|Subject: TGR: These are okay - July 1999|
Posted May 10, 2010 by The Guide Revised
If any changes are needed to the article or you think it needs a discussion, plese post in a new thread. Thanks.
A127469 - Public Toilets.
Short and joky. Don't think it needs anything doing.
A127450 - Caring for Latex Clothing.
No work needed.
A126659 - Wire Hangers.
Very short and rather pointless, but no work needed.
A109739 - Sideburns.
Very short. Link works.
A36541 - Toasted Sandwiches.
No point changing any of this one, I think.
A112302 - Mate.
Short and jokey. Nothing to change.
A49808 - I Can't Spy - the Game.
A126415 - Curiosity.
Pointless but harmless.
A121032 - Old Wives' Tales.
A61912 - Remote Controls.
OK. Was on the Jan-Jun list.
Hmmmmm - not sure of your criteria for ok there hygienicdispenser.
None of the above would pass the current standards in PR.
There are some definite candidates for being demoted - if that is possible, while others, such as the latex clothing, need revising at the very least.
I think we need to clarify what to do with short, mostly harmless entries from this far in the past?
>I think we need to clarify what to do with short, mostly harmless entries from this far in the past?<
My opinion - leave them alone (which is why I marked all these as OK even though they would obviously not be passed under today's rules). They are an integral part of the site's history, from the early steam-driven days of the internet. "Curiosity" is totally pointless, but it's lasted 11 years. On wikipedia it wouldn't have lasted 11 minutes. Do we really want to be retroactivally homogenising the past? I repeat, that's only my opinion.
Also, there are 9900+ others to look at. At ten a day, that's three year's work.
I freely admit my knowledge of latex clothes is minimal.
I've updated all the ones in this thread (for now, at least).
The only one of the above I disagree with is Curiosity - one sentence is just *too* short and doens't actually tell you what curiosity is. Well. Not really.
I don't think we should keep them purely out of historical interest, but I think we should keep them because they are a pleasure to read - that should be the final judge.
I would say that if an Entry is factually correct, then leave it. If something is amusing as well, then definitely keep it. We want the humour and the personal feel because that's what makes the EGE the EGE. I would even say keep the Latex Clothing one, despite the references to 'I' because it is still a useful article and interesting to read.
If we flag up everything that wouldn't make it past today's guidelines we'd never get anywhere and potentially lose some articles that are very good (even if they wouldn't ge through today). I don't like dry, informative EGEs myself, I much prefer quirky, fun, informative EGEs and most of these fit the bill!
Thanks for clarifying the objectives here Vip. I am in favour of leaving well alone, if it comes in the mostly harmless category. Otherwise we would never get around to doing any revisions on more important entries.
The latex clothing one I thought just might need tweaking, to remove the first person references, but if you are happy enough with it - I'm not going to disagree. It definitely should remain as an EGE, whatever.
Seriously though - if there were some old EGEs that were really dreadful, how would we stand about flagging them up for demotion?
I mean, I love this one, it is priceless - consider the list of contributors to the sum total of sentences (9). A412859
I wanted to link to it, when subbing Rome restaurants, but it really isn't quite right somehow, even if it did make me laugh because that is how I found the driving to be last time I visited.
That is a staggering number of contributors. It's a good 'un though, isn't it.
We'll have to get the Eds involved if we want to demote any. It could be tricky though as it might make some links in other EGEs invalid. Not to say it can't be done, but just that they might prefer an Update instead.
Ah - yes, inward links. that would be tricky. I had never thought of that. Good point.
A105788 - Scrambled Eggs
A103122 - Newspapers
A103177 - The Great British Breakfast
A1675 - Coffee
Newspapers is short, but it's enjoyable and amusing.
|Subject: TGR: These are okay - July 1999|
Posted May 22, 2010 by Deke
This is a reply to this Posting.
How good it is to see one of my early efforts rearing its ugly head. A126659
...and great to see that someone’s actually read it and even awarded an appellation of ‘rather pointless’.
Please do tell how that rates against ‘mostly harmless’, higher or lower?
'Rather pointless' is waay better than 'mostly harmless'. It's also vastly superior to 'pointless', 'totally pointless', 'staggeringly pointless', or 'starring Chevy Chase'.
A103168 - Happy Morning Radio Disc Jockeys (DJs) - short but in keeping with the title
A109658 - Gibraltar Airport - again short but amusing and informative.
A109720 - Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers - I would appreciate a second eye over this. I can't decide if it has distilled the whole show into its essence, or whether it has been so simplified it has lost its point. I don't really know the show though.
(I should point out that some required extra links, but I have posted these to EF so I didn't think it worth making an extra thread).
A71614 The Ultimate Cocktail List
I meant to say that the two in the last post are okay because they have been revised. (alcohol and cocktails)
These are okay as well, although they are in the 'mostly harmless' category.
A72424 - Strip Clubs
A75683 - Diabetes - a Personal Perspective
A112339 - Roundabouts
A68492 - Traffic
My feeling is that they are not worth revising. If someone came along with an interest in any of these very old, original Entries, then they
could do a complete rewrite.
These are okay as well.
A120754 William Shakespeare who was he
A61813 - Juggling
A61921 - Kebabs
A73270 - Chess (link mended - thanks Danny!)
A113194 - Indian Side Dishes
A121023 - Murphy's Law - short and sweet, mostly harmless
A121041 - Newton's Laws of Motion - ditto
A49204 - Red Dwarf - The TV Series - this was written by a few people including smij. I think he is still around, but I'm guessing that this is mostly up to date? Any Red Dwarf fans around to verify this?
A113923 - The World's Best Beaches This seems to have been updated fairly recently.
Please note that Not Panicking Ltd is not responsible for the content of any external sites listed. The content on h2g2 is created by h2g2's Researchers, who are members of the public. Unlike Edited Guide Entries, the content on this page has not necessarily been checked by a h2g2 editor. In the event that you consider anything on this page to be in breach of the site's House Rules, please