Lois & Clark Forums Forums Fan Fiction Fanfic Related Pre-Kerth Story Reviews Project--Reviewer Guidelines

This project, although a possible help to those people nominating and voting in the Kerth Awards, is in no way actually affiliated with the Kerth Awards.

ccmalo came up with the idea of reviewing each of the stories that have been posted to the archive this year (to help jog everyone's memory about what qualifies for nominations), and she and I have decided to run with it. Feel free to post your own review to any story you wish (I'll be posting some this evening), but please follow the ground rules listed below.

-Each of these threads will be for the stories posted in ONE month, plus a thread for the stories uploaded this year which are not eligible for Kerth nominations. There will be a total of thirteen threads. Do not post a review for a February story in the October thread (or January in March, etc.), please! Also, please wait for all stories in a certain month to be reviewed at least once before moving on to the next month, and wait for all monthly threads to be posted and finished before reviewing stories for the 13th thread--this will help to avoid confusion.

-At the top of your review, paste the header information from the story (you can copy it from the archive), including Title, author's name, and rating. Also type in the LENGTH of the story (this is listed in K in the archive), and put "Review by: ___________," replacing the line with your name--or nickname if you prefer to remain anonymous.

-Next, include 2-3 paragraphs (can be longer or shorter, so that the review is proportionate to the length of the fic) in which you:

*Summarize the fic, without giving too much away
*Include a quote or two so that we get a good idea of the author's style, or of some good phrases the author used
*Comments on the fic itself--your review. Please use specific examples from the text, including quotes and generic references.

All four of the above MUST be included, but please try to be fair and impartial. If you didn't like a certain fic, it's okay, but please do mention the fic's strong points as well, if you mention any weaknesses!

No Gushing - Overly-positive comments do not help the authors to improve their writing skills, nor does it inform Kerth voters about the good and bad points of the story. This is not the place for comments that only say "great story!"

No Flaming - Attacking the author, or saying that the story "sucked" (or any other synonym for the word) will not be tolerated.

Do your best to be truly impartial - Try to review even the stories you didn't like. The more stories you give balanced and intelligent reviews, the more impartial you will appear, and the people participating in Kerth votes will know more about the story.

Don't worry if someone else has already reviewed a story - Multiple reviews will help Kerth voters to see all sides and opinions about a fic--this is a good thing!

One story review per post, please! - If you have reviewed 3 stories, please post three times--do not combine all three reviews into one post. This will keep the threads short and coherent enough to read at a glance, for easier referencing.

And overall, HAVE FUN! If you hate writing reviews, then don't write one! We do not want to force anyone into this, but we would welcome any and all participation.

-After your review, include a list of the possible Kerth categories that the story might fit into. We are using last year's categories for these reviews, but if you want to suggest a new one, please e-mail the KCom team, and include the new category in your list too.

Important: If a story you're reviewing is not eligible for the Kerths (see Kathy's list below), put in BOLD at the top of your review, "This story is not eligible for the 2006 Kerth Awards." and at the bottom, don't include a list of potential categories.

Last year's categories:

Best Super Short (1-10k): Very short stories.

Best Short Story (11-50k): Short stories of any subject or tone.

Best Waffy Story (1-50k): Short, mainly light stories intended to give the reader a Warm and Fuzzy Feeling. No A-plots.

Best Comedy: Generally short stories where the main purpose is to amuse.

Best Special Occasion Story: Generally short stories that deal with a special time of the calendar year, i.e. Christmas, New Year, Thanksgiving, Fourth of July, Valentine's Day; or with a special occasion in Lois and Clark's lives, such as a birthday or an anniversary.

Best Mid-Length Story (51-200k): Mid-length stories of any subject or tone.

Best Revelation Story: Stories which contain a revelation about Clark being Superman. The person finding out can be Lois or any other character.

Best Episode Adaptation: Stories which alter the events of, or start from some point in, a particular episode. Includes adaptations, continuations, and rewrites.

Best Tearjerker: Stories that elicit strong emotions from the reader and make you repeatedly reach for the box of Kleenex.

Best Drama: Stories which focus on a series of exciting or suspenseful events. Stories can be similar in tone and balance to the show's episodes, or tackle a more serious subject matter, and will generally, though not always, contain a significant A-plot. No size restrictions.

Best Relationship Story (over 50k): B-plot driven stories which focus mainly on Lois & Clark's relationship. No tone or timeline restrictions. Might include "getting together" scenarios, or focus on their developing relationship, either before or after marriage.

Best Alternate Universe / Elseworlds Story: Stories which feature parallel universes (including the Alt World that was introduced on the show), or stories in which the author has made major changes (such as time, place and/or nature of the characters) before where the series started in the Pilot. Cross-overs would also fit in this category. No size restrictions.

Best Original / Supporting Character: Rewards a special character from stories which strongly highlight a supporting character from the series or creates a new, interesting character that plays an important role in the story. No size restrictions. (Sorry, but versions - no matter how altered - of Clark or Lois do not qualify as Original or Supporting Characters)

Best New Author: Limited to authors who first published their Lois & Clark stories in the past year.

Best Overall Story: A story of any type that is outstanding overall. No size restrictions.

My head's spinning here. Darcy, you've been busy.

I'm thinking we should remove this bit:
"Include constructive criticism"
because I think we probably just want to provide a bit of a non-judgmental overview for people. We all have such different tastes that I'm not sure it would be fair otherwise or all that useful.

May I suggest, too, we complete one month before starting the next so it doesn't look like no one wants to review a story.

This is really a big task - not sure it's do-able, but maybe if everyone throws in a few reviews .... My thought is just one or two reviews per fic, in the interest of getting as many stories covered as possible.

Also, we haven't run this past K-Com, so, of course, we need to do that.

Also 2, writers out there - your thoughts? either here or privately.

c.

I think you've got "constructive criticism" confused with "negative/inflammatory opinion." Without constructive criticism, it would be unfair to include the things that worked well for a story, and leaving out both the good points as well as the points that need work leave us only with a summary, whereas with a balance of positive and negative constructive criticism, it then becomes a review.

-----

Example of what I mean:

Author X's characterization of Bobby Bigmouth here is spot-on, right down to the speech patterns in his dialogue. However, I found the more major characters lacking in depth--Lois's mannerisms in particular, to me, seemed more like those of a Beverly Hills snob than of the hard-hitting reporter we all know. I just can't quite picture her being a participant in the malicious gossip that she shared with Molly, Lucy and that other woman in Chapter N.

Example of what I DON'T mean:

The way Author X wrote Bobby here is great, but Lois is just a ditz, and she's totally a Mary Sue!

-----

The first example is an intelligently stated opinion, using specific examples from the text of the story--whether quoted, paraphrased, or just referenced.

The second example also gives personal opinion, but does not back up that opinion with any sort of textual reference.

As for finishing one month before beginning the next--I had thought of that too, but forgotten to put it in my post above. Thanks for the reminder!

It's not that big of a task, actually. There are only an average of 3-4 fics uploaded per week, and there are only 52 weeks in a year, so that makes about 210 fics for the year. Divide that by 12, and you get less than 20 fics per month. I could easily crank out 3-4 reviews in one evening if I wanted to, more on a Saturday.

Of course, this is me I'm talking about--the gal who read through most of the stories in the whole archive (and there are a LOT of stories) within 4 months of reading the first fic she found, who has practically no life outside of cyberspace (although a guy I know DID give me his phone number at the election on Tuesday . . .)--other people's RL commitments will possibly hinder them from doing very many.

But yeah, it's quite do-able as long as more people than just us two do at least one review per month.

And running it past K-Com is definitely a good idea. Maybe they've already seen the thread? I mean, the word "Kerth" is smack in the middle of the heading, so it's kinda difficult to miss.

K-Com, if you see this thread, what do you think?

Okay, speaking with my KCom hat on:

We don't have a problem with the project per se, but we would ask that it's made clear that the project is not affiliated to the Kerth Awards. Perhaps you could post a note to this effect at the top of each of your twelve threads?

Thanks and good luck with the project!

Yvonne
Kerth Committee Member

Okay. Doing that right now, Yvonne.

I'll take this opportunity to request reviews from people, too.

Stories uploaded to the Archive in January:

Growing Up Super - Luddy, Sarah
Five Crossovers That Never Happened to Lois and Clark - Rowland, Marcus L.
Just Watchin' TV - Potts, Mary
Smart Teens - Young, Susan
Far From Home - Jensguy
Grocery List - Potts, Mary
Escaping Trask - Frantz Jr., Richard
You Don't Know Me - Richards, Wendy

c.

(Sorry! )

And I'll take the opportunity to point to that January list and go, "See? You see how little stories we have to upload in January?!"

So, once again, if there are authors out there who have stories they'd like to submit to the Archive and don't mind it being held over to the start of 2007...do let us know when you submit your story. We'll be grateful. (Heck, your EIC will probably fall weeping on your neck and offer you chocolate chip cookies for life. )

LabRat

I'm confused, which is pretty much my normal state, but anyway, I thought I'd ask for clarification. What's the big deal with getting stories uploaded to the archive before the end of the year? Is it to do with the Kerths? Because I was under the impression that the story just had to be finished to be considered eligible. For example, "In a Better Place" was only uploaded to the archive very recently, but it won a (much deserved) Kerth last year.

So, why the December rush?

Caroline

I've edited the first post in this thread, re-wording the part about constructive criticism. I also added the "we are not affiliated with the Kerths" blurb at the top.

It's traditional. <g>

I think, back in the day, there was a bit of confusion and many authors thought that if it wasn't on the Archive it didn't count. I remember many instances of threads designed to counter that mistaken impression, in the past.

Nowadays, I think most authors know that's not the case. But because it's been the habit for years to get your story on the Archive before the year end, it's just gone on that way.

And it's just more convenient for authors, I think. If your story has been uploaded to the Archive within the eligible time period then it will automatically be added to the eligibles list by K-Comm in January.

If your story isn't on the Archive, then it's your responsibility to email K-Comm and ask for it to be added. K-Comm just don't have the time to check every website for stories. That's why IABP was on the list. Because CC asked for it to be and then submitted the story to the Archive much later, once she'd tweaked it as she wanted.

Most authors, I think, just prefer to submit their story and relax, knowing they don't have to do anything else to make sure their story is on the list.

Although it's not a huge deal for the Archive, it would make life a lot easier if the December rush didn't exist. We'd probably not have a major headache trying to rally up stories to upload in January, submissions would be spread more evenly, and it would certainly save our GEs being especially pushed during a period that's kind of hectic anyway in RL.

But we've coped for years with it and will do again. So it's not a huge hassle.

LabRat

Okay, so now I'm confused.

So to make it eligible did it have to be submitted between Jan-Dec of said year or uploaded between Jan-Dec??

Carol--why was Fear by Deja vu Not included in your list of stories uploaded by Jan?

And You Don't Know Me by Wendy Richards was submitted in Dec '05 (as was Escaping Trask By Richard Frantz Jr.--these were the first 2 stories uploaded in January '06) So are these 2 stories eligible?

Jo

Jo, I left it off because I'd just posted a review of that story, and i was hoping someone might add a review of another of the january stories.

c.

The important criteria is uploaded. It makes no difference when the story was submitted. It's when it was uploaded to the Archive which counts.

Which is why we put a deadline on submissions for authors wanting their stories uploaded before year end. We need time for the editing process in between submission and upload. So...if you submit your story before the deadline of December 1st, we can (barring unforeseen disaster <g>) fairly surely guarantee that it will be uploaded before December 31st. Anything submitted after December 1st - well, we'll do our very best to get it uploaded before the 31st, but we can't guarantee it.

But don't forget that this only applies to automatic eligibility through the Archive. Even if you miss getting your story uploaded by year end, it can still be eligible for the '07 Kerths. Providing it was completed and posted somewhere during the year. All you need do is email K-Comm and ask for it to be included.

LabRat

gotcha that makes a whole lot more sense to me!

Thanks!

I keep a spreadsheet for myself to keep track of which stories are eligible in which year, just because of the end-of-the-year Archive rush, and authors who run into delays submitting their stories to the Archive **coughCCcough** I think the mini-reviews are a great idea - not just for reminding people of early submissions each year which should be remembered at Kerth nominating time, but just to point out stories that we may have missed along the way.

In terms of Kerth nominations, I have marked down that the following stories archived in this past calendar year were already submitted for last year's awards. Some were winners...

(January) You Don't Know Me
(January) Smart Teens
(March) Long Strange Trip
(April) Cloud Nine
(April) Hide and Seek
(September) In a Better Place

I don't keep the official spreadsheet for the Kerth Awards, so this is not meant to be the definitive list. But if people are starting to think nominations already, maybe this can help until the official list of stories is posted next year.

Kathy

Thanks, Kathy! Would those stories then not be eligible for this year's awards? If they wouldn't, then I think we should NOT have reviews for those stories this go-round.

Thanks, Kathy. That's very helpful. I should have remembered the timing of Smart Teens and You Don't Know Me. Especially Susan's story because I was one of her betas. First the memory goes...

So: revised Jan list - Fear which has been reviewed:

Growing Up Super - Luddy, Sarah
Five Crossovers That Never Happened to Lois and Clark -Rowland, Marcus L.
Just Watchin' TV - Potts, Mary
Far From Home - Jensguy
Grocery List - Potts, Mary
Escaping Trask - Frantz Jr., Richard

That's right - they were entered in last year's award round, so therefore aren't eligible again, no matter what their Archive upload date is.

If your sole purpose is to review potential Kerth nominees, then true, they shouldn't be reviewed in these threads. But since this isn't officially affiliated with the Kerths, I don't see anything wrong with someone writing a review if they choose to. It can always be noted at the top of the review that the particular story was already entered in last year's Kerths. And it may draw someone's attention to a story that they had missed before. My own reading this year has been far more erratic than in the past, so I know that I have a lot of catching up to do. Most of those will actually be stories eligible for this year's awards, but certainly there are stories on the Archive that I still have not gotten to...

Oh, tell me about it... That's actually why I started including this info in my database a couple of years ago, because I was losing track of which stories were eligible in which awards year.
Happy to help. But since my database is not completely up-to-date , it's possible that I've missed a couple. So certainly people will want to use the official Kerth list when it gets posted on the website.

Kathy

Good point! Therefore, let us review ALL of the stories uploaded to the archive last year. I've included a note above about making sure the non-nominatable stories are clearly marked in the reviews.

The reason I suggested the reviews was to help meet the need expressed at the beginning of the thread to prepare for Kerth nominations, so I 'd liked to keep the reviews limited to those stories that are archived and are eligible for the upcoming Kerths.

Always, always looking for the easy way out, I know.

c.

Perhaps there could be a 13th thread? That thread could be written after all twelve eligible-story threads had been finished, and include reviews for the stories that are not eligible for the Kerths.

Would that work?

A 13th thread sounds like a good way to go. Right now, I'll be happy just to see January done.

c.

Okie dokie. I edited the post above so that it says 13 threads. And with that, it looks like were on a roll.

I'm just about to post my first three reviews, but I thought I'd point out two things first.

1. I'm going in order from shortest drabble to longest epic when I do my reviews. This is just my particular quirk--that's usually the order I try to go in when I read the stories in the whole archive--I go to an alphabetical-by-author-name page, then read from shortest to longest (unless it's a series). Others may choose a different method. This also helps me to get the more easily-re-readable stories reviewed first. It'll take longer to review the longer stories, simply because I'll either have to skim enough to remember the story, or read the whole story because I might've skipped it in my previous readings.

2. I have NOT chosen the "Best Overall Story" for ANY of the stories when I review them, because I believe that ALL stories could be considered as candidates for that particular category at this point. The actual nomination process will narrow down the stories more appropriate for this category.

And now, without further ado, I will post my first three reviews in the January thread. Let me know what you think.

Thanks for the great explanations, LabRat.

LabRat, you are talking about stories having to be uploaded by the end of the year. So now I'm going to be brave and ask... What takes so long for the stories to be uploaded? (After the GE is done.) I know you guys are busy so please don't think I'm complaining - I'm trying to understand the process. (I hate it when I don't understand.) I submitted two stories at the same time, but one got lost in cyberspace and had to be resubmitted. The one that I resubmitted got posted to the archive first. I find this totally confusing.

If a story is submitted within the time frame, then what makes it not eligible? And if I want to review a story, how am I going to know whether is eligible or not?

Usually if the story is uploaded to the Archive within the calendar year, it is eligible for the Kerths awarded the following spring. So stories uploaded between Jan-Dec 2006 would be eligible for the Kerths in spring 2007.

But there are usually a few exceptions. Sometimes an author has made a specific request that his/her story not be considered eligible, in which case that would have been noted in the story file itself. There are also stories that were eligible for the previous year's awards. For example, the exceptions that I listed for 2007 are stories that were posted to message boards or on other websites at some point in 2005. They were not uploaded to the Archive during 2005, yet the authors of these stories wanted them considered for the 2006 Kerths, rather than waiting for 2007. There are always a few stories that fall into this category each year, usually posted right near the end of the calendar year. The Kerth Committee will include them in the "Eligible Stories" list that will be posted before nominations begin.

Well, even though my list is not the official one, I don't think I've omitted anything. And the Eligible Stories list for the 2006 Awards is still up, so you can also look through that and make sure that the story you want to review wasn't listed last year.

Hope that helps,
Kathy

I'm not aware that it does take a long time. Certainly not in December, when I'm basically throwing as many stories up per week as I can fit in in a frantic attempt to make sure I don't have any spare at the end of the year! <g>

Do you mean why do we need a month and a deadline for submissions of December 1st? That's not really to deal with the upload time. It's mostly lead-in editing time. There is an editing process between submitting a story and upload it to the Archive. And that's what takes up the time.

Because of the sheer number of stories we usually get submitted in December, we need that extra time to allow for the story to be edited and still have time for it to be uploaded by year end. We get so many stories submitted in December, generally, that I usually have to ask the GEs to 'double up' if they can in this month, many of them taking on more than one story at a time. At this time of year, then, more than any other time, a story may have to be held pending just waiting for a GE to edit it, never mind the time it takes to do the work.

It follows that if an author was to submit their story in the middle of December, their chances of having it edited will be much slimmer than if they did so at the start of the month. It's like having three months worth of normal submissions all crammed into one month.

Having said that, the December 1st deadline is really only a safety net. It always gets a bit hectic and there are always times when I think, "This one's not going to make year end...", but somehow we usually get there in the end. I don't think I've had to disappoint an author yet. Our marvellous GEs and Lauren usually pull out all the stops to ensure they all get there in time.

But, obviously, the sooner you can get your story in, the best chance it has of being uploaded timeously. And we definitely appreciate as much pressure being taken off our GEs as can be managed at this time.

Actually, it sounds pretty normal. <g> There's usually very little correlation between the two. Very rarely is the first story I sent out for editing in a month the first that comes back to me for uploading. The second the second...and so on and so on.

If the second story you submitted was uploaded to the Archive first, then it follows that it was probably returned to me by the GE first.

And the reasons for that are infinite. GEs, of course, edit at different rates. Some are quicker than others. One story might be cleaner copy than another, so require less work. One story may be shorter than another. The author in one case may be slower to respond to edits or there may be more to and fro discussion on edits than in another case...and so the list goes on and on. And that's not counting in RL, which is as capable as throwing spanners in the works of GEs as anyone else.

Once a story is returned to me by the GE, it goes into the upload queue. There are very few reasons from that point why it wouldn't simply work its way up the queue to upload. In 99% of stories, it's first come, first uploaded. Only very rarely would I skip over a story on the list when choosing stories to upload in any particular week. Or artificially advance a story to the head of the queue.

One reason for the former would be if, say, the first four stories in the queue were all by the same author. Then, I'd skip a couple and choose stories by other authors further down the list, rather than have an upload one week that was all by the same author.

Reasons for the latter may include a story which had a particular problem and had taken an unusually long time to be returned to me, for whatever reason. I might feel that the author had waited longer than they should for upload and put it at the top of the queue. Or - as this week - if a time specific story has been submitted, such as Tank's Halloween story, I'll put it to the top of the queue so that it gets uploaded as close to the date of the special occasion it's about as possible.

But that happens very rarely and the most usual process is for a story just to naturally work it's way to the top of the queue.

Hope that clears up any confusion, Classicalla. If not, just email/PM me and I'll see what I can do.

LabRat

I have a generic question, not about the Kerths, but about uploading stories in general.

Why are there only 3-4 stories uploaded per week? I know there was one story that I GE'd which waited a week or two between the time I sent it back to you and the time it showed up on the archive, and only 3-4 stories were uploaded to the archive in the weeks between. Why is that? Are only 3-4 stories allowed to be uploaded at a time, whether there are more ready to go or not?

Just wondering.

Thanks, Kathy, for the link to last year's eligibles. Just checked it and noticed that the story I reviewed for January 2006 was on the eligibles for 2005 and so is not eligible. Oops. I guess I'd better remove that review.

c.

Part of my job as EIC is to 'manage' the stories in the upload queue. That means, parcelling them out for upload as best suits the Archive. A week or two's wait for upload is usually about normal for most stories.

No, there's no set limit to how many stories are uploaded each week. 3-4 isn't even standard. We've had many weeks with fewer than that number uploaded and more than that.

In lean times, with few submissions coming in, I've dropped down to two or even one because that's all that's been submitted. We have to work with what authors give us. If stories aren't submitted, they obviously can't be uploaded.

In busier times, the opposite doesn't always apply, however.

Mostly, that's because I have to balance how many stories I can upload each week, while not leaving myself short for weeks to come. So if I have zero stories currently being GE'd, for example, I'll have to be very careful not to empty out the list, because I need to factor in leaving enough time for new submissions to come in and be edited before I can upload them and still ensure that we don't end up with an empty week.

If, as with most other fanfic archives out there, submissions were uploaded straight away, without being edited inbetween, it would be much simpler to balance, of course. But factoring in editing time is what makes it slightly more complicted in FoLCdom. I'm always having to think two or three weeks in advance.

If there are stories being GE'd, it's easier to balance, because I can reasonably assume that some of them will come back in before the next upload is due, so I can pretty much clear the queue entirely, or almost entirely. (I usually like to ensure that I have at least one story still in the queue, just in case of emergencies. ) But, yeah, those are the really easy weeks and I love it when I have enough of a backup list in GE to be able to throw up 6 or more stories at once.

So, yes, it's never a case of I just throw up all the stories in the queue that week. If I did that, we'd end up with weeks where there was no upload at all. And while it might be nice to give Lauren the odd week off <g>, our readers wouldn't be so happy. They've kind of gotten used to weekly uploads over the years.

LabRat

Thanks for the great answers, LabRat. The answer to Darcy's question was particularly helpful.

You're welcome, Nancy. Any time you need answers just hollar. What I'm (partly <g>) here for.

LabRat