Article Writing Discussion Boards

Unfortunately we still feel the article reads a little too closely to something you would receive from a marketing department. It is very feature focused rather than discussing how those features personally helped you or may help you. There is even a link inviting the reader to a free trial.

Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject

Hi Sean.

I totally understand your concerns, so i would like to reply to you on the three points that you have made here.

1-) Article Author Motivation or Trigger:
I think that every one of the 11M members on code project, including me has a different motivation or trigger when writing an article, so i think code-project editors should not take this in account during the approval process. The article should be important.

2-) Article reads a little too closely to something you would receive from a marketing department:
It may happen that when reviewing a software you may end up with a similar way of writing as the other humans that are working on the marketing department do, but that doesn't make an article bad or not worth reading. Also there are a lot of articles under the Review of 3rd party controls that are very similar to my article and still have been approved.

3-) It is very feature focused rather than discussing how those features personally helped you or may help you :
As i mentioned in my first post the features i describe in the article are there to solve specific problems, like filtering a intellisense autocomplete list or how to give the users the ability to format a data-grid. Not every problem needs code as a solution !!!

4-) There is even a link inviting the reader to a free trial:
Will remove this link if i get access to the article again.

I have been a developer for the past 21 years and a code-project member since 2006. I have written a honest review article and i believe you should give it a second chance.

Sincerely.

Bledar Birbo wrote:
you may end up with a similar way of writing as the other humans that are working on the marketing department do, but that doesn't make an article bad or not worth reading

But it might make him susceptible of being interpreted as spam

Bledar Birbo wrote:
Also there are a lot of articles under the Review of 3rd party controls that are very similar to my article and still have been approved

Approved doesn't necessarily mean legitime or OK. We are at the end only humans and there are people who try to fool the system every minute. Sadly, some of them get through. If you have found some, you might rise them to be reviewed.

Bledar Birbo wrote:
3-) It is very feature focused rather than discussing how those features personally helped you or may help you:
... Not every problem needs code as a solution

I understand what Sean told you different as you. I think that the point is: To describe not only what it can, but to make it in a personal way. Like "I like feature X because it helps you to..." or "I found YYY nice because it makes the process easier than ZZZ" or things like that.

M.D.V.

If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.

C# MIDI Toolkit[^]

On the one hand, it's nice that they aggregated all the relevant code to get a compileable, working version, something I've been meaning to do for awhile but haven't had time. On the other hand, it would have been nice to have been asked about it first.

Someone did something similar to this years ago for another one of my articles, but In that case they asked for permission first (though it may not have been required, I don't know); I happily said yes.

They notified you...
And you gave your permission to do what they have done - MIT[^]

Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.

The license you associated with your article allows them to do this. At least they have given credit to you - I think it's nice, and it's certainly a compliment.

Please check this:
Build Your Own Generic Data Access Layer: Part II[^]
http://raymroj.blogspot.co.il/2013/11/build-your-own-generic-data-access.html[^]

Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.

It looks like he first wrote his article and then posted the blog because the images in the blog are loaded from CP.

As a result, changing the type to blog would not work because the images will be gone.

My point is that someone copied that CP article and posted it at his own blog...
Normally the hamsters are deal with such things... Mad | :mad:

Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.

You are right. It seems that the blog has been posted by a different person.
I did not noticed (and checked) this due to the same publishing date.

Thanks for the catch! We're on it.

Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject

Article : http://www.codeproject.com/script/Articles/ArticleVersion.aspx?waid=152751&aid=853755[^]

It directly talks about pricing of something. Why not to consider it as spam?

"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly"- SoMad

Looks like spam to me. Thumbs Up | :thumbsup:

"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer

Her another Tip is also suspicious : What and Why of CDN[^]

"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly"- SoMad

Pure spam, and because this forum isn't as high traffic, it'll probably be missed.

If you think an article is spam, raise it in the spam forum.

Why such advice when you already know the result of raising there? I want to be sure that it is not under category where it should not be considered advertisement. In a recent case, one article was missing a note and as a result,it was reported in SA watch,article got deleted and author was about to go.

"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly"- SoMad

Raise it the way you raised it here. Ask if others think it's spam, and then leave it to others - otherwise, what's the point of having that forum?

The format of this blog[^] is quite messed up and there is no message board to tell it to the writer.

Would you mind to have a look?

Thanks

M.D.V.

If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.

I think John may have gone back and fixed this one. He's a good seed Smile | :)

Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject

These articles:
OOP in Python - part 1[^]
OOP in Python - Part 2[^]
Are originally published here:
http://python.dzone.com/articles/oop-python-1[^]
http://python.dzone.com/articles/oop-python-part-2[^]
Now, the author is the same, so this is no plagiarism, but I'm not sure that CP welcomes such repost...
Any opinion?

Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.

In my opinion, they would be better as blog posts here, rather than articles.

Partly inspired by the frequent QA questions involving validating user-entry in various formats, I've been planning to write an article on how to create a WinForms sub-classed TextBox that lets you specify characters to be filtered out, substituted for, or transformed into, in a very "high-level" way, and I'm at the point now where I'm satisfied the code is "ripe."

I thought it would "icing on the cake" to create a Visual Studio design-time data editor for the filter/substitute/transform rules.

There is an open-source library for implementing a design-time (PropertyGrid usable) editor for a generic Dictionary. It was last updated over two years ago, and there's no sign of any recent activity (except an "Issue" I just reported) for the same period of time. It has a NuGet install, and, while the source code is no longer directly downloadable, it's all on the CodePlex site, and can be copied.

So, I got busy and successfully modified the source so the library could work inside a sub-classed WinForm Control (the fact it would not work in such a context is what my "Issue" report was about).

Now, of course, I hope that the author of the library might respond, and then I could ask his permission to include the library in the code sample for the article, and also get a better understanding of what prevented it from working in a sub-classed Control; ideally, the author would change the behavior so the reader of the article could just get the library from his CodePlex site.

But, what if the author does not respond ? The library is licensed with the GNU LGPL 2.1 Public License. While this license states:

"you have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for this service if you wish); that you receive source code or can get it if you want it; that you can change the software and use pieces of it in new free programs; and that you are informed that you can do these things."

I'm not at all informed about the legal/ethical dimensions and requirements for distributing a modified open-source library like this, and, frankly, I don't really want devote bandwidth to that.

I probably could write a design time editor from "scratch," but I'd rather be doing other things.

Appreciate your wise advice, and counsel.

thanks, Bill

«OOP to me means only messaging, local retention and protection and hiding of state-process, and extreme late-binding of all things. » Alan Kay's clarification on what he meant by the term "Object" in "Object-Oriented Programming."

Permission from the author is not necessary. You must only follow the license conditions (your modified version must use the same license and the source must be available). See also the GPL FAQ[^].

In your case you should let the original license text on top of the source files and add your own text indicating that it is a derived work and what has been added or changed. Optional add also your own readme file.

If you want your article code to be published also with LGPL, you can include the modified library sources with your source download package.

Otherwise you should provide an additional package with the modified library sources and add some text to the article license section to make clear that there are different licenses.

As already noted, you must publish the modified version using the same license. But you should check if the license is LGPL 2.1 or LGPL 2.1+. The latter may be indicated by the + sign or in textual form ("these or any later version of GPL"). If you are allowed to use a later version I would choose 3.0.

Thanks, Jochen, for this very thoughtful reply.

When I do publish an article here on CP, I'd like it to have either no license of any type, or the same "license" that most other CP articles have.

I'm still not sure if it's "legal" to publish an article on CP that would be "encumbered" by such things as LPGL.

This kind of issue is one I have not encountered before.

cheers, Bill

«OOP to me means only messaging, local retention and protection and hiding of state-process, and extreme late-binding of all things. » Alan Kay's clarification on what he meant by the term "Object" in "Object-Oriented Programming."