And the advantages of this change from just filing an error report are....? Frankly, if I had filed a report I would have offered even more links to the standard websites:
https://secondhandsongs.com/edit-review/82
- The database is updated immediately
- No additional workload for editors
First, something weird seems to be happening, though it may be specific to this case. When I click on the "Needy Time" link in the edit notice it does not take me to the release at issue. Searching for "David Evans [2]" does not return the artist.
Second, I likely need to get a handle on what happens on the editors' side of things. There's a difference between a notice and a review/approval. A notice is just that, a ping to the assigned editor that VV has messed with your stuff. The editor can either ignore (I trust VV, no worries) or review the changes (that VV screws up all the time). A review/approval is what happens with an error report.
What exactly does an editor see and is required to do upon a CC adding an additional source link (or any other authorized revisions/additions for that matter). Does just a simple notice generate that can either be ignored or not? Do the changes temporarily apply until an editor approves, at which time they become "permanent" or revert?
It appears that when there is no assigned editor, the notice/review flows thru the "Participate"/"Search" queue. If there is no assigned editor to receive the notice, etc., should one be generated at all and just let the change go thru?