Editing Standards

[Irritable1]

As a new editor, I hasten to add this topic while I'm still on good terms with my client authors   I've looked around for some background but haven't been able to answer some questions.  I'd like to get an idea of what the general standards are at GA for a few things (or whether such standards exist):  

 

1. Final approval for the MS before posting. Is there a standard for how this works? Or does it vary by author/editor pairing?
2. Do authors always respond to edits? I don't mean accept, but respond?
3. Editing credit: are authors always required to give editing credit to their editors, or is this a matter of individual preference for each pairing?
4. As an editor, do you ever ask NOT to be listed because your changes were not accepted?  If so, do you have a criterion you use?

I'm trying to set up a rubric for myself but I'm not sure how it would fit in with what other people do.  Any advice would be useful.

 

 

[Andy78]

I've edited for several different authors on site, so here's my tuppence worth.

 

 

1. This really does vary.  If an author is only working with one editor then usually it once the MS no longer has editing issues.

 

When working with a much larger team (I've seen stories with two or three editors, and up to five or six beta readers) you might be the first, second or even last person it goes through, so that would depend how the author wants to play it.  Maybe after everybody has offered their opinions, the MS goes back through the entire team again for a second read or maybe just through the editors or through one particular editor who it has been agreed will have the final say.

 

Whatever the agreed process is, and regardless of the size of the team, ideally after the author has worked through the first set of edits they should send it back for a second edit, though some don't.  LJH will probably be shocked but this is not something I choose to enforce on those I edit for.  If they want a second, third, fourth edit then I'm more than happy to spend the time doing so, but I'm not going to hound them over it.

 

I always send back any MS for a second read where changes have been suggested.

 

One thing that should be standard, is that if any significant changes are made to the MS (changing locations, characters names, adding in new scenes etc.) prior to being posted, then it should be returned to you for a re-edit as you will be basing future edits on the last version of the MS you saw.  If Mrs Jones from Seattle is now Mrs Smith from Tampa and your author hasn't told you, then how are you going to know which character they are talking about.

 

 

2. Again this seems to vary.  There are some who simply take the edits and follow them to the letter without so much as questioning them.

 

I have worked with some authors who do ask 'why this' and 'why that', and I've done the same with edits and comments I have gotten back.  I even had a query on one of my edits recently where I had to go back to The Chicago Manual Of Style to check on where I had gotten the basis for the edit.

 

Don't get me wrong, there are some edits I simply take (such as spelling and punctuation corrections) when I know the edit is correct and no point in querying.

 

I think the authors who ask, question, and challenge editing suggestions are the one who genuinely want to further their craft.

 

 

3. When an author posts their story there is a section on the story posting page to add in the names of editors and beta readers.

 

You will also find that in story threads some authors refer to the work their beta readers and editors have done, and I have also seen thank you messages to editors and beta readers at the end of story chapters.

 

I don't think there is any rule mandating crediting editors and beta readers, but if someone who I had invested my free time and effort in, hadn't at the very least listed me as an editor on their story page, I would be miffed to say the least.

 

 

4. This has not happened to me yet (and I hope it never does).  There are editors on site who do far more editing than I do, and they may have encountered this situation before.

[Irritable1]

You will also find that in story threads some authors refer to the work their beta readers and editors have done, and I have also seen thank you messages to editors and beta readers at the end of story chapters.

 

I don't think there is any rule mandating crediting editors and beta readers, but if someone who I had invested my free time and effort in, hadn't at the very least listed me as an editor on their story page, I would be miffed to say the least.

 

 

4. This has not happened to me yet (and I hope it never does).  There are editors on site who do far more editing than I do, and they may have encountered this situation before.

 

 

 

Where I'm coming from on this: I'm trying to provide a professional service, but I'm also doing it for fun. Now a publishing house or a company where I might work would have an in-house standard, or a style manual or whatever, and I wouldn't be in a position to refuse to have a final say, or to back down on something I knew was correct, because that gateway service would be what I was getting paid for and I would in essence be agreeing with the author not to do my job. And the group doing the publication, whoever they were, would also feel pretty strongly about maintaining a standard because it'd be part of their "branding," for want of a better word. So if my name showed up on the final product there would be an understood implication that this was my best work for the writer and for my employer.

 

But the writers on this and other sites are not all hoping to get published eventually. They might be willing to accept a lower standard. Or they might insist on a different standard than mine because they just didn't like my edits.  In that case, I think I wouldn't want my name to appear on the final product, because it would give the impression that the quality of the output was indicative of my best work, and in fact it wouldn't be. And I wouldn't want future clients to judge my editing on that basis. I wouldn't feel let down if I remained anonymous after having provided a lot of work, because this is a much-needed hobby for me.  I can see why one might feel differently, though.

 

So... to circle back to my point, if I'm to take this position, then I'd like to know what other editors are doing.

Edited May 12, 2014 by Irritable1

[rustle]

Hi, One.

 

I've worked with a number of authors on-site, as well. Since all editors here are volunteers, there is no tight standard, as Andy indicated. Having said that, though, I've recommended changes to stories and seen the story again after the changes were made. That seems courteous to me. For punctuation or grammar, I'm not bothered if I don't see the piece again.

 

An author ignores an edit at his peril, as it's the author's name which figures most prominently on any story. My philosophy is not the same as some - it's the author's story to tell, and the author has the final word. If I don't like it, I won't edit for the author any more. Editing here is not something to put on my resume, so for me, it's for fun. 

 

I don't normally justify edits unless questioned, and at that point, school is in session, and we'll talk about it.

 

Mostly, I just try to keep things fun between the author and me.

[Thorn Wilde]

Like Andy says, most of these things vary quite a bit. As an author, when I work with an editor I will simply complete all edits I understand and agree with without word or question, and if I choose not to follow my editor's suggestion for one reason or another, I will tell them why. If I don't understand why my editor wants me to change something, I'll ask. Once I've revised, I always send the story back for a final proof as I think that's just good sense. 

 

As an editor, I nitpick on grammar and punctuation and make suggestions for everything else. That is to say, I don't expect a writer to make every change I suggest, but when it comes to the basics of the craft, my edits are non-negociable. On everything else one can usually find a happy middle ground somewhere that both the writer and editor are happy with the result. I think it's important for an author of creative prose to be allowed to develop their own style, though not, obviously, if it negatively impacts the legibility of the prose. I have edited stories where I didn't want my name on the final product, because I felt like I wasn't getting through to the writer at all and what they had made was quite frankly sub-standard. In this case, I have informed them of this, as kindly as I could, pulled out of the relationship and asked that they not credit me. 

[Graeme]

I haven't worked with a lot of editors, but in my case I generally accept the edits I receive. In some cases, my editor may suggest an alternative, without necessarily recommending it, in which case it falls back to me as to what I want to do.

 

There have been times when I've argued with my editor. It's usually for one of two reasons. The first is simply a cultural difference between Australia and the USA (all my editors have been American) that I want to preserve. They've all been good about accepting those, though sometimes what we come up with is a compromise between the two styles (this is usually to do with dialogue and speech patterns). The second is where my poor grammar has resulted in the editor misunderstanding what I intended, in which case I needed to rewrite the section to make it clearer, so they could then edit again.

 

As a matter of courtesy, I send the final version to my editor. I didn't the first time I used an editor and they expressed surprise that I had posted the story without letting them know. That was ignorance on my behalf. It's only polite to let the editor see the final version, since, as you've said, their name is being associated with it.

 

On your questions, ultimately as this is all volunteer, it'll be up to the individual pairing of author/editor, but for me the answers are:

 

1. As stated above, I send the final copy to my editor for their approval.

2. I accept the vast majority of the edits without comment. I will sometimes question a few, either to clarify the rule (so I can make sure I minimise their work with the next chapter/story) or because I disagree (as indicated above).

3. Unless an editor indicates otherwise, I believe they should be credited. I'll admit that a lot of my older short stories are here at GA without an explicit editor, but that's because the editor in question isn't a member here.

[Kitt]

I've worked with several authors. Some take every word I say as law, others take it under advisement. If an author feels strongly about not changing something I have suggested, that's ok with me. I am not a professional editor, and simply do my best to help where the help is wanted.

 

Second reads on manuscripts are also something some of my authors ask for, others don't. Again, I leave it up to them. I am quite willing to share the editing task with as many people as an author wishes to bring into the team and to read through as many times as an author wants to make changes. IMHO the more eyes look at a story the fewer mistakes can slip through. Even the best of us are human and occasionally miss things.

 

There is my two bits. Is that about equal to Andy's tuppence?

[Houdinii]

I personally pick an editor I can accept work from.... Grammar might be mean, or non-existent, but I'd still like to see it.  Authors should at least acknowledge, though? I would think editors could say something too, though.  In my experience, that is a 50/50, at least a little bit.  Editing credit... credit is due.  Not asking for credit if I didn't take advice?  Well, if you felt wronged, don't dare, but sometimes an editor's work reassures an author's thought... (and was worth credit all along)

[LJH]

Nothing for me to add. If an author does not accept my edits, I will not allow him / her to acknowledge me as the editor. I also tell that person to find another editor to abuse. A writer enlists the service of an editor to learn. When the writer's stubborness and ego tripngets in the way, that relationship is seriously offset. I have no time for such writers.

[Irritable1]

Ok. So on the basis of the responses so far, it seems like there's a rough consensus that

 

1) is negotiable, but a second round of review after edits is common and considered courteous to both parties

 

2) varies, but responses tend to be more common if an author disagrees with edits

 

3) editing credit is not required by the site but is considered desirable by most people, UNLESS

 

4) has occurred, but in that case people don't continue with any halfway-editing like I was proposing to do, they just close out the editor/author relationship.

 

Thank you, this has helped me quite a bit.  

Edited May 13, 2014 by Irritable1

[Mark Arbour]

I think that the relationship with an editor (and with active Beta readers) needs to be pretty close.    It really is a team effort, and if you don't have a mutual respect, and a mutual understanding of your roles, it's not going to be much fun. 

 

But I pretty much do what Sharon tells me to do.   She's just a little scary.

[Sasha Distan]

I respect the input of every comment any of my editing team make (otherwise, i wouldn't ask them), but final decisions lay with me. After all, at the end of the day, the author wrote the words, they belong to him/her.

[Persinette]

Nothing for me to add. If an author does not accept my edits, I will not allow him / her to acknowledge me as the editor. I also tell that person to find another editor to abuse. A writer enlists the service of an editor to learn. When the writer's stubborness and ego tripngets in the way, that relationship is seriously offset. I have no time for such writers.

 

Dude, I'm not sure it's the writer's ego that's a problem in this situation. Yeah, some of them are self-absorbed little shits - but so are some editors.

 

Sometimes a writer does just see something an editor doesn't, and an 'I am an almighty god deigning to look upon your feeble scribbles' attitude is A: the kind of personality you put a paper bag over, and B: begging to produce substandard work.

[Irritable1]

Dude, I'm not sure it's the writer's ego that's a problem in this situation. Yeah, some of them are self-absorbed little shits - but so are some editors.

 

Sometimes a writer does just see something an editor doesn't, and an 'I am an almighty god deigning to look upon your feeble scribbles' attitude is A: the kind of personality you put a paper bag over, and B: begging to produce substandard work.

 

It sounds like people at GA have faced disagreements before, and they've shared with me the strategies that have worked for them.  I'll put together an agreement that works for my own understanding of the duties I have to a writer, and then provide it to authors up front so that people can have a clear picture of what they're working with, and make their choices accordingly.

[LJH]

Dude, I'm not sure it's the writer's ego that's a problem in this situation. Yeah, some of them are self-absorbed little shits - but so are some editors.

 

Sometimes a writer does just see something an editor doesn't, and an 'I am an almighty god deigning to look upon your feeble scribbles' attitude is A: the kind of personality you put a paper bag over, and B: begging to produce substandard work.

 

I'm not talking about the odd gremlin that an editor doesn't see.  I'm talking about novice and experienced writers who are on a constant ego trip and make the editor out to be a demon and refuse to accept their editing. These are VOLUNTEER editors, people who have lives beyond GA.  Editors are there to assist the writer.  These writers then accuse the editor of hijacking there awfully written story because they fixed the homonym there to their and say things like "I will write my story my way.  That's all well and good.  A sub standard online publisher will publish things like that.  A mainstream publisher will not.  And writer's should understand one thing, they might get away with ego trips online, but will never get away with it when dealing with a mainstream publishing editor.   Editors online should be aware of those "I am better than thou" writers. Being accused of hijacking a story akin to feeling violated.  The author might say, yes, well, you violated my story.  But then, that story deserved it because it was so riddled with errors.  I deal with mainstream authors in my country. These authors know this: your work must cater for the most educated reader who might happen to pick your book off a bookshop shelf, a reader who will notice mistakes in a flash. Now, this is all to do with grammar and punctuation.  Content and style is another thing altogether.  An editor who interferes with content and style is simply the devil in disguise.  Content belongs to the author.  Style too.  Any editor who says that the content needs editing, or the style is no good, should go back to editing 101 and start all over again.  

 

I can see that you agree with me 50/50.   As I said before, I cannot edit for egotripnbounce writers who feel that editing their incorrect grammar is interfering with their work.  

 

The grammar and style of dialogue must fit the plot.  If the grammar warrants a different approach, the editor will see that.  If the story is written in the POV of a 12 year old child, or a cowboy or an alien, or an autistic person, the grammar is dictated by this.  The style of writing will be different, and so will content and spelling too.  The editor will know this.

 

Read the above very carefully before commenting.  I'm not saying that you disagree with me.  And I do not disagree with you.  SOME writers and SOME editors DO suffer from ego.

 

I am one of those editors.  But that's because I am confident in my editing, and I know what I am doing. This is MY opinion.  Every one is entitled their own opinion.  And my opinion is right.     

 

   

 

and some will go        

and some will       

and some will      

 

 

hugs

[Andy78]

 

 

(but agrees 100%)

Edited May 18, 2014 by Andy78

[Persinette]

LJH, this is the bleeding gap where your post used to be. Sorry about that. I wanted to reply to your entire post but I also wanted to quote you, and if I'd quoted the whole post then I'd deserve a smack around the ear for using all that unnecessary page space.

 

- Editor's note

 

Ah, so you're primarily talking about the whiny little tosspot division of writers? In that case, we are entirely in agreement about telling them which finger to swivel on. It's just that without those qualifiers, your post came across as a lot more aimed at ALL writers - regardless of their reasons.

 

(I suspect we rubbed each other up the wrong way. You, as a pro editor, were thinking of all the drama queens you see online, while I, as a (non-fiction) pro writer, was thinking of That Bloody Guy Who Changes The First Paragraph And Now Your Point At The End Of The Piece Makes No Sense, But What Can You Do? He's Already Published The Bloody Thing. You know. That Guy.)

[Cia]

 Now, this is all to do with grammar and punctuation.  Content and style is another thing altogether.  An editor who interferes with content and style is simply the devil in disguise.  Content belongs to the author.  Style too.  Any editor who says that the content needs editing, or the style is no good, should go back to editing 101 and start all over again.  

 

 

Okay, I do this ALL the time. I operated for years solely as a beta, however, as I'm a self-taught editor in essence (those grammar lessons in school were a LONG time ago ) and didn't want to be considered the author's editor. I'm far more knowledgeable now and don't mind the editor title. But, if sent a story by an author, they can be assured that I will not only call into question anything I see amiss with their punctuation and grammar but also their characterizations, plot arc, writing style, POV, etc...

 

That isn't to say I demand it all be changed to 'my style'. I recently had an experience where an author wrote something with what felt like, to me, over the top emotional bonding improbable in the contemporary setting. Yep, real life insta-love. *shudders* It didn't work--for me. I explained my reasoning for my concerns, just as I explained everything from the comma needing placement before the conjunction to the capitalization for Dad when being used in place of a name. I expect my grammar and punctuation corrections to be followed as I always clearly explain them and my source the first few times, but when it comes to plot I do leave it up to the author. Still, I dare to question them because I feel it is necessary.

 

It is THEIR story, yes. But, I would be derelict in my aim of helping them produce a quality product if I didn't address things beyond a line edit, imo. I saw this with another author who had a novella published by a big publisher, actually, and they were nailed after the fact. They did line edits just fine, but the character progression needed work as well, and it didn't get called out. I also had it happen to me as the line editor one of my novellas called into question my arc and plot events as incomplete--and they were right.

 

We're not only editors of an author's work, we're the first readers. Author vision of a story and reader perception doesn't always mesh. This is why, when I edit, I consider and comment on every aspect of writing if needed.

[Cia]

Oh, and to address the original comments.

 

1 through 3) Yes, this does vary. I expect authors and editors to address the process between them. Anything else makes no sense. We do not have a set 'standard' we ask authors to adhere to in relation to things like God vs. god, all right vs. alright, or come/come vs. come/cum because we're not an editing house. We do have a standard of quality, though, which is why we encourage all authors to polish their work or find help to polish it. What works for one team, however, doesn't always work for another.

 

4) YES. I can't see as you'd want to continue editing for someone who ignored you, but this is something you can say. 'Don't list me' is a request all authors should obey if asked by their editors. If they don't, come to me. It's awkward to address, but I've seen both authors who need new editors and editors who need new authors. The reasons vary--editing style/expectations don't mesh up is usually the culprit, however. If the style or skill of the editor is ever in question, the author has every right to drop the editor like a hot rock. If the author is a prima donna who won't work with the editor on 'writing rules' (talking grammar/punctuation here usually)  because 'their way is better', the same is also true.

 

Above all, communication is key. The author and editor should be clearly outline what they expect and then strive to meet those expectations. If the relationship doesn't work, then talk it over or discontinue.

[Sasha Distan]

(I suspect we rubbed each other up the wrong way. You, as a pro editor, were thinking of all the drama queens you see online, while I, as a (non-fiction) pro writer, was thinking of That Bloody Guy Who Changes The First Paragraph And Now Your Point At The End Of The Piece Makes No Sense, But What Can You Do? He's Already Published The Bloody Thing. You know. That Guy.)

 

Oh, You Know That Guy Too! Why Are There So Many Of Them On The Internet?

[rustle]

Oh, You Know That Guy Too! Why Are There So Many Of Them On The Internet?

 

Damn near as many as those who misuse capital letters

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(  )

[Thorn Wilde]

But, if sent a story by an author, they can be assured that I will not only call into question anything I see amiss with their punctuation and grammar but also their characterizations, plot arc, writing style, POV, etc...

 

Oh, I definitely do this too. If I don't, I can't be sure that anyone else will, and I feel that it's my responsibility as, like you said, first reader to point out these things as well. Point of view, characterisation and making sure the plot holds together are all important things to address. And clichés, and over-used idioms and cultural references can all be very off-putting. If I read a story and there's so much info dumping in the first four paragraphs that I just want to quit reading and go home, that's something that needs to be dealt with. If a character uses words a person like him/her wouldn't use, if something just doesn't add up, if there are plot inconsistencies, I see this as my job as well, and I just can't let it go unmentioned. Maybe the author has a beta who will take care of these things, in which case it can't hurt to get it twice, and maybe they don't, in which case it definitely needs to be said. When I work with an author, they get a full package deal. I don't expect everything I say to be taken as gospel, but if I feel like something needs to be changed I will comment on it, whether it's directly within my purview or not. That's just how I roll.

Edited May 19, 2014 by Thorn Wilde

[rec]

As an editor of several authors with different preferences, I have developed a document that I called Author-Editor Understandings. Each author fills it out according to his/her wishes, and I consult with the document as I edit.  It covers a general understanding as to how heavy to edit -- light (or closer to proofing) to heavy (or closer to beta work). It covers punctuation, spelling preferences in general and spelling of words used frequently in gay stories, such as t-shirt or tee-shirt or blow job or blowjob.

 

These understandings work to minimize the acrimony between editors and authors.

 

If anyone wants a copy, please PM me, but put your regular email address in, like xyz at juice.com, because I keep having difficulty in emailing documents through PM.