passages that the reader likely intended to edit out.
Note any long pauses or bad background noises that disrupt the flow of your listening pleasure.
Note that the intro and outro has the correct wording as noted in the first post of the project thread, and 5 seconds of silence at the end.
If the recording seems too loud or too quiet, please note that as well.
It is NOT necessary for you to follow along with the text; just listen as you would normally.
A request for word-perfect (example: Einstein's Relativity) includes all of the above, and reading along:
Follow along with the online text and note any differences between what is written and what you hear. (Note: sometimes the online text is wrong, or differs from the edition that a reader worked from! It is important to use public domain texts. In some cases, the corrected text is actually under copyright(example: Ulysses)! If in doubt, ask the BC.)
A reader may request special feedback, and that would be whatever was asked for. (example: "Needs listeners who can understand French / Spanish / ...") The special need will be explained in the top post for that Prooflistening thread.
And some Prooflistener requests are CC - Constructive Criticism sought.
Sometimes folks would like feedback on how to improve their reading style or their recording setup -- they'll write CC at the head of their subject line and post details in the top post about what type of feedback they want.
viewtopic.php?f=18&t=219
Don't you have any standards?
It depends what you mean by standards. Our feeling is this: in order for LibriVox to be successful we must welcome anyone who wishes to honour a work of literature by lending their voice to it. Some readers are better than others, and the quality of reading will change from book to book and sometimes from chapter to chapter. But we will not judge your reading, though we may give you some advice if you ask for it. This is not Hollywood, and LibriVox has nothing to do with commercial media's values, production or otherwise. However: we think almost all of our readings are excellent, and we DO try to catch technical problems (like repeated text etc.) with our Listeners Wanted/prooflistening stage. Maybe you'd like to help?

You mean your readings might have mistakes in them?
Project Gutenberg has a 99% accuracy rate target for its texts; we aim to equal or better that. For a 20 minute audio recording, 99% is equivalent to 12 seconds of error. Count to 12 and see how long that is. So, we think by a pretty objective measure, even with a few mistakes, we're doing pretty well.
however, i use special standard pl levels when i emphasize this in this project and standard pl levels for normal projects - and i read along, as do many others.
but think of it like that: as a pl, there might be other reasons, why you don't want to remark every little mistake, where the reader got carried away with the text and or modernized two words or three. maybe, because i respect and welcome the efforts and work a (new or) reader (for many many years) put into this recording.
when it happens too often, i ask back, which reading source was used - the dangers of getting a copyright violation issue because of someone reading from a copyrighted edition is too big and highly risky, i think.

i can assure you, that prooflistening is the most difficult work here on librivox.
you never know when it is too much or too less and you never know the reaction of a reader until they happen.
while i was for enabling something like slow reading as a pl level in my beginnings, i now just plead for keeping this system as it is: it is enabling very much freedom, very much difficult! volunteer work; and every possible project and special need is possible to realize.
:D
cheers
wolfi
reader/12275
brownrottger
LibriVox Admin Team
Posts: 8984
Joined: May 11th, 2021, 5:00 pm
Location: Westford, Massachusetts USA

Post by brownrottger »

Thanks for the in depth explanations. I was worried about the integrity of the author's work. So if the standard does include something that makes you go "huh?" then that would mean mistakes that change meaning. I, myself, since I have alot of free time, will always listen with the text but I do now understand. Thank you all for taking the time to respond.
Best,
Christine
Post Reply