Preparing A Catalogue of Main List Posts

[Cindy C.]

Hi, FAQers,

First up, a warm welcome to Pip!  ::waves to Pip::


Elkins and I have given some thought to how we might go about 
preparing a catalogue of main list posts, and here are some ideas, 
complete with files and databases.  

Our goal, of course, is to produce a catalogue of coherent and canon-
based posts on every conceivable canon issue that has been 
discussed – that is, the posts and threads that someone will 
eventually use to write or update a FAQ.  So we're looking for posts 
that are interesting, amusing and/or well-reasoned, and that have 
good analysis and good form.  No theory is too outlandish to be 
included in the database; let the FAQ editor decide whether "Lupin 
was an unpaid auror" makes it into the FAQ.

What posts should we *not* include in the catalogue?  We should not 
include posts that make no canon point (OT, LOL!, Me, Too!), posts 
that have atrocious form (spelling, grammar, etc), extremely short 
posts, posts that merely repeat what others have said much better in 
the same thread, and gibberish.  That said, if you run across a 
truly awful thread and you wind up citing no posts at all from that 
thread, please do go back and pick the best post from that 
discussion so that we won't miss entire threads.  

Those reviewing messages should review all types of messages except 
FILKS, including SHIP, FF and TBAY.  I indicated earlier that 
perhaps TBAY posts could be skipped, but upon reflection, I think 
they should be included.  Some TBAY posts have substantial or novel 
canon analysis (Memory Charm Symposium, anyone?), so it might be 
best to catalogue them.  Otherwise, use your best editorial judgment 
on what you think should be included in the catalogue and what is 
best left out.  

CONSISTENCY ISSUES

Once we finish the catalogue, we hope to have a massive Word table 
that we can sort by key words.  In other words, the person preparing 
the Hagrid FAQ will be able to read or print out a list of all of 
the posts that someone entered into the catalogue because they 
discussed a Hagrid-related issue in some meaningful way.  For that 
reason, we should strive for a measure of consistency in how we 
prepare our tables.  If everyone prepares a different style of 
table, we'll have a royal mess on our hands.

For that reason, I have prepared a table template and uploaded it to 
the files section.  Let me know if you think there's a better way, 
but this is what I've come up with.  It has five columns.  

First, there is a column for "Message Number."  Pretty self-
explanatory.

Second, there are three columns for "Key Words."  This is where you 
enter a key word that the editors will use to sort the table later 
when they are writing a FAQ.  If the post addresses more than one 
subject, such as "Harry" and "Hagrid", please give it two key word 
entries in separate columns.  Try to include a key word for every 
subject discussed in a meaningful way in the post.  For instance, if 
I were cataloging the Memory Charm Symposium, I would have separate 
key words for "Neville," "Longbottoms," "Memory Charm," "Crouch 
Jr.", "Mrs. Lestrange," "Avery," and so forth.  If the post requires 
more than three key words, just start another row for that same 
message number.  

The advantage of using separate columns for each key word is that 
anyone coming along later can sort the table by column so that all 
references to Moody, for instance would appear clustered together.  
Say someone is looking through the catalogue for posts discussing 
Sirius' reaction to how Snape clutched something on his arm when 
confronted by Moody.  If we do not use separate columns for each key 
word (for instance if we write "Moody Snape Dark Mark Black" all in 
one key word column), then the sorting function will only sort the 
column alphabetically for the first word it sees -- "Moody"  -- and 
the editor might miss the relevant post.  If we enter key words in 
separate columns, however, we can later sort *each* of the columns 
alphabetically, thereby catching each occurrence of a key word.

Along those lines, if you run across a combined post with 10 
different subjects addressed, 5 of which are one-liners and 5 are 
substantive in their treatment of the issue, you should probably 
include key words for the 5 substantive issues and skip the 5 one-
liners.

Feel free to select any key words you think are appropriate.  For 
instance, Luke's foreshadowing post might take the key 
word "Foreshadowing."  Elkins' post on subversive readings might 
take a key word of "Literary Analysis."

Third, there is a column for "Comments."  To assist those editing 
FAQs, we probably want to be fairly specific in describing and 
evaluating the post.  "Discusses Snape" is not too 
helpful.  "Snape/DE" is better, but not great.  "Why Snape left the 
DE" is better still.  

Here's the link for the Table Template:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP4GU-FAQ/files/

My experience with tables is that they can crash if they get too 
large.  What is "too large?"  I'm not sure, but I probably would 
break a table into two documents if it began to exceed 15-20 pages.  
Don't forget to back up your tables and/or upload them periodically 
to the files section in case of computer crash.  


MESSAGE REVIEW

I've also set up a database for those able to help prepare the 
catalogue by taking on a block of messages and preparing a table for 
their block.  I divided the database into 1,000-message blocks so 
that FAQers without much time can still help out without committing 
to a huge 5,00-message block.  Feel free to sign up for one message 
block or multiple message blocks.  Please indicate the date you 
commit to your chunk.  If for any reason you cannot finish your 
block reasonably promptly, please upload any table you started, note 
in the database that you can't finish your block and indicate where 
you stopped work.

Here's the link:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP4GU-FAQ/database?
method=reportRows&tbl=10&sortBy=1&sortDir=down&start_at=0&query=

Once the catalogue is complete, we'll be ready to start writing FAQs.

Does this sound workable?  Any suggestions, questions, comments?

Cindy