for a few years I've had a hunch that there's really bad practices/moral being applied when people edit/approve bottle changes...
To be reliable, and this is standard database practice - once a bottle (i.e. an entry) has been confirmed and added to the database, the bottle (the entries' core data) data must NEVER change - this is 'good practice' generally when working with large data sets, but becomes an absolute necessity once you have data cross referencing or building more data on top of existing entries ( i.e. the bottle & relative data relying on it to NOT change - ever... in WB context - rates, notes, added to collections, etc are true for the bottle they are submitted for - if the bottle changes/mutates underneath/over time, the data left for the bottle looses all its value/context, resulting in untrue/bad data).
I've now seen a case first hand that a Specialist changed a bottles core data, and the clusterf*ck that followed suit - on this:
This is the documented details:
Created at 2016-05-13 12:54:33
Created by mds51
Updated at 2016-12-27 11:07:36
Updated by mds51
Created at Created by Comments for the administrator Info URL Accepted on Accepted by
accepted 26-12-2016 AndersP Hi, I have made some changes. After researching the internet it doesn't come in 150ml bottles, only 500 which I have in my posession. I have also added a link which is a similar bottle I have, only the barrel number is different. (I have barrel number 545) The whisky is also destilled in Dunedin's lost destillery, not Willowbank as listed above. This is written on the back of the box. Kind regards, Anders Pettersson https://www.masterofmalt.com/whiskies/ne… 26-12-2016 RoyC
accepted 13-05-2016 mds51 - https://scontent.ftxl1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v… 13-05-2016 RoyC
So let's look at the issues, and there's a fair few (sorry RoyC, I have no idea if you regularly do this, but I have to use this exemplarily as there's a lot of things wrong with how this went down - and I am only a specialist for 2 very small areas... so I imagine we have a lot of bad bottle data on WB that was changed post-approval... but let's go through one by one):
RoyC did not check with the original submitter mds51, instead
RoyC took the 'bottle change request' for granted, and to be true-er than what was previously approved (why ?)
RoyC then changed what was a confirmed 150ml bottle, to a 500ml bottle,
RoyC added the barcode fitting the 500ml bottle
(Funnily enough, one step to verify would be to check with the original approver as well, but, the original submission was also approved by RoyC.)
mds51 then, after I wrote to him and asked if the 150ml bottle really exists, which he confirmed, changed the bottle back to 150ml, as he still has access to the bottle as the original 'owner' of the submission...
Now the bottle page mixes 150ml fill content data with the 500ml bottle barcode.
In a few days no one would have any trace or rememberance of any of this
= falsified / bad / untrue data par excellence that no one is able to trace back or correct.
It's great that people put so much work into WB, but, the above is very destructive imo.
So these are just my few cents, as I think this needs to be addressed & people need to be aware of how bad/destructive this way to edit/approve data is as it weakens whiskybase as a whole and the more this happens, the less trust worthy the data on whiskybase becomes as a whole.
Also, interesting/scary, that mds51's edit, from 500ml to 150ml does NOT show in the history...
And here's a user reporting that a bottle he added and left data / a note on, has been deleted:
Can anyone see what might have happened there ?
Odd... that was a bottle added in December... by Menno...
Google still has a cache of it:
Very strange... why would anyone delete bottles which have been around for a while AND had user data attached to it...???
Looks like Vassago has added the same bottle back in by hand:
But, the issues stands that there's a lot of bad data-practices being applied, the Ledaig 19 being just the latest case that was noticed where someone with admin/mod/specialist privileges is altering/removing data and damaging WB as a whole.
Would be great if we could get a mod/admin/specialist system going, again similar to discogs, where fundamental changes to any existing bottle (change in fill / % / date ) have to be approved of by 2-3 specialists/mods, and until done, the site displays the proposed changes as un-reviewed.
how every data-entry, by user or mod is logged and review-able by all ?!
For that it is mandatory though to have a transparent log of committed actions plus a voting system...
But lets' see what WB v4 brings eh ?
And here's another example of bottles being edited my mods/admins/specialists after notes/rates have been left on existing data (although in this specific case someone 'made' it the bottle I left a note for on the 'standard' bottle...):
i.e. when I left the note, this was the general/international version of the OB Glen Garioch 1972 [which I assume most people who left their note on their were meant to rate....], whereas now it has become the much rarer OB Glen Garioch 1972 Bottled for Oddbins UK version...
Am I really the only one seeing a problem with bottles that are happily mutating along in whiskybase & constantly changing between what is different bottles in fact...?
And another interesting one that has been edited after people have left data & rates:
16 Feb 2012 11:36 am
BUT then someone added additional info, instead of making a new version, and suddenly the non-descript master version has become a specific bottle run from 2015...