Obitch all you will October 20, 2009 9:51 AM Subscribe
I am not as dismayed by some as the single-link obitfilter, which we have discussed many times before. But I think they can be done better than this.
Single link AND no mention of the deceased party's name AND the less-than-helpful tag obituary? Really?
Single link AND no mention of the deceased party's name AND the less-than-helpful tag obituary? Really?
Yeah, deleted. We were just looking at it.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 10:03 AM on October 20, 2009
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 10:03 AM on October 20, 2009
I thought the same thing at first and even made what I now realize is a misplaced comment. But on second look I think it's a clever reference to "...he reputedly upset Margaret Thatcher to such a degree that she refused to have his name on the honours list...".
posted by Slack-a-gogo at 10:05 AM on October 20, 2009
posted by Slack-a-gogo at 10:05 AM on October 20, 2009
It's a shame as Ludovic Kennedy was probably well worthy of a post... just not that one.
posted by le morte de bea arthur at 10:12 AM on October 20, 2009
posted by le morte de bea arthur at 10:12 AM on October 20, 2009
'well worthy'? Sorry, I've started talking all 'street' for some reason.
posted by le morte de bea arthur at 10:13 AM on October 20, 2009
posted by le morte de bea arthur at 10:13 AM on October 20, 2009
Does every single deleted FPP get discussed here?
It wasn't deleted at the time. I guess the poster thought it was going to be a long argument over the worthiness. But it wasn't.
posted by smackfu at 10:18 AM on October 20, 2009
It wasn't deleted at the time. I guess the poster thought it was going to be a long argument over the worthiness. But it wasn't.
posted by smackfu at 10:18 AM on October 20, 2009
Yeah I got that withholding the name was sort of on purpose but it's one of those "too clever by half" sorts of things really.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 10:19 AM on October 20, 2009
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 10:19 AM on October 20, 2009
Does every single deleted FPP get discussed here?
No. And it wasn't a deleted post when I brought it up, so the real question is, "Does every post dicussed here get deleted?" The answer to this is also "no," by the way.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 10:19 AM on October 20, 2009 [1 favorite]
No. And it wasn't a deleted post when I brought it up, so the real question is, "Does every post dicussed here get deleted?" The answer to this is also "no," by the way.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 10:19 AM on October 20, 2009 [1 favorite]
Does every single deleted FPP get discussed here?
Take it to MeTa, sport.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:21 AM on October 20, 2009
Take it to MeTa, sport.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:21 AM on October 20, 2009
In Soviet Russia, deleted posts discuss you.
posted by Rhomboid at 10:45 AM on October 20, 2009 [2 favorites]
posted by Rhomboid at 10:45 AM on October 20, 2009 [2 favorites]
New record?
Unlikely, but I'm not sure I'm up to doing the db hunting I'd need to do to produce a proper list right now.
Though that might be a fun project at some point. I figure, trawl through metatalk post text for links to other threads on the site and then check the timestamps on the respective parent and target threads.
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:46 AM on October 20, 2009
Unlikely, but I'm not sure I'm up to doing the db hunting I'd need to do to produce a proper list right now.
Though that might be a fun project at some point. I figure, trawl through metatalk post text for links to other threads on the site and then check the timestamps on the respective parent and target threads.
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:46 AM on October 20, 2009
Much as I'm really proud to be the suggested holder of a new deletion record I'm still not sure why it was pulled.
Plenty of Meta Posts are either single or two word entries that act as an inducement for the reader to click through and find out more. Many link to a single information source or web article. I simply followed this formula.
posted by cameronfromedinburgh at 11:08 AM on October 20, 2009
Plenty of Meta Posts are either single or two word entries that act as an inducement for the reader to click through and find out more. Many link to a single information source or web article. I simply followed this formula.
posted by cameronfromedinburgh at 11:08 AM on October 20, 2009
cameron, I think the idea is that the single-link posts are kept due to the merit of those single links. your single link was just an obituary that can be read off of the front page of the bbc, it is not a notable link.
posted by Think_Long at 11:20 AM on October 20, 2009 [2 favorites]
posted by Think_Long at 11:20 AM on October 20, 2009 [2 favorites]
Fair enough Think_Long, point taken.
posted by cameronfromedinburgh at 11:25 AM on October 20, 2009
posted by cameronfromedinburgh at 11:25 AM on October 20, 2009
I guess some single link one page obits from newspaper front pages are more notable than others
posted by BozoBurgerBonanza at 11:33 AM on October 20, 2009
posted by BozoBurgerBonanza at 11:33 AM on October 20, 2009
I've found some more links and written up a more detailed FPP.
posted by Electric Dragon at 11:36 AM on October 20, 2009
posted by Electric Dragon at 11:36 AM on October 20, 2009
I hope the original poster or someone else who is familiar with Mr. Kennedy reworks the obit post to add more information. He looks like an interesting person and someone I would like to learn more about.
posted by TedW at 11:43 AM on October 20, 2009
posted by TedW at 11:43 AM on October 20, 2009
You know, this is the second time today I have been just a little late hitting the post button.
posted by TedW at 11:44 AM on October 20, 2009
posted by TedW at 11:44 AM on October 20, 2009
I guess some single link one page obits from newspaper front pages are more notable than others
Actually no. The rash of celebrity deaths and bad (or multiple) obit posts about them this Summer is what's caused the shift from the "first obit post stays no matter what; we don't want to have to judge them" policy to "we can pretty well judge what a bad post is and if we see bad obit posts early enough we'll try to remove them so someone can write a good one"
In the case of two decent posts posted at about the same time: the first one stays.
In the case of one single link obit post posted in the middle of the US night that has 150 comments before we wake up: it probably stays.
Thanks, Electric Dragon.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 11:46 AM on October 20, 2009
Actually no. The rash of celebrity deaths and bad (or multiple) obit posts about them this Summer is what's caused the shift from the "first obit post stays no matter what; we don't want to have to judge them" policy to "we can pretty well judge what a bad post is and if we see bad obit posts early enough we'll try to remove them so someone can write a good one"
In the case of two decent posts posted at about the same time: the first one stays.
In the case of one single link obit post posted in the middle of the US night that has 150 comments before we wake up: it probably stays.
Thanks, Electric Dragon.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 11:46 AM on October 20, 2009
Also, cameronfromedinburgh, just FYI, adding "my own personal endorsement of his life" to an obit post veers into get-your-own-blog territory.
posted by CunningLinguist at 11:50 AM on October 20, 2009
posted by CunningLinguist at 11:50 AM on October 20, 2009
I guess some single link one page obits from newspaper front pages are more notable than others
We discussed it at the time and weren't remotely thrilled with that Cronkite obit. We've historically been a little more permissive with obits at times than maybe we should have been, depending a lot on the context and the timing, but that some not-great posts have lived for one reason or another is not a reason to celebrate or defend further posts of the same sort.
Much as I'm really proud to be the suggested holder of a new deletion record I'm still not sure why it was pulled.
I did respond to your email about this, fwiw.
I've found some more links and written up a more detailed FPP.
Nice work, Electric Dragon. Thanks.
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:54 AM on October 20, 2009
We discussed it at the time and weren't remotely thrilled with that Cronkite obit. We've historically been a little more permissive with obits at times than maybe we should have been, depending a lot on the context and the timing, but that some not-great posts have lived for one reason or another is not a reason to celebrate or defend further posts of the same sort.
Much as I'm really proud to be the suggested holder of a new deletion record I'm still not sure why it was pulled.
I did respond to your email about this, fwiw.
I've found some more links and written up a more detailed FPP.
Nice work, Electric Dragon. Thanks.
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:54 AM on October 20, 2009
cameronfromedinburgh, don't worry too much about it. The thing about obit posts is that if people knew who the deceased person was, then a single link isn't really much of a tribute. If they didn't know who the person was, then a single link isn't really great at filling in the blanks. For a general non-obit post a single link is fine, though something meatier than a single news link is usually the way to go.
No really big deal in this case, the deletion isn't intended to say you did anything wrong so much as "this could be done better and if we remove this someone will probably come along and do that" It's a weird stance to take, admittedly, but a lot of bad "FIRST POST!" obits sort of led us to it as a strategy.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 12:00 PM on October 20, 2009 [1 favorite]
No really big deal in this case, the deletion isn't intended to say you did anything wrong so much as "this could be done better and if we remove this someone will probably come along and do that" It's a weird stance to take, admittedly, but a lot of bad "FIRST POST!" obits sort of led us to it as a strategy.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 12:00 PM on October 20, 2009 [1 favorite]
Looking at the last 50 posts tagged "obit," there were only three (1, 2, 3) that were single link posts without [more inside]. Some only have an extra link or two, many have more (I'll leave the charting of links in obit posts over time to others).
posted by filthy light thief at 12:02 PM on October 20, 2009
posted by filthy light thief at 12:02 PM on October 20, 2009
10 mins from the blue to MeTa. New record?
Heh. There is someone who doesn't trust the flagging system.
posted by smackfu at 12:55 PM on October 20, 2009
Heh. There is someone who doesn't trust the flagging system.
posted by smackfu at 12:55 PM on October 20, 2009
yes because no one knows how to google his name if they want to find more info...
it's just a post on a blog, folks
posted by Zambrano at 1:06 PM on October 20, 2009
it's just a post on a blog, folks
posted by Zambrano at 1:06 PM on October 20, 2009
No real reason to delete this post other than "meh." I liked the Thatcher reference.
posted by blucevalo at 1:25 PM on October 20, 2009
posted by blucevalo at 1:25 PM on October 20, 2009
Oh, ok. It's just a post on a blog, folks! We can all go home now. Thanks, Zambrano!
posted by Kwine at 1:42 PM on October 20, 2009 [3 favorites]
posted by Kwine at 1:42 PM on October 20, 2009 [3 favorites]
But we can thank ricochet biscuit for coining a very useful new piece of MetaFilter terminology: Obitch. Short for Obitchuary...
And the rapid MeTa response time makes me think somewhat eponysterical? Because a ricochet biscuit is not exactly 'slow food'...
posted by wendell at 2:49 PM on October 20, 2009
And the rapid MeTa response time makes me think somewhat eponysterical? Because a ricochet biscuit is not exactly 'slow food'...
posted by wendell at 2:49 PM on October 20, 2009
cameronfromedinburgh writes "Plenty of Meta Posts are either single or two word entries that act as an inducement for the reader to click through and find out more. Many link to a single information source or web article. I simply followed this formula."
It's called mystery meat and the formula, even when the posts don't get deleted, is flawed.
posted by Mitheral at 3:28 PM on October 20, 2009
It's called mystery meat and the formula, even when the posts don't get deleted, is flawed.
posted by Mitheral at 3:28 PM on October 20, 2009
I posted an obit thread once that didn't include the deceased's name. No regrets!
posted by dhammond at 5:47 PM on October 20, 2009
posted by dhammond at 5:47 PM on October 20, 2009
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by dunkadunc at 10:00 AM on October 20, 2009