Does anyone check corrections anymore?

I try to submit corrections for entries whenever I can, but lately it seems like it is pointless. I have been sending corrections for the same breweries for the past few months and nothing has changed. I know for a fact that I have been trying to get all the entries for The Collective Brewing Project to align for awhile now. Some of the entries are Collective Brewing Project, while others are listed as The Collective Brewing Project and still others are entered in as The Collective Project. It wouldn’t take much to go in and align the database here.

Cobra was rebranded as Old Town last year but there hasn’t been an update to the site listing yet. A couple of the Martin House are listed as Martin House, Fort Worth (beer name). If nothing else, someone make me an admin so I can clean up the DFW, Texas entries.


I regularly check corrections, but I only correct the ones which fall into my area. The people responsible for Texas are @BMan1113VR, bu11zeye (doesn’t seem to be active, at least not on the forums), @fly, and Mora2000 (also not active on the forums).

1 Like

So why are most admins here so reluctant to do ANYTHING outside of their own area then?
As far as I know joe doesn’t force you guys to stay in your own area and you’re not technically restricted to this. And yes, I get that it makes sense for you to largely stay in the area you’re most knowledgable on, but I mean even if it’s a simple and obvious typo for example? Why leave it?


BMan moved to California many years ago, fly lives in Austin which is a 3.5 hour drive from DFW, I see Mora from time to time but he hasn’t rated anything since 2016 and bu11zeye got married and rates sporadically now. Doesn’t seem to be an active DFW admin.

I think the solution here is to have certain low level admin functions automatically granted after certain criteria are met… So – Member for 5 years and 1000 rates or something like that, and you can modify the beer name/ABV/description. If it gets abused, it can be revoked on a user-by-user basis.

For as much as we crow about our database, there is a whole lot of incomplete information that would be more likely updated if regular users had an easier and more reliable path to make the updates.

Not that this will ever happen, of course.


Agreed. I’d also extend this to Premium members too. I mean think about it, if someone is willing to donate money to your website, chances are they have a vested interest in its success and want to help it out.

Years ago on the old forums before I started posting I remember someone made the following suggestion:
If a beer has 0 ratings, premium members should be able to freely edit it (for things like typos, descriptions, missing ABV etc.). Then once it receives a rating it becomes “locked” and then only actual admins can edit it.

Same thing for breweries and places too. It’s just one example, but little things like this would cut down petty admin jobs quite a lot I reckon.


Just to counter the first post… I’ve noticed my corrections to UK beers are being dealt with far quicker these days, usually within 48 hours or so - not amazing, but it’s a huge improvement over the weeks/months some have taken in the past.

1 Like

This also can lead to some which get missed since (unless I’m missing something) you can’t filter the corrections.

The admin handbook states that simple changes outside our jurisdiction are allowed, style changes aren’t. And if we change something, we should unverify a beer such that the admin who’s responsible for it can verify our changes again.

I try not to change things outside my jurisdiction because too many other admins seem to feel responsible for Bavaria, making changes which are wrong and verifying beers which don’t exist and it’s really annoying for us - so I don’t want to be that guy in another part of the world.


Hmm ok… explains why certain corrections take ages then.
Personally I feel that’s a bit extreme. Are you saying that if for example you corrected a typo in a beer name, you’d then unverify it for a local admin to re-verify? Sounds like unnecessary additional work, not helping with backlogs and whatnot.
Or did you just mean that for more in-depth changes?

1 Like

Saucy admin drama: commence. :dancer:


“Typos” can be tricky if you don’t speak the language all that well and there are puns involved. But if it’s an obvious typo (or the use of ` instead of ’ ) or just a minor ABV change or an addition of IBUs, I wouldn’t unverify (although I have seen the most hilarious mistakes there, such as people switching up IBU and ABV and stuff like that).
(and technically, the handbook does say we should unverify whenever we “suggest a change to a beer in another area”)

even one is one too many! And I’m pretty sure the Belgians are much worse off than we are.

(I should point out, though, that many of the people who have made such mistakes in Bavaria in the past understood that we want to double check things and have stopped doing that)


Oh right that’s ok then, thanks for clarifying!
If I submit a correction that’s just a typo I usually make sure an image is uploaded for the beer so the admin can see for themselves, or failing that (if not so obvious, for example with puns) will link to an official website or something for proof or to clarify. Hopefully that’s helpful enough in those situations.


I 100% agree with this and would happily spend time updating beers names, descriptions, images (my personal bugbear), when I notice errors. ABV is a tricky one, I would only suggest a change if the original entry was an obvious error e.g. 66% rather 6.6% for example. I would also be less confident changing beer details for none UK beers.

In terms of criteria I would say 2+ years premium, 1000 Rates or 200 place rates.

@joet is this something that could be trialled in the UK? I don’t want to speak for others, but i’m sure there are a few people who would be more than happy to do this.


Also extend to Ireland so I can fix YellowBelly Beer since no admins are willing to take that on.


The will’s usually not a problem. Time generally is.

1 Like

Yeah I get that, we all have jobs and lives to live. But I mean I could blaze through the YB problem in 15-20 mins max. 99% of it is simply adding the brewer’s name to the beer entries since they went all Untappd style on us. I’d simply open up each beer’s edit page in a tab, copy/paste "YellowBelly " in front of each name, then tab through each tab hitting save on each one. Nothing more to it than that right?

After that there’s only about 5 beers with typos/capitalisation issues that need more attention when fixing.

Maybe I’m getting an unrealistic view of this since I work from home and I’m not busy these days so I’m spending an inordinate amount of time on this site, but I’d be more than happy to take on all those tasks that nobody else has time for. I don’t really care how long it takes me anyway, as long as the end result is 100% accuracy.


I think for this we would be talking about minor amends, that probably take as long to report as to fix, therefore 2 x 5 minute jobs become 1 x 5 minute job. Time saving 5 minutes. (not saying a change will take 5 minutes, just using this as an example)

1 Like

it is annoying when you send feedback and you notice months later the same misstake is still on the site.


Yes, yes, yes! The ability to make some changes to a beer entry would be fantastic! Places too.

1 Like