Hard to Believe

@Maya​ 

The following valid corrections declined despite the matching, perfectly solid evidence. I know you've also been distancing yourself from actually correcting the inaccurate data for some inexplicable reason, but here goes nothing.

Do the editors know the guideline that mentions a part about public records or perform an actual data vetting with the provided sources?

• #260516-213355-841000
• #260516-214131-052000
• #260516-214229-644000

@Maya​ 

Aren't you going to acknowledge the above errors as you should? Look, this is only hurting the credibility of the database. 

I can see you've changed the status with a few clicks but I presented new errors, so you at least need to have the decency to inform further even if you prefer to do nothing else about it, like correcting and reporting! 

I'm sorry to have to say this but can't you see how thankless this treatment and you are? As a contributor, do I need to push hard for each mistake each time? Why should I care about any inaccuracy if this is the treatment! Shame on you!

I know you won't do anything, nor do I expect a response from you now, but I hope your superiors can see the situation and evaluate your approach.

Hi @jabrenner​ -

Hi @Michelle​ 

Thank you for moving the needle as someone with common sense and professional courtesy. If it wasn't for you, I know for sure the wrong listing would be maintained considering some submissions being butchered by unqualified, irrational people to my dismay. They should know better than anyone what is best for a vast database and try to be grateful for any important contribution made out of respect for this website and its valuable content and remember that no one, including me, has to deal with such repeated unpleasantness.

Now, what will become of the editor prodigy who obstinately declined the correction despite the solid information presented? I re-submitted twice to see the outcome and each was declined for being, get this, unverified! It was obvious no one checked really or that simply declined without any reservation. I was furious. Maybe many others are following the suit. I also would like know if internally any progress is being made towards it. This is beyond a mere processing error at this point, and to be honest, this listing was to be corrected ages ago as mentioned in another thread! I have one other correction waiting to be tested out depending on your answer. Thank you again.

Hi @jabrenner​ -

Thanks for your comment, I'm glad we were able to get that corrected, and I appreciate your patience throughout the process.

To address your questions:

We are continuously committed to making the experience of submitting data consistent and reliable for all contributors. Unfortunately, while we strive for accuracy, processing errors can occur and the notified reasons for declines don't always fully reflect the complexity behind a decision.  In some cases, data may have previous contentions or supporting evidence on file that can make verification more challenging than it might appear on the surface.

With that being said, none of this diminishes the validity of your contributions or the frustration of having a well-sourced correction declined.  Your feedback about this experience is noted and is part of the broader improvements we're working on internally to ensure submissions are reviewed with the thoroughness they deserve.

For the correction you mentioned, I'd encourage you to go ahead and submit it, and if you run into any issues, don't hesitate to flag it here so we can look into it directly.

Hi @Michelle​ 

#260523-155835-240000 correction declined against the evidence. I must note that since your suggestion, some others prior to this went through flawlessly with the same type of sources. I don't know if it's the same person, but I guess this editor must be cautioned to check the actual, solid evidence.

Going forward, I would hate to keep running into this despite flagging.