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

ENTRY LINKS (subed use only): U114627A742655

Hi,
I'm your subeditor for this entry. I'll be reading it and checking it against the guidelines in the Subeditor help documents. I will also add/remove/change GuideML as necessary. If you have any questions, you should post them here.

This process typically takes about a week.

Cheers ,
Robert

Robert Wall?! Didn't you play O'Hara in "Enter the Dragon"? Won't be argueing with you then!

I've had a couple of dozen Guide Entries edited already, so I pretty much know the score. Thanks for letting me know...



H.

No, I don't think I did. Maybe someone's stolen my name . I've checked the entry, and have a few changes to make. Firstly, when you're using quote marks (e.g. "Anoraks" in the second para.), you should use single quotes (') instead of double quotes ("), according to the Subeditors-Style document. Also, links need to go to Edited or Recommended Entries, so I'm changing most of the ones in the document (the destinations, I didn't fail to note, were written by you. You really do write a lot ). Apart from that, it's OK!

Robert

*returns after 'not a lot of link checking' and a few other boring jobs*

Right, that looks OK! Any coments/questions/complaints/miscellenious comments ?

Robert

Yes, I've only really written entries on three or four occasions, it's just that once I get going I tend to write about six or seven at a time!

Not wishing to do your job, but if this is your first subbing job, you might like to take a second look at the second footnote - the Eds frown on first person references in Edited Guide entries, even if changing it spoils the punchline of a joke...

You could reword it, or just take it out. You're the sub, so your call. Thanks for that.



H.

Actually, it's about my 15th job...

I left the footnote in: one of the tag's main purposes is to add 'witty asides' (as the GML clinic puts it) to articles.

I'm ready to send the entry back to the Editors now, have you got any more comments?

Did that sound sarcastic? Sorry if it did...

Anyway, I'll submit the entry on Sunday if you haven't got any problems with the entry!

Not at all! If the footnotes survive I'll be all the happier, I just didn't think they would, is all. Cool.

H.

Good. I'm submitting the entry now!

Firstly, Robert, this is not (necessarily) aimed at you - I think the change I'm about to moan about was done by the inhouse Editors...

I'm annoyed. I don't usually mind people editing my words - but I mind A LOT when they introduce factual or grammatical errors which weren't there in the original.

Look at this:
"It originated with trainspotters, but you can as easily be a "football anorak", a "Star Trek anorak", but it seems hardly ever a "ballet anorak" or an "opera anorak" - although you could be an "Opera anorak"."

A grammatically correct, if rather long and complex sentence, taken from the original of this article. Did anyone not understand what I was getting at?

Now look at this:
"It originated with trainspotters, but you can as easily be a football anorak as a Star Trek anorak. However, it hardly ever a ballet anorak or an opera anorak - although you could be an Opera anorak. However, it hardly ever a ballet anorak or an opera anorak - although you could be an Opera anorak."

Now, it's been split into two sentences - but the first one doesn't mean the same thing as the original, and the second one isn't even a proper sentence! What is the point of having a two stage editing process if it takes correct English and changes it into incorrect English?! If there's nothing wrong with the original (and there's not) - WHY CHANGE IT? And if you MUST change it, at least take the time to make sure what you've changed it to is correct.

The first sentence SHOULD say: "It originated with trainspotters, but you can as easily be a football anorak or a Star Trek anorak."

The second sentence SHOULD say: "However, you're unlikely to hear of a ballet anorak or an opera anorak - although you could be an Opera anorak."



H.

Dear Hoovooloo,

I've changed it with a very slight tweak. Could you take a look?

Anna

Hiya...

Thank you for the attention, but we're not there yet. It now says:

"It originated with trainspotters, but you can as easily be a football anorak as a Star Trek anorak. However, probably not a ballet anorak or an opera anorak - although you could be an Opera anorak."

It still needs changing... it should be "football anorak OR a Star Trek anorak"; these are being given as two equally possible alternatives. Your version makes football anorakism sound less likely - which it isn't, not by a LONG way.

Also, the next bit *still*, even after TWO attempts by the inhouse Editing team, isn't an English sentence - the bit before the dash has no verb. "However, probably not a ballet anorak or an opera anorak..." does not make SENSE.

My suggestion was "However, you're unlikely to hear of a ballet anorak or an opera anorak..." There is a verb in that - "hear".

Like I said the first time - if you HAVE to change it from my (grammatically correct) original, it would at least be nice if you took the care to change it for something which is written in correct English. You lot are supposed to be Editors, after all...

H.

Hoovooloo, please. Anna is, apparently, only human.

Incompetent as we all may be, try to be nice...

Robert: I take some care about what I write, usually. I try as far as possible to make it factually accurate and grammatically correct. If I do get it wrong, it is because I write stuff here for a giggle in my spare time for no pay. I'm an engineer, not a professional writer or editor. Dealing with words is *not* what I do for a living, and it's not what I'm qualified for. You, Robert, are good enough to volunteer to subedit it in your spare time for no pay. Because of that, if I've got a problem of any kind with your subbing, I tend to be quite diffident about it - see the earlier posts in this thread. You did a good job. Anna gets PAID to edit this stuff (imagine that! ). I don't think it's too much to ask that paid Editors are able to write sentences in correct English. What *else* does an Editor DO, after all? (serious question, I have no idea at all) I don't mind people changing what I write - I'm not precious about my prose. But ultimately, when that entry hits the Front Page, it's MY ID under "Written and Researched by" and it's YOUR ID under "Edited by". You might not mind having your name attached to something which is wrong, but I do, *especially* if it wasn't wrong when I wrote it and there's no obvious reason for changing it. If this was the first time, I might be a bit less annoyed. If it was the second time, even. But it's not. http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/F71550?thread=135086&post=1294543#p1294543 I'm having a real problem with the process here: (1) I write entries which are correct, factually and grammatically (2) the subEd produces a subeditted version which is also correct, and complies with the style requirements re: single quotes and stuff (3) the paid Editors add errors to them for no reason that I can see (4) I spot the errors before they hit the front page only because I usually pay VERY close attention to the progress of the entries I write (5) when I point the errors out people get on my case for not being "nice". Pardon me for caring about quality. Pardon me for expecting people to be able to do their JOB. Every author of an entry that gets Edited gets an automated email the day it hits the Front Page (I got one today, as it happens...). I made a suggestion nine months ago that the author(s) of an entry should get an automated email seven days (or whatever) *before* their entry hits the front page, to allow them to spot cock-ups like this before they go "public". It hasn't been implemented, yet. I appreciate the programming team have other technical things to implement which are far more important. But I thought that writers are the lifeblood of this site, and this kind of behaviour p**ses them off. At least, it p**ses me off. And who am I, after all? Just another guy writing entries. There are a *dozen* h2g2 users who've solo authored more Edited Guide entries than me (according to the figures at A712982, and counting the four I've got "pending") so it's hardly like I'm especially prolific or anything. So in summary - I don't mean to sound rude, and if I did I'm sorry. I DO mean to sound p**sed off that I still have to check for this kind of stuff. H.

And here's me thinking that after the H/Chris conversation you'd have stopped getting p***** off with the Editors. BTW, I've read that conv. before. It's in the Subed Report as a case study.

And here's *me*, thinking that after the H/Chris conversation the Editors would have stopped adding stuff to entries without checking whether it's factually or grammatically accurate.

Fascinating to hear my conversations are a case study. Can you tell me more about the SubEd's report? Is it on the site? Is it public? Or do you have to be a SubEd to read it?

H.

Oh, and just to reiterate - I've never, as far as I can remember, had a problem with a SUBEditor. My experiences with Subs have been 100% good.

H.

Dear Hoovooloo,

I've updated the entry. Would you mind taking a look?

Thanks,

Anna

Dear Anna,

That's fine now. Thanks.

H.