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

Entry: Lloyd's of London - A1129628
Author: Tenaka - U186694

Just Something I was interested in. Unlike the edited guide version already available this focus' more on what Lloyd's is and how it works.

Tenaka, a lurker for the last two years, who has finally got around to writing something!

I take it you're proposing this entry as an update to the original. In that case, you should make Update HQ aware of its existence (A496451), and post something to this thread to make sure that the Scouts don't pick it. Lastly, be patient. We only have a small team working on updates, so they can take a while

The content of this entry is excellent, and it makes really good reading. Certainly update material.

One quick design note: It tends to be frowned upon to put links in Headers. Also, it's recommended that entries begin with a preamble, rather than a Header, but this would probably be sorted out over the course of the update.

B

Glad you liked it.

Didn't know that there was a way of updating edited, so thanks for that.
Thanks for the suggestions, corrections, I'll change them now and then head over to update HQ.

Thanks

To be honest, we try and keep the Update scheme quiet, as it's only semi-official, it doesn't work terribly well, and there's not enough people working on updates to deal with a huge amount of traffic.

B

This is good, but there are a few spelling errors in it. Lucine should be Lutine, for example. Also, watch out for the difference between their and there, and between right and write.

You have carefully said "Lloyd's is" throughout the entry, but there is at least one place where you have "LLoyd's are".

You might like to tell the story of the satellite that was insured at Lloyd's. When there was a mistake during launch and the satellite ended up in the wrong orbit, Lloyd's paid to send the space shuttle up and an astronaut caught the satellite and put it into the correct orbit. This was cheaper than paying out the insurance money!

Thanks for those corrections. I think I've got them all!
I wanted to avoid particular claims for a couple of reasons.

1. I could get in trouble with work with out checking how much info is public (I audit Insurance Companies, especially Lloyd's Syndicates and know nearly ALL the details).

2. I was thinking of doing something about insurance losses in general and things like asbestos, oil rigs and satellites/space accounts. The project that failed because the US didn't realise they needed to convert metric to imperial was paid for by Lloyd's, and the new insurance agains hacking. I'm sad like that and find the insurance industry quite interesting

Please keep sugestions and corrections coming though.

I like it.

The first header isn't needed - the title makes the first header.

Yet I like the two different headings. One is the title for the article, one is an intro title.
The two relate to fundamentally different things. One to the whole article, the other to the introduction that follow's it.
At least I think so?!?

It's usual practise to not have a header at the beginning though - I think a sub would probably remove it.

Cyzaki is right - the style guide does recommend that an entry shouldn't start with a header or subheader. One of the main reasons for this is that it does look a bit funny in some skins...

Tried looking in other skins and see what you mean. I'll take it out now and just leave the main title.

Thanks

I've changed the Title to take account of the sugestion. Just wondering what you now thought.


Tenaka

I think the title is a bit long now. I think it would be better as:

Lloyd's of London - from Coffee House to Insurance Market

I had the same concern, which is why I asked, but couldn't think of a better way to phrase it.

So thanks for thinking of a way for me. I hope you dont mind that I've taken what you suggested and put it straight in.

That's OK.


There are still a few typos:

it's long history --> its long history
company,owned --> company, owned
it's shareholders --> its shareholders
Entry, unfortunately is --> Entry, unfortunately, is

G

Thanks for those.

Another lot of corrections done.

If there are any more corrections/sugestions please let me know.

Your Guide Entry has just been picked from Peer Review by one of our Scouts, and is now heading off into the Editorial Process, which ends with publication in the Edited Guide. We've therefore moved this Review Conversation out of Peer Review and to the entry itself.

If you'd like to know what happens now, check out the page on 'What Happens after your Entry has been Recommended?' at EditedGuide-Process. We hope this explains everything.

Thanks for contributing to the Edited Guide!

Congrats!

Congrats!