In the thread asking what we value about the forum or would appreciate more of from the LEO team within it, a couple of people have recently mentioned New Entry and Wrong Entry.
Siehe auch: Was ist euch im LEO-Forum wichtig? - #139
I think we all understand that the backlog of entries such as species names or relatively unfamiliar technical terms is long, a relatively low priority, and can indeed take as long as 6 months (the time lag originally requested in this reminder thread). However, I sense that many of us wish for a way to flag certain other items as higher-priority, worth a faster look.
Some said, and I agree, that when there is a useful suggestion for a relatively common term, it would be valuable / much appreciated to see a faster change, or at least some kind of relatively quick (e.g., 2-3 days?) preliminary feedback, just to get an idea of what further citations, examples, or comments might be needed while the discussion is still fresh in people's minds.
An example might be the sixth form thread(s) above, which have had to be mentioned several times even though I think most of us could easily flag that as BE.
It was also mentioned that clearly wrong existing entries could really use some kind of a priority flag, so that they don't disappear under all the species names and end up staying wrong for another half a year or more.
Here are two specific examples from that discussion.
isabelll #139 (other thread)
>>For example, if you look for the English for sozialistisch, the first translation you are given is "socialistic", which is nonsense.
I agree -- first choice should be socialist (adj.), and 'socialistic' should be either deleted or marked as relatively uncommon, usually a needless variant or a false friend.
>>And: a few months ago there was a thread about colostomy, someone had found the term "artificial anus" in Leo. I doubted that, and our resident medic, Marianne, confirmed it, but the the translation is still in Leo, I just checked.
I strongly agree, as I said in that thread.
Unfortunately, that discussion was apparently in Übersetzung Korrekt and not in Wrong Entry, which might be why no action was taken. I think we usually assume that the LEO team at least glances at the most active discussions every day, but maybe that's not in fact the case.
Still, I hope that with the information in these two threads, we could perhaps avoid having to simply repeat it all in Wrong Entry, if anyone on the LEO team has the time and energy to take a look.
Siehe auch: künstlicher Darmausgang - artificial anus
Siehe auch: stoma - das Stoma
*edit* Although, on a second look, that particular pair seems to have been removed, so that the remaining entry is 'artificial anus - Kunstafter,' which may be correct, albeit uncommon?
Sorry if it's already been taken care of.