Enjoy
30%
OFF - valid until
31-12-2024 00:00
Hello to all,
Following the suggestions that have been made concerning requests made without prior research, we have found a way to implement a global search without making too many changes to the website.
We hope that this will avoid requests for scores that have already been submitted.
I am also working on improving the search system.
We will keep you posted,
Musically,
Slade
Following the suggestions that have been made concerning requests made without prior research, we have found a way to implement a global search without making too many changes to the website.
We hope that this will avoid requests for scores that have already been submitted.
I am also working on improving the search system.
We will keep you posted,
Musically,
Slade
0
Reply
Hello There are more and more people asking for titles that have already been on the site for several months or years. This raises a question. Are we dealing with losers who love to be assisted or is there a schmilblick in the P-A site's search engine if the applicants can't find anything and feel obliged to apply?
Perhaps it should be re-explained that it is possible to search with several criteria. The title, if one is sure that it is good, or with keywords, or by artists, or by performers or by composers. But all this seems maybe too heavy.
Perhaps it should be re-explained that it is possible to search with several criteria. The title, if one is sure that it is good, or with keywords, or by artists, or by performers or by composers. But all this seems maybe too heavy.
3
Replies
slade
03/10/2021
Hi yoyo,
Without even doing a search with multiple criteria just the title find most of the scores that are requested and already filed.
There are several factors:
- people don't search (in the same way that people don't read. It is specified twice that the artists field is for artists but the requesters keep marking their messages in it).
- regular members are requesting sheet music because they can't download it from the site because they are not premium.
- most of the existing sheet music sites also work on a personal request concept. Does this play a role? I don't know.
But literally the last 5 requests I see would have been found just by typing the title of the score... Without any need for advanced criteria....
Without even doing a search with multiple criteria just the title find most of the scores that are requested and already filed.
There are several factors:
- people don't search (in the same way that people don't read. It is specified twice that the artists field is for artists but the requesters keep marking their messages in it).
- regular members are requesting sheet music because they can't download it from the site because they are not premium.
- most of the existing sheet music sites also work on a personal request concept. Does this play a role? I don't know.
But literally the last 5 requests I see would have been found just by typing the title of the score... Without any need for advanced criteria....
Cindou11
04/10/2021
Me, I go on and on, but I always survive ........ ♫♫ Mouahhhhh
ACCORDEONIAL
05/10/2021
Hello to all, I will add that there is also the "advanced search" which allows to put several elements: title, composer...
But Slade said some things...the nonpremium members...who make multiple requests....and who can't even, (it's me who says it) THANK!
But Slade said some things...the nonpremium members...who make multiple requests....and who can't even, (it's me who says it) THANK!
Hello
It seems that for a while now, many "requests" for scores are solved simply because what is requested is already on the site. So the question we can ask ourselves is this. Why not change the wording of the fields on the left. With SEARCH FOR SHARES .and ..REQUESTS FOR SHARES. Maybe this will reduce unnecessary requests. And of course the field PARTS SEARCH is the area where all the partitions are stored.
The PARTITIONS field doesn't seem to be clear enough for some people.
Thanks
Lionel
It seems that for a while now, many "requests" for scores are solved simply because what is requested is already on the site. So the question we can ask ourselves is this. Why not change the wording of the fields on the left. With SEARCH FOR SHARES .and ..REQUESTS FOR SHARES. Maybe this will reduce unnecessary requests. And of course the field PARTS SEARCH is the area where all the partitions are stored.
The PARTITIONS field doesn't seem to be clear enough for some people.
Thanks
Lionel
7
Replies
slade
11/03/2021
Hello Lionel,
Indeed, this is a problem that is starting to arise.
The site normally does a search on the requests in order to redirect the applicants to the existing partitions if they exist.
I'll do some tests with the requests we had lately to see if the suggested partitions are displayed.
But by putting its message in the artists field (specified twice in the form ....) the search certainly does not succeed...
We are going to study the question to try to reduce this kind of problems.
Sincerely yours,
Slade
Indeed, this is a problem that is starting to arise.
The site normally does a search on the requests in order to redirect the applicants to the existing partitions if they exist.
I'll do some tests with the requests we had lately to see if the suggested partitions are displayed.
But by putting its message in the artists field (specified twice in the form ....) the search certainly does not succeed...
We are going to study the question to try to reduce this kind of problems.
Sincerely yours,
Slade
didber
11/03/2021
Thank you Lionel to come back on this problem which would be almost eradicated if the "SEARCH" function was done on the whole site and not only on the active section.
slade
11/03/2021
Hello didber,
a site-wide search function would not necessarily solve the problem. Besides adding to the confusion, there are just no searches being done.
Sincerely,
slade
a site-wide search function would not necessarily solve the problem. Besides adding to the confusion, there are just no searches being done.
Sincerely,
slade
didber
12/03/2021
Hello Slade
Indeed "not necessarily" but "very probably"
Didier
Indeed "not necessarily" but "very probably"
Didier
slade
12/03/2021
Hi didber,
I understand why you think it would be useful.
But you are assuming that people are doing research in score requests.
There are some yes. But it is a minority of the requests that are duplicates.
There are several explanations:
- people don't understand the difference between requests and scores (some)
- people have a hard time understanding the site (some, see the searches done directly in the comments)
- the automatic searches are not relevant enough and people post anyway (some and to be improved on our side)
I looked at the last few days of the requests that were reported as already submitted and before corrections it turns out that a large majority with an artist field containing the message. As a result the suggested scores were not because the artist field was not respected.
There are several ways to solve this without disrupting everything for people who manage to use the website.
- propose a redirection to the scores when a search on the requests is done. This is in line with your point.
- succeed (??) in having people enter the artists in the artists field of their request in order to be correctly redirected to the existing scores.
- work on the nomenclature of the different categories in order to reduce the problems of understanding as Lionel suggested.
However, changing the whole search system would do more harm than good. Considering the already existing difficulty for the members of the site.
Sincerely,
Slade
I understand why you think it would be useful.
But you are assuming that people are doing research in score requests.
There are some yes. But it is a minority of the requests that are duplicates.
There are several explanations:
- people don't understand the difference between requests and scores (some)
- people have a hard time understanding the site (some, see the searches done directly in the comments)
- the automatic searches are not relevant enough and people post anyway (some and to be improved on our side)
I looked at the last few days of the requests that were reported as already submitted and before corrections it turns out that a large majority with an artist field containing the message. As a result the suggested scores were not because the artist field was not respected.
There are several ways to solve this without disrupting everything for people who manage to use the website.
- propose a redirection to the scores when a search on the requests is done. This is in line with your point.
- succeed (??) in having people enter the artists in the artists field of their request in order to be correctly redirected to the existing scores.
- work on the nomenclature of the different categories in order to reduce the problems of understanding as Lionel suggested.
However, changing the whole search system would do more harm than good. Considering the already existing difficulty for the members of the site.
Sincerely,
Slade
slade
12/03/2021
Sorry for the mistakes. My phone has "corrected"
Unknown
17/03/2021
Hello didber and yoyodu77,
the nomenclature of the categories has been changed ("requests" instead of "partition requests") to try to reduce confusion.
The search on the "requests" page has been removed and replaced by a message inviting to do a search and a link leading to the search on the "scores" page.
We now send a reminder and explanation message to applicants who do not enter their application information in the correct field (text in the "artists" category, search in the comments area, etc.)
We continue in parallel our reflections and research on the improvement of the relevance of the "automatic searches".
We hope that this will limit the errors. Thanks for your feedback :)
Musically
KPC
the nomenclature of the categories has been changed ("requests" instead of "partition requests") to try to reduce confusion.
The search on the "requests" page has been removed and replaced by a message inviting to do a search and a link leading to the search on the "scores" page.
We now send a reminder and explanation message to applicants who do not enter their application information in the correct field (text in the "artists" category, search in the comments area, etc.)
We continue in parallel our reflections and research on the improvement of the relevance of the "automatic searches".
We hope that this will limit the errors. Thanks for your feedback :)
Musically
KPC
