Polishers' Home Page | Why be a Polisher? | What do the Polishers do? | Polishers' Code of Conduct | Volunteer to be a Polisher

The term Gem Polisher was chosen with intent. If a piece is of UnderGuide gem quality, its author will already have done all the grinding and cutting necessary. All we do in taking it for display in the UnderGuide is give it a light polish with a lint-free¹ cloth. This is because one of the basic tenets of the UnderGuide is to allow for personal, creative pieces of work. It follows that entries should be as close as possible to the author's original entry and that all changes should be made in consultation with the author, where that is possible.

There is a distinct difference in approach here to that of the Edited Guide's subeditor who has a relatively freer hand to create the EG entry from the material provided by the author and the PR thread. When gem polishing, the author retains control of the piece throughout the process.

So what do you look for when you're given a piece to polish?

The easiest bit is that the piece does need to be in GuideML. If it's not then you need to do that and should try to reflect the author's original layout as closely as possible. If it is in GuideML you need to check that the Approved GuideML forms have been used ², changing the author's GuideML where necessary. The change in the overall look of the piece should be minimal in doing this. There may be occasions when it's justified to use some unapproved GuideML, these should be discussed at the UnderGuide egroup.

Then you need to look for typos, non standard spelling, grammar, lay out and structure. You also need to read through the piece carefully to look for any wording that the reader is likely to misinterpret. Having identified all those, consider which you think were unintentional on the author's part. Those are the only ones that you should think of possibly changing. Bear in mind that idiosyncratic spelling, grammar etc. even 'wrong' spelling, grammar etc. may be part of the author's, or a character's, voice, or may add the flavour of a different cultural or geographical backgound that it would be a pity to lose. They may even be 'correct' in the author's background. British English is not a requirement for UG pieces. Never forget that your judgement of what is correct in these matters is within the context of your culture and don't assume a mistake without checking. You need to read through the AWW thread, some of the points you've identified may already have been picked up and discussed.

The next step is to contact the author, introduce yourself, say what you're there to do and say what you would think might be possible changes that would improve the piece's presentation. In opening the discussion you need to be aware that some authors know exactly what they're doing, they will have placed every full stop and comma with a great deal of care and will be sensitive about any change. Everyone however can miss a tpyo in proof reading. Other authors will be complete beginners and will benefit from advice and you should not hesitate to offer that. And then there will be all sorts in between where you need to use your own judgement. But it will pay in every case to tread very carefully and get to know the author a little before getting into the detail.

Of course you can't consult the author if they are not around (ie gone Elvis). Try to make sure - post to their page anyway, they may be present under a different user name. Ask in the egroup, someone may know how to reach them. If they are Elvis, you need to act with discretion. Use your knowledge of polishing in consultation with authors to decide what to change and, if you find yourself making significant changes, confer with other polishers and the UG Eds.

If, after all that, you, as polisher, are unhappy with the results let the UG Eds know your concerns before taking it any further.

Some tips and reminders:

• Choosing pieces for polishing that suit your background and / or expertise will help, particularly if you are new to this type of work.
• Every effort needs to be made to contact the author.
• Your consultation with authors is of the "Here's what I'd like to change", not the "Here's what I'll change" variety.
• Get to know the author - knowing their track record with previous, UG or EG pieces is useful background.
• Read the piece through thoroughly, more than once, to be sure you've understood the author and read the AWW thread.
• Don't automatically correct what you see as errors.
• If you find yourself making extensive changes, rewriting sentences, or even phrases, something is probably wrong and you need to consult the UG Eds.
• If you feel the reader really needs additional information in order to understand the piece, consider adding a discrete note outside the body of the text. If this significantly alters the look or feel of the piece, again, consult the UG Eds.
• If you feel that useful background information can be given through links, then again these should be added outside the body of the text. Links need to be to sites you are reasonably sure will be maintained. If this significantly alters the look or feel of the piece then, yes you guessed it, consult the UG Eds.
• We are a team - miners, polishers, UG Eds and authors. We should work collaboratively. Most entries should be knocked into shape, if any knocking is needed, in the AWW. And their gem quality assured in the egroup voting discussions. The more polishers can take part in those, the fewer polishing problems should be encountered.

Technical bits:

Checklist for creating the Polished Gem version of an entry:

• Credit the original author.
• Tick the not for review box.
• Put '- (UG)' in the title after the piece's name.
• Put the UG blob, using <LINK H2G2="underguide"><PICTURE EMBED="RIGHT" BLOB="B3767758"
  ALT="Official UnderGuide Entry"/></LINK> in the top right hand corner.
  
• Putting any changes you've made in red, using < FONT COLOR="#FF0000">red text</FONT>, is a helpful, effective and easy way to track the changes and makes the UG Eds life easier³ . The red font needs to be removed however before the final handover of the finished, polished, piece to the UG Eds.
• E-mail the 'A' number of the polished entry to the UG Editor of the day.