# Delete invalid threads?



## lazarus78

Dear all,

One of the added values of WR are the forums. If the translation given by the dictionary is not matching your needs, you can have a look on the threads that include the word in the title.

Nonetheless, some foreros directly open a new thread instead of going through the existing ones. Then, usually appears one of the Moderators who knows that there is a previous thread on this matter, and she/he just informs of that. For example, this thread (I really wonder how you, Mods, are able to know and do all these things! ) 

The issue is that if later somebody is looking for related information might look through the threads, and therefore will probably check these ones which are absolutely useless. 

The suggestion is obvious: Mods have the big power of deleting threads when they don't fulfil the rules of the forum. Why not, if they realize that there's already existing a thread on the same issue, delete the new one at the same time that they inform the forero?

That's it. I went through other C&S threads and I think this issue was not discussed. I apologize if otherwise. Thanks for your work, guys.

Warm regards,

Lazarus


----------



## TrentinaNE

Maintaining order and efficiency is an evolutionary process.    In some forums, the moderators like to close the thread with a message that the thread-opener (and others) can read and (we hope) learn from.  In IT-EN, we add a "marker" to those threads and we periodically go back and delete them, just as you are suggesting.  So, obviously, we already like the idea.  

In some other forums, workload issues may dictate other approaches.  

Elisabetta


----------



## lazarus78

Hello, Elisabetta, and thanks for your answer. 

Well, I really have no clue how you, Mods, deal with all the job you have, but I guess once the Moderator has found out that the same topic was adecuately answered in another thread, instead of informing the forero who asked in the thread, the Mod could send a PM saying "check these previous threads" and delete instantly the useless one. I think the time employed in this action would be more or less the same, isn't it?

The objective of this proposal is just to avoid the accumulation of useless threads in the dictionary and to leave only the most useful threads.  

And that's it. Regards


PS. I'm talking on my complete ignorance about how you manage with your job, dear Moderators, so if I said any inconvenience don't be mad on me!


----------



## Jana337

TrentinaNE said:


> Maintaining order and efficiency is an evolutionary process.    In some forums, the moderators like to close the thread with a message that the thread-opener (and others) can read and (we hope) learn from.  In IT-EN, we add a "marker" to those threads and we periodically go back and delete them, just as you are suggesting.  So, obviously, we already like the idea.
> 
> In some other forums, workload issues may dictate other approaches.
> 
> Elisabetta


I want to add that if you find old closed threads or threads that didn't lead anywhere (because the asker never showed up to explain the question better), you are most welcome to report them so that we can delete them and make the dictionary cleaner.


----------



## lazarus78

Do you mean, Jana, that I should report the post that I linked above, for it to be deleted? (or at least for the moderators to know about it)?


----------



## Jana337

That thread has already been reported by someone else.  Let's wait for Spanish moderators - they will tell you what they prefer.


----------



## TrentinaNE

lazarus78 said:


> Well, I really have no clue how you, Mods, deal with all the job you have, but I guess once the Moderator has found out that the same topic was adecuately answered in another thread, instead of informing the forero who asked in the thread, the Mod could send a PM saying "check these previous threads" and delete instantly the useless one. I think the time employed in this action would be more or less the same, isn't it?


I find that sending a PM takes more time than posting in the thread (having to copy/paste text and links), and if I've already _deleted_ the thread in question, then it becomes harder for the person to understand what my PM is about. 

But thanks for your concern! 
Elisabetta


----------



## lazarus78

TrentinaNE said:


> if I've already _deleted_ the thread in question, then it becomes harder for the person to understand what my PM is about.


 
Well, I guess that if I ask a question and after a few hours or days I receive a PM, from a moderator, with the title of the thread I opened, saying "you will find here the answer to your question", I will easily know what's the story about. And I guess most of the foreros will, won't they? 



TrentinaNE said:


> I find that sending a PM takes more time than posting in the thread (having to copy/paste text and links)


 
And, again very respectfully to all of you, moderators, sending a PM means just clicking on the nickname of the forero, and you get the option for the private message. If the mod used her/his time on looking for the old thread that was answering the question, making a couple of clicks and then a copy-paste of the new thread won't take so long time.

I'm not at all on position to tell you how things must be done, you're already dealing with a herculean task here. I'm just thinking loudly, if you just say it's not realistic, that's it, end of the story. If you consider that if other foreros (like me) who go through threads like the one quoted at the begining of this one should be reported, I would be glad to cooperate. 

Regards. Laz


----------



## TrentinaNE

lazarus78 said:


> If you consider that if other foreros (like me) who go through threads like the one quoted at the begining of this one should be reported, I would be glad to cooperate.


Yes, we do.    Thanks in advance!  

Elisabetta


----------



## lazarus78

If you tell me that I should, I will. But it will be very embarrassing for me to report as invalid a thread that has already been checked out by one moderator. 

Implicitly I'm suggesting that the moderator didn't do his tasks properly, and I think I'm not the person to do that. 

You get my point? Wouldn't you feel annoyed if you receive a report of a thread you checked, saying that it should be deleted?


----------



## Jana337

No, we wouldn't feel annoyed.  

If you consistently report threads where we think that no action is necessary, you will get a PM with a short explanation. But most reports are absolutely valid.


----------



## lazarus78

Ok, then I will act accordingly.

Thanks a lot both of you, Jana and Elisabetta. I will do my best 

Warmest regards

Laz


----------



## fenixpollo

If you report a post/thread that has already been moderated, it is in no way insulting to the moderator: it just means that you think that more moderation needs to happen.  Please don't hesitate to report posts that you think need moderator attention.

The only difficulty that I have in deleting new threads that are repetitions of old thread topics is the communication issue that was mentioned above, though I agree that a PM is appropriate. Another strategy that I often use is that I will merge all of the previous threads with the same title, same context and same question.  That way, everyone involved can see the answer.

This is not necessarily a best practice, however, and it's definitely not a standard for the Spanish forums. In fact, we don't have a standard for dealing with this issue at the moment.  Thanks for bringing it to our attention.


----------



## ILT

lazarus78 said:


> If you tell me that I should, I will. But it will be very embarrassing for me to report as invalid a thread that has already been checked out by one moderator.
> 
> Implicitly I'm suggesting that the moderator didn't do his tasks properly, and I think I'm not the person to do that.
> 
> You get my point? Wouldn't you feel annoyed if you receive a report of a thread you checked, saying that it should be deleted?


No, it shouldn't be embarrassing  We are people too and we err. Sometimes you'll notice something we missed, and sometimes your report will lead to no action from us whatsoever, but you can be assured that we won't be annoyed. We try to clean up the forums, but especially in the case of General Vocabulary it is an enormous task, and we can use all the help foreros can provide. Reporting posts and threads is the best way to help.

We are trying to come up with a way to keep GV under control, and all ideas are welcome and taken in consideration. Thanks again.


----------



## cheshire

I don't quite see many "useless" or "invalid" questions, although they may sometimes overlap each other. I don't mind overlap, I recongnize it as ordinary activity in the process of learning languages. Even if a word employed in the same meaning could emit a different ray in other sentences. It would be a pity if Toscanini gets deleted just because there's a nice Karajan piece already.

I understand the problem with too much or overlapping "related threads" appearing under the WR dictionary entries, but couldn't the titles in dictionary definition pages be deleted manually, instead of deleting the actual threads altogether?


----------



## Jana337

cheshire said:


> I understand the problem with too much or overlapping "related threads" appearing under the WR dictionary entries, but couldn't the titles in dictionary definition pages be deleted manually, instead of deleting the actual threads altogether?


Sisyphean work. Literally. 


> I don't quite see many "useless" or "invalid" questions, although they may sometimes overlap each other. I don't mind overlap, I recongnize it as ordinary activity in the process of learning languages.


Some overlap is natural but what I consider indispensable in the process of learning (anything, not just languages) is acquiring the skill of finding, sorting and making use of available information. 

I believe that the usefulness of this forum would diminish if it were understood as a substitute of the dictionary and not as its complement.


----------



## lazarus78

There all, 

Thank you very much for your support and guidance.

Therefore from now on, whenever I find what I consider a "dead end" thread (that directs to another with a similar title on it and the proper answer), I will report it for your consideration.

Very warm regards to all of you,

Lazarus


----------



## Grefsen

Jana337 said:


> I believe that the usefulness of this forum would diminish if it were understood as a substitute of the dictionary and not as its complement.



This is an excellent point that you make *Jana337. 

*I know that I wouldn't find it to be very interesting to spend much time here at Word Reference if all the foreros ever did was post a word or phrase that they wanted translated and then have others do the translations for them.


----------



## cherine

lazarus78 said:


> Well, I guess that if I ask a question and after a few hours or days I receive a PM, from a moderator, with the title of the thread I opened, saying "you will find here the answer to your question", I will easily know what's the story about. And I guess most of the foreros will, won't they?


As the recipient of the PM, _*you*_ will know, but how would the others know, unless with a public message?
I mean: the best way to send a message to the biggest number of persons is the public message.

When do I use this: when it's something that's being repeated by several people, when it's something that needs attention from severl people or when it has to do with the rules, and I need to remind the forum members of the importance of following the rules.

When a moderator posts a link of previous threads, it's a good reminder of those threads, and of the importance of using the search function before opening knew, repeated, threads.



> And, again very respectfully to all of you, moderators, sending a PM means just clicking on the nickname of the forero, and you get the option for the private message. If the mod used her/his time on looking for the old thread that was answering the question, making a couple of clicks and then a copy-paste of the new thread won't take so long time.


Your suggestion is valuable of course, but...
1- Deleting and sending a PM surely takes more time than just posting a reminder and closing.
2- If I have to take the same action with several threads in the same day, that would be a real killer, trust me 
So the best, more practical and less time consuming method is to post a reminder and leave the thread. Of course, that thread can be removed later.



fenixpollo said:


> Another strategy that I often use is that I will merge all of the previous threads with the same title, same context and same question. That way, everyone involved can see the answer.


I sometimes do this too.

But I think we, moderators, would all be very grateful if we're spared all these alternatives  And this only requires a few seconds of the forum members' time, searching for previous threads


----------



## lazarus78

cherine said:


> As the recipient of the PM, _*you*_ will know, but how would the others know, unless with a public message?
> I mean: the best way to send a message to the biggest number of persons is the public message.


 
Yes, but quite frequently the first answer is the one directing to other threads, meaning that not so many people will be involved in the discussion before the thread was deleted. And just as when other threads are deleted or moved, if you delete this one, you will always include the explanation. 



cherine said:


> When a moderator posts a link of previous threads, it's a good reminder of those threads, and of the importance of using the search function before opening knew, repeated, threads.


 
Well, or it can be even counterproductive, because with the time, accumulation of "dead end" threads will make boring and hard to find the thread that is providing a useful answer, so more likely people will find easier and faster to ask directly in the forums.

Nothing to say if is easier to send PMs or what... these are you the ones who are dealing with it all day long, so you are the experts! 



cherine said:


> But I think we, moderators, would all be very grateful if we're spared all these alternatives  And this only requires a few seconds of the forum members' time, searching for previous threads


 
Of course, you can count on me! 

Thanks for your comments, Cherine. And well, accept mine simply as thoughts of a user who wants to help 

Regards to everybody,

Lazarus


----------



## eujin

I'm new to the WR forum but I must say it has struck me how many deleted threads/posts there are. Way more than on other forums that I am used to - some of which could probably do with some stricter editing. It's a bit of sour grapes really, because I've only posted 10 times and I've already had a post deleted. It must be a lot of work for the moderators.


----------

