|
Post by tim gallon on Feb 1, 2004 18:37:22 GMT 1
ref yesterdays programme, did you manage to get it proof read before printing?, i know on thursday Sean hadnt seen anything.
reading it i noticed about half a dozen minor errors.
would still be able to proof read if you want, im quite good at finding mistakes as i have to check other peoples work as part of my job.
|
|
|
Post by faginy on Feb 1, 2004 18:39:42 GMT 1
what mistakes did you find gal?
i proof read it on Friday, and I know i missed 2 errors in the who's who column.....
|
|
|
Post by tim gallon on Feb 1, 2004 19:17:43 GMT 1
for a start there are several on page 48 (stats table):
says that ross stephens got two yellow cards in the morecambe game.
in relation to the coloured bars noting whether we are playing home or away the hucknall game indicates this is an AWAY fixture, the forthcoming game against Barnet is indicated as a HOME fixture, the game against Chester in april is indicated as an AWAY fixture and the last game against Morecambe is indicated as a HOME fixture.
Also suggests that the home game against Burton is on a saturday when its mid-week.
there are some other minor mistakes on other pages that i found including the one Ant found in qouteing the Breathe on em Salop reissue.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 1, 2004 22:50:51 GMT 1
Sorry Tim no I didn't. The proofs, which are suppsed to be back at the club on Thursday, did not arrive until 1.30 am Friday morning. I did stay up until 0030 just in case they arrived. But on Friday I was at work. I believe Chris Hudson and Phil Thomas helped but it had to be turned around fast.
I do wonder about taws - the comment in the meeting on thursday about taws not making money out of it, or not making that much money out of it. I wonder whether that means a similar level of priority is given as a result?
The club isn't mking that much money out of them either of course.
|
|
|
Post by tim gallon on Feb 2, 2004 0:13:48 GMT 1
blimey, the harder you look the more mistakes keeping popping out! have noticed mistakes of some various descriptions on pages 2, 3, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16, 22, 31, 34, 38, 41, 45, and 50. Some of these are for small things like full stops but i would nevertheless have mentioned them if i had proof read it. After last weeks naming incident theres a couple more this week. On page three Colin Poole is spelt Colin Pool. On page 10 Sammy Aiston is called Sam Alison. Ian, i'll send you my programme in which i have identified all the errors so you know where im coming from in saying the above. Finally the biggest error of them all comes on page 28. This is where it asks Lenny what his nicknname is. The response given is "Excellent Lion". Come off it, everyone knowns its really s**t Lion.
|
|
|
Post by RuytonShrew on Feb 2, 2004 0:21:29 GMT 1
Sean - nothing to do with me, mate, I was at work on Friday and didn't do any proof reading.
Tim - all fair points but maybe better emailed directly to Ian as this is probably a bit embarrassing on the board! It's also fair to say there were far fewer errors than last weeks so clearly the checks have improved already. Hopefully they'll keep getting better...
|
|
|
Post by tim gallon on Feb 2, 2004 0:32:22 GMT 1
possibly your right Chris, but i started off this thread with Ian and Sean in mind and i only have Ians email address. Im not having a go, clearly mistakes happen that get overlooked by the author after they go over the same thing time and time again. Thats why you need proof readers in the first place. If its any consoliation my previous boss used to pick such errors on my reports and no matter how hard i tried to get rid of all of them she'd always find one
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Feb 2, 2004 2:42:03 GMT 1
i think all this crossing the t's and dotting the i's is going a bit too far
if only photoshop had a spell checker
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 2, 2004 13:54:52 GMT 1
Sean - nothing to do with me, mate, I was at work on Friday and didn't do any proof reading. Sorry Chris, thought it was you, Ian Whitfield said he'd passed it to a Chris - I assumed it was you. Its impossible to proof-read 50 odd pages in a morning so there are going to be mistakes.
|
|
|
Post by BelleVueShrew on Feb 2, 2004 15:17:49 GMT 1
Not this Chris either. There must be more than 2 Chris's around!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2004 16:02:41 GMT 1
Yeah Whits asked me but i only had 10 minutes spare. As Sean says you need a good bit of time to read through all the articles and stats etc...
|
|
|
Post by skipwithrob on Feb 2, 2004 17:02:00 GMT 1
Just wondering, dont mean to have a dig, but are peoples articles proof read, because there were a number of errors in the article written by the photographer (havent got the programme to hand).
Apart from that thought it was quite good.
One other thing, how come there arent any stats, like there were in last seasons programmes, giving form,top scorers average attendances etc...
|
|
|
Post by ianwhit on Feb 2, 2004 17:03:49 GMT 1
One other thing, how come there arent any stats, like there were in last seasons programmes, giving form,top scorers average attendances etc... if you can suggest an article to drop then we can fit the stats back in.
|
|
|
Post by skipwithrob on Feb 2, 2004 17:09:24 GMT 1
fair enough, no need for thesnippy reply. I was only asking a question.
|
|
|
Post by ianwhit on Feb 2, 2004 17:12:20 GMT 1
what was snippey about that?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2004 17:19:53 GMT 1
Nothing Whitters,
Keep up the good work chap
|
|
|
Post by ianwhit on Feb 2, 2004 17:39:18 GMT 1
good old rob still being a hat
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2004 18:47:31 GMT 1
;DBut at least he replies Ian, please answer my emails mate ;D
|
|
|
Post by skipwithrob on Feb 2, 2004 19:24:41 GMT 1
You could have simply put "there isnt any room in the programme" Instead you put a sarky response. Like duh! How am I supposed to know there isnt enough room in the programme, maybe you could take out some of the many adverts?
|
|
|
Post by faginy on Feb 2, 2004 19:26:34 GMT 1
with less adverts the programme would cost more and then you'd be moaning about that!! isn't that many adverts anyway!
|
|
|
Post by skipwithrob on Feb 2, 2004 19:28:42 GMT 1
Don't recall ever moaning at having to pay £2.20/£2.50. Anyway it was only a suggestion, don't see you making any so.....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2004 19:30:22 GMT 1
Give it a rest Rob
PLEASE!
|
|
|
Post by faginy on Feb 2, 2004 19:31:29 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by skipwithrob on Feb 2, 2004 19:33:11 GMT 1
Whats wrong simply asked about the stats page, the one that the programme has had for the previous 2/3 seasons.If that upsets you ant, dont read it.
Or simply ban me.
Talk about a whole load of people having their periods........
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2004 19:34:44 GMT 1
Oh good grief
Pappa don't preach
|
|
|
Post by CuyahogaBlue on Feb 2, 2004 20:59:13 GMT 1
Oh NNNOOOOOOO Not a religion debate
|
|
|
Post by ianwhit on Feb 2, 2004 21:30:22 GMT 1
You could have simply put "there isnt any room in the programme" Instead you put a sarky response. where did i say there was no room? i can't see anywhere in this thread that i have said that... so girlfriend, like duh, what'ever back to you son. the programme is made up of 56 pages, of that 16 are constant adverts, the others are sponsorship bits and bobs and a page for internet adverts. personally i think the advert count is quite low compared to others. the other pages are articles, features etc.. nothing is set in stone.. at the start of the season with less pages and a smaller page size we had the conference stats page and a quiz page. over the season both had been dropped to allow other things, for saturday theres a book review, fitc, afroshrew and the youth profiles. if there are enough people who want the stats back i'll pop them back in
|
|
|
Post by telfordSHREWS on Feb 2, 2004 21:42:45 GMT 1
need anymore pic's Ian?
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 2, 2004 22:04:07 GMT 1
if there are enough people who want the stats back i'll pop them back in I quite like a good stats page because you want to know about the opposition. I also like a team photo of the opposition with a key underneath saying who is who. I'm probably a bit too traditional.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Feb 2, 2004 22:06:06 GMT 1
One of the Thomas brothers is a Madonna fan.
|
|