In advanced search there's a checkbox "Owned by a self-identified native". Would it be reasonable to extend this functionality to "Owned or approved by a self-identified native"?
It could be.
Can you tell us what made you think of this? With a bit more context, we can better assess whether we should extend the checkbox as you suggested or whether we should add another search option.
Note that there has been a similar request raised on GitHub:
Because I like working with sentences added by native speakers. They are less likely to be awkward, they are less likely to contain structural mistakes. I even enjoy noticing typical mistakes that native speakers make - for example, I used to pronounce "they're" and "there" differently in English a long time ago, and only after having noticed that native speakers of English regularly confuse "they're", "there" and "their" in writing did I understand those three have identical pronunciation.
Anyway, I have a lot of reasons to work only with sentences added by native speakers, so I almost always use the "Added by self-identified native speakers" checkbox in my searches.
However, I think I'm missing out on sentences added by non-native speakers that were approved / corrected by native speakers. I don't see why those would be any worse than sentences added by native speakers.
So I believe it would be useful to treat "Sentences added by native speakers" + "Sentences approved by native speakers" as one set.
The github link is not the same. If I OK an English sentence, it doesn't make it any more reliable than it was before me okaying it, but it's important for a sentence to be reviewed by a native speaker.
> only after having noticed that native speakers of English regularly confuse "they're", "there" and "their" in writing did I understand those three have identical pronunciation.
Not identical, at least not for every speaker, but definitely similar. :)
There are a lot of correct sentences that belong to users that have not indicated their native language. And I have come across quite a few sentences with errors, by native contributors. Nevertheless, I think this would be a useful feature.
In relation to this, I would like to call for an overview of all the sentences having the @needs native check tag. I find it discouraging to see sentences with this tag being ignored for ages.
There are also quite a few sentences that have both this tag and an "OK" tag, which is confusing. I understand that may be because the person who OK's a sentence does not always have the right to delete other people's tags, or they just forget; this makes me think the issue is perhaps not best handled using tags.
> In relation to this, I would like to call for an overview of all the sentences having the @needs native check tag. I find it discouraging to see sentences with this tag being ignored for ages.
In which languages? I make a point of frequently reviewing the English sentences with this tag (along with @check and @change). Sometimes they build up in the short term because they are owned by an active member who hasn't had a chance to get through all of them yet.
> There are also quite a few sentences that have both this tag and an "OK" tag, which is confusing.
Again, in which languages?
OK, I looked a bit closer, using the web interface, and found that Norwegian Bokmål actually stands for more than half of the total ~4500 sentences. It is among these that I found the OK'd ones.
Other languages that stand out are Japanese (412), and Mandarin Chinese (384). To get the whole picture, for each language, maybe somebody could run an SQL query?
Indeed, English has very few unhandled @NNC requests, for which I am grateful.
Norwegian Bokmål has no corpus maintainers. Maybe it's time to recruit one.
Det ville være en stor forbedring.