Quoting Darxon:

Quote:
Quoting RHo:

Quote:
Everybody who says, bad data is bad data, should think about the consequences of your no votes. Let's assume that you vote no on a contribution with some valid new data but one error which has been there before is not corrected. The contributor refuses to correct the error for whatever reason. As a consequence the contribution is declined. The result is a profile which still features the error but is missing some valid data.

Well, IMO someone who only submits partial corrections does not follow the rules for profiling to the necessary extent.

Regarding the overview example: the rules state that the overview shall match the back-cover exactly. If for whatever reason there's a wrong overview in the online db, if I submit a correction I'm oblioged to check the data I submit against the overview on the back-cover. If I actually do that, I should find all mistakes if I do a thorough job.

Well, I do not say that you are wrong. I just say, that you have to consider the consequences. Namely, if the contributor refuses to correct the existing error and the contribution gets declined, you are not only missing the correct part of the contribution but also still have the error which has been there in the first place.

IMO a more sensible approach would be to vote yes and point out the error in the note. If the contributor corrects the error everything is fine. If not, you can contribute the fix yourself after the release of his contribution. But then that is my approach only.

A completely different situation is of course when the contributor introduces a new error no matter how small it is. In this case I will vote no.

It is very easy to overlook a mistake in the original contribution...trust me I know! I have often received a private message alerting me to the fact that I missed something.

I seldom check my contributions if I see all "yes" votes but if I see a "no' vote I check to see what I might have done wrong or missed.

If I don't receive a private message first I would prefer a "no" vote so that I can correct any mistakes I might have made.

Quoting mwkirchner:

Quote:
Quoting RHo:

Quote:
(edited) ...The contributor refuses to correct the error for whatever reason.

If they feel like that after taking the time to make a contribution ... that is sad.

He may or may not have his own reasons for not correcting an error. Maybe in his eyes it is not an error at all. Maybe it has been even argued about it in the forum.

Quoting RHo:

Quote:

He may or may not have his own reasons for not correcting an error. Maybe in his eyes it is not an error at all. Maybe it has been even argued about it in the forum.

True. Sometimes it's a deliberate choice: submit separately the arguable part.