Not sure why people do that, but isn't this a bug?  I thought I heard something about it...also thought it had been fixed.

I think it had something to do with the order of the bold and italics coding.

I've submitted these overview changes, and honestly, I'll probably do it again.

To my understanding, it was some sort of bug with whatever was changed in the latest update that the overview would be flagged for contribution. If the "new" overview is submitted, again, it's my understanding (as I've tested it) that the overview will no longer be flagged for contribution. I'm sure the bug or the excess code or whatever the problem is will at one point be fixed, but until that time, if there's absolutely no change (and there's not... every single one of them I've submitted, and it's only been about five or six, I've thoroughly and completely gone over, letter by letter, space by space, and they're identical) and it'll stop them from being flagged for submission again, what's the harm in submitting them? It'll stop a bunch of confusion for maybe a newer contributor who has no idea what's going on, and if I can save someone a bit of hassle, I'll happily do it.

As long as the work by the contributor is being done (checking if anything was changed, what was changed etc. etc.) there's no harm in submitting them.

This was previously discussed here, and yes, the affected overviews do need to be resubmitted once.

Quoting Merrik:

Quote:
I've thoroughly and completely gone over, letter by letter, space by space, and they're identical) and it'll stop them from being flagged for submission again, what's the harm in submitting them? It'll stop a bunch of confusion for maybe a newer contributor who has no idea what's going on, and if I can save someone a bit of hassle, I'll happily do it.

As long as the work by the contributor is being done (checking if anything was changed, what was changed etc. etc.) there's no harm in submitting them.

I don't know how you have done the contribution notes, but generally...

It is just a question of bad contribution notes, in most cases, I believe. If the contributor has done the careful checking as you described, they should simply state that the overview does match the back cover despite it being flagged as changed - instead of using contribution notes such as "Overview shows as changed, I don't know why" which indicates that the contributor is not sure if there are differences and doesn't even care.

It's not that the contributor should be able to pinpoint, what has changed (as it's not possible in this case), but instead note that the contributed overview is (now) correct, for the benefit of voters. That's all that is required.

Nobody should be expected to vote yes on contributions that the contributor him-/herself doesn't know what changes it possibly contains.

I've done exactly the same. If the overview shows up in the comparison screen and I know I haven't changed it I will compare them visually and if they're the same I will tick the box anyway and make a note in the contribution notes.
But a server-side fix would have been nicer.

Ditto Kathy.