h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Vip and I have been wondering whether there should be a pro-forma response to Entries that have been sent to PR either by confused newbies - or by those who have another axe to grind - such as advertising their personal websites/products or trying to sell their own belief systems.

If I was a newcomer to h2g2 and visited PR, some of the Entries that figure at the top of the list give an erroneous impression of what it is all about.

I also think that the two month rule before asking the Eds to remove certain things is too long.( for example A64439526 ) where the newbie hasn't replied to either his ACE or to the comment in PR). Plagiarised entries that have been hidden by the mods also 'hang around' too long too because of this two month rule.

I'd love to hear any other views - especially from those Scouts with longer tenure - I really want a consensus over this issue - which has been brought up many times in the past, I'm sure.

If anyone feels this should be brought up as a discussion over in the Scouts' Yahoo forum - then I log in there quite frequently.

My main argument is that I want to keep the atmosphere in PR very welcoming and positive to new authors, whilst still retaining the right to say ' This belongs somewhere else...' and to support each other when we meet an author who accuses us of being petty.

Please let me know what you think

I did suggest (back in my scout days -sorry for interrupting the live scouts) that we have a set responce, but it was poo-pooed

do you only now operate with the 2 month rule. I'm pretty sure that we a seperate thing for 1 hit wonders whose first post was an entry and then they never returned + also entries that were just complete non-EG material.

it seems stupid leaving in plugs for websites or a 30 line homo-erotic tribute to "Ronald Regan, history's greatest leader" for 2 months when it is clear that they will NEVER make EG no matter how much editing is done to them

Hi jon - glad to see a response - so far the only one I have had is via my Facebook messages - a threatening/stalking one which I have reported to the Eds.

Well, whatever floats their boat.

(I've removed the photo from the h2g2 facebook page that identified me as Lanzababy now - who'd have thought such malicious nastiness existed?)



Thanks for your comment re PR - it is exactly how I feel.

I do have my own set response to those - a bit like the Scouts all have theirs - that I alter to fit. I suppose that not having just *one* standard response for every Scout helps us seem like real people, not an automated message.

You can email the PR thread link to the Eds direct and ask for its removal. These were usually actioned the same day; and rarely did the Eds disagree with anything plagiarised or advertising.

ex-Scout GB

Thanks Mala and GB

Late as usual


lil xx

<--- not a wasted journey

It appears I'm still subscribed to this forum.



*steals some and *

I often advised people to read the Edited Guide, and gave them links to EGEs or categories of EGEs that might give them ideas on what we're looking for. I suspect some of the contributors have never read an EGE.

Thanks Icy - I have done that too when there is a similar EGE - I think it is a good tactic.

I'm also wondering whether the differences between ordinary Entries and EGEs are not obvious to newbies? Maybe this is another reason that they sometimes think that 'anything goes' and then are all hurt and upset when we direct them to reading the guidelines? I'm not in the business of trying to hurt peoples' feelings.

I think a lot don't even read their welcome message, let alone any writing guidelines. Some even post to PR before any Ace has welcomed them.

That is exactly the problem we are encountering. Confused newbies. We need a very welcoming message in PR that is extremely clear as to what the purpose of PR is for. Maybe we should have a filter on the Entries sent to us - at least from brand new members? I'm not sure that this would be feasible though.

Having said that - we have had some great new members who have managed to negotiate the PR process and have their Entries selected.

It's been discussed over and over again. The general consensus was, iirc, that the unsuitable entries from newbies aren't much of a problem.

As for what to tell them, that's a different kettle of fish. I guess you'll have to decide it there and then.

Quite so.

I still seem to be subbed too - the probs of unsuitable entries will never go away, I'm half convinced PR was started because the Eds (who used to get the submitted entries) created it because they were fed up with saying 'no, you're missing the POINT' to people.

When I was a Scout (some time ago I have to admit) the 2 month Elvis rule was only for *suitable* entries. Modded entries were removed asap, as were one liners and 'Mostly Harmless' comments.

There is nothing anyone can write that will stop the unsuitable entries as people don't read things before they submit (actually, *after* they submit). People probably don't even realise there is a PR when they hit that 'submit for review' and the page you get isn't exactly 'user friendly', plus it's outdated, what the hell is a 'review forum' anyway, and if you do look at a FAQ or the PR page, or the writing guidelnes there's just so much STUFF to read when they could just click this one clicky button and be done with it.

What's needed is Scouts being able to remove entries from PR.

Thanks Mina! I think that is a very sensible proposal. The Eds are so busy that even when we put in 'the list' for removal, it takes a week or so before they have time to press any buttons.

Now perhaps we could ask if lil could have a little pffft button?

*worries about a PR with lil in charge of button-pressing*

She'll be along herself in a minute - then we'll see!

Sorry I'm late, apparently I forgot to subscribe to this page.

It looks like we've got some sort of a concensus:
Completely unsuitable Entries can and should be removed via an email to the Eds as soon as it becomes apparent they won't get through PR

A standard-ish Scout message for unsuitable Entries is just fine, in the same way that the ACEs have standard welcome messages

I think a discussion about what should roughly be in the message would be really useful.

Already mentioned:
------------------

Explaining the difference between standard and Edited Guide Entries

Links to EGEs - would the Infinite Improbablility link (EGE only) be suitable, do you reckon?

My ideas:
---------

Stating that all EGEs must be
-your own work
-not copied from another site (even if you wrote the other site yourself)
-Factual
-Of an appropriate length (more than a few paragraphs but not as much as an essay)

Linking to:
<./>Writing-guidelines</.>
<./>Writing-beginners</.>
House Rules: A516034


Any more for any more?