This failed:
http://n4g.com/NewsPending-306846.aspx

Reporter claim it is a dupe of this:
http://n4g.com/News-306565.aspx

The failed post links to an article that has a large list of the sale items divided by genre with prices.

The second (aka "original") links to post about the same sale that is much shorter and does not include any type of list - is essentially a "here's the sale" and links to it.

Not a dupe.

While the failed article does contain more detail, the earlier submission offers a link to the site and the news is at its core the same.  This is the purpose of alternate source links on submissions, which you should definitely add yours as.

So if some submits a post on N4G to an article that reads, "Hey, look at this new game" to N4G first, anything after that, no matter how much more complete or better, is a "duplicate?" (And it links to the sale/same site as well).

Maybe http://n4g.com/industrynews/News-302710.aspx should be the "original" and http://n4g.com/News-306565.aspx the "duplicate?"At the core it's the same news, right?

pjeigh


So if some submits a post on N4G to an article that reads, "Hey, look at this new game" to N4G first, anything after that, no matter how much more complete or better, is a "duplicate?" (And it links to the sale/same site as well).

I deal with things case by case, and in this instance each source led to the same information, and neither submission was an editorial.  The benefit to the members lies in having the stories in one place, with one as an alternate source. 

Catastrophe
I deal with things case by case, and in this instance each source led to the same information, and neither submission was an editorial.  The benefit to the members lies in having the stories in one place, with one as an alternate source.

Well then please explain your definition of "editorial."

pjeigh

Catastrophe
I deal with things case by case, and in this instance each source led to the same information, and neither submission was an editorial.  The benefit to the members lies in having the stories in one place, with one as an alternate source.

Well then please explain your definition of "editorial."

An opinion piece (like a thesis or an essay).

Catastrophe

pjeigh

Well then please explain your definition of "editorial."

An opinion piece (like a thesis or an essay).

Interesting. That is not the only use of the word, esp. in professional writing.

"Editorial" can also mean content that is not advertising (including news and features).

I must say I am rather displeased with the decision as well as the reasoning.

I understand, and I'm sorry that we did not find a resolution to your liking. 

Pretty much was an angry video game nerd submission that failed

http://n4g.com/NewsPending-308659.aspx

Which reporter said post in Badjoystick which I can understand, but at the same time

http://n4g.com/Search.aspx?q=angry+video+game+nerd&channel=-1&contenttype=-1

And the most recent one there was mine, and JamieSI approved it, so yea haha

Put back to Waiting Approval, since subs get 48 hrs to reach 10+

Alright thanks, if it fails it fails cause it was indeed "badjoystick material" then haha, I'm still getting the hang of this contributor/submitting thing, and I usually just pick up what I see, so I saw AVGN being submitted here in past/approved and figured "guess its alright to submit it then lol"

Anyway thanks for the reply/bump back to pending!

http://n4g.com/NewsPending-309598.aspx

It's being reported for adding a video from another source (which it credits) even though it was the original story.  If the video needs to be separate and there be two different approved articles I understand, but the original article shouldn't fail approval.

cupogoodness


http://n4g.com/NewsPending-309598.aspx

It's being reported for adding a video from another source (which it credits) even though it was the original story.  If the video needs to be separate and there be two different approved articles I understand, but the original article shouldn't fail approval.

It is a "lame" report, which doesn't fail anything.  I reported lame because I did not like the way you were handling the other submission and reporting it.

cupogoodness


http://n4g.com/NewsPending-309598.aspx

It's being reported for adding a video from another source (which it credits) even though it was the original story.  If the video needs to be separate and there be two different approved articles I understand, but the original article shouldn't fail approval.

This submission is duplicate to http://www.n4g.com/xbox360/NewsPending-309726.aspx

The Examiner pulls the video from Joystiq, which would be acceptable if it was merely an addendum to an original piece.  This is not the case.


The submission was not failed when you posted in this thread, it is now a (legit) failed story.

http://n4g.com/NewsPending-310078.aspx

This story, despite the reports, is legitimate for a few reasons. People are saying it's speculative and not news, but it was submitted as an article, not a news story. It also talks about the game and strange reasoning behind the decisions that made led its creation. It's negative but it's still an article that leads to information about the game. There really is no reason why it would fail except for the bias of others.

Thanks.

Phoenix Video Game Examiner
Information told how it is.

http://www.n4g.com/NewsPendingCom-309987.aspx#C2246537


I don't really care that it failed, but I was wondering if you could check through the reporters because a couple people reported the story 4-5 times, which I was pretty sure was against the rules. Not sure if this is the right place for this.

Also, does this mean that all future RROD whine stories will be failed too?

The Lazy One


http://www.n4g.com/NewsPendingCom-309987.aspx#C2246537


I don't really care that it failed, but I was wondering if you could check through the reporters because a couple people reported the story 4-5 times, which I was pretty sure was against the rules. Not sure if this is the right place for this.

Also, does this mean that all future RROD whine stories will be failed too?

There's not a starting place for that submission, it wasn't even submitted properly.  It's not worth parsing that one for any kind of example; reporting, content or otherwise.

infestedandy, this thread is for failed submissions.

I posted this thread last night and it was approved by contributors, and four hours later, after it was on front page and a heat level of 60 if was failed with no reason at all.
http://n4g.com/NewsPending-310621.aspx
I heard I could get an answer here.

http://www.borderlandsforum.com

matthewsvaughan


I posted this thread last night and it was approved by contributors, and four hours later, after it was on front page and a heat level of 60 if was failed with no reason at all.
http://n4g.com/NewsPending-310621.aspx
I heard I could get an answer here.

Hey there!  I reviewed the submission and I believe it was failed out of human error (there is the misconception that no forum posts are allowed, while in actuality forum posts with screens and/or from industry professionals are permitted).  As it was a moderator oops and not a submission error, I restored the post and you're all set!

This failed:

http://www.n4g.com/NewsPending-311337.aspx

No reports, good story and no dupes. Was just wondering why.