In the spell checker, I have seen some people that spell a word wrong or don’t exactly know how to spell it. Therefore, my idea. Can we get the thing where you can right click on a word and see suggestions. I have been contacted by a user who asked how to spell something, and I had to look online to see how to spell it! My other idea. Putting the spell checker while writing or editing articles. Sure, the tool will still exist, but this way, the wrong word/s will show up in red when you are editing and you can right click on it and change it, like a document. Just my suggestions.
system
2
Internet browser spellcheckers are awesome. So is Microsoft Word and any other external word processing programs.
Actually, Maluniu, internet browser spellcheckers and MS Word are kinda useless for what we are doing. Both of those have the primary goal of flagging someone if a word couldbe wrong; therefore, they leave a few tens of thousands of acceptable words out on purpose. I use the ultimate authority of dictionary.com
. What we really need is a “Mark as Patrolled” for the spell-checker tool. BADLY. It’s actually causing more harm than good most times by prompting people to change words that are actually correct. I’m sure someone worked very hard on this, but without the ability to mark articles correct as they are, it’s not working as intended.
system
4
I’ve seen the complete opposite. The spellchecker tool can only do so much. When it comes down to modifying, clearing words, it’s also about the editor and a mixture between common sense and using their own spellcheckers. There’s those whom are changing a lot of hyphened words, “wikiHow” being modified to something else, words with special characters, words ininternal links being modified (which obviously kills/breaks the link), people changing British to American English (which is a pretty simple double check in another tab/window to make sure about it), etc. Who knows how a person is using the tool. Are they changing it because they truly believe it should
be changed, or are they changing it because the spellchecker tells them it’s wrong? Kind of fuzzy on the “What we really need is a “Mark as Patrolled” for the spell-checker tool. BADLY. It’s actually causing more harm than good most times by prompting people to change words that are actually correct.”
part. Is it a suggestion to “upgrade” the spellchecker for improvement/mark more words correctly or the spellchecker tool edits themselves being patrolled? O.o
“There’s those whom…” (incorrect use of whom). But yeah (incorrect use of yes), from my observations, the spell-checker tool is causing more harm than good on an inexcusable majority of the edits. It is a bad tool as it is currently programmed. It is prompting people to fix things that do not need to be fixed, and if fixed, look really stupid because they’re not correct.
This tool is causing people to edit articles to be incorrect rather than edit articles to be correct, simply because of a red highlight on a word. It’s really pissing me off because the spell checkers think they’re doing the right thing and someone has to tell them they’re not, but mostly crap spelling gets through because it eliminates the red mark. NOT good for the site. This needs work.
system
7
People can just ignore things. If the spellchecker beeps because of the word “colour”, then the editor can either double check it out themselves and see that it’s correct or change it because it’s underlined. This is a human error. If the spellchecker beeps because “Wikihow”, the person can either change it accordingly to “wikiHow” and carry on. This is common sense/knowledge. If the spellchecker beeps because of “tommorrow”, then the person can correct it to “tomorrow” and carry on.
If you look at a lot of the edits from the spell checker tool, you will realize that “common sense” is not very common. I keep dictionary.com
open when I’m using it (and instruct new spell-checkers to do so too), but from what I’ve seen we’re at a net negative edits due to the tool. For every five good spelling fixes, six or more have to be reverted or edited because they’re incorrect “fixes.”
system
9
Then people shouldn’t be using the tool
IamSH
10
Hey we are forgetting that for what Spell Checker is created. It’s created to point out spelling error from articles and of course it’s a bot. So it only does things for what it’s programmed for with its limited resources. To make it more accurate we have to improve its resources. It’s a graphical, upgraded version of Articles with Common Spelling Errors
. As it’s bot with limited resources, so you can’t guarantee that it’ll be 100% correct. So the job of the tool is to show you articles which may have any spelling error and you have to decide whether it’s correct or not as a human. If you say it’s a bad tool, then I’ll say we are not trying to make it better.
Hate to burst your bubble, but there no spell-checker in IE just yet. I made mention of it to(I hope) the right authorities! Otherwise why move it to another document program, spend a lot of time doing that, adding tge article, then moving the pieces into place. Tough, and not feasible @maluniu
.
