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

Great stuff, Ben!
Some comments/suggestions:

I think we should point out more clearly that not everything is going into the UG. If the considered opinion of the researchers in the AWW is that something is cr*p it will sit in the AWW for a long time.
BTW, we do *NOT* minesweep in such a way that we remove entries after a certain period of time, correct? So essentially an entry will stay in the AWW for all eternety.

Regarding the spelling/grammar(/GuideML), where it says that the Polishers might make *some* changes, perhaps it might round the subject off to state that
"... these changes will be discused with the author if they are more than basic corrections."



Tube

When I sat down to write it, it amazed me how many guidelines have in fact developed informally within the Miners and Polishers Group in the few months we have been going.

I have made the two changes you suggested, Tube. There is some more tweaking needed, specifically links and things.

Does anyone else have any comments on the content itself?

And can anyone give me a link to the page where Douglas Adams spoke about his vision for h2g2? I think I would like to include the "anyone can write anything" quote.

(I *hate* coming out of retirement like this. Will I never learn?)

Ben

The "Vision Thing" (haha, old Sisters of Mercy Joke) is at A550955.

Though you might want


"You can create your own Guide Entries containing anything you want, from your opinions of world events to a description of your home town, and it all goes to make up the h2g2 Guide, the sort of guide which was not possible before we had the means of live, shared information resources."


That's from DNA's welcoming message at A157349

That's the one. Thanks Tube. I have put it in, but it takes up quite a bit of space. I still feel those remarks are extremely to the point.

Cheers.

Ben

Hi Ben

Can I draw your attention to this forum reply F55683?thread=343355&skip=0&show=19 - specifically:
'Finally, although we are perceived as a 'newspaper' we are just as likely to use historical or 'old news'. So, although we try to be topical - certainly valid for columns which embrace sport and current affairs - this isn't a big requirement.'

Also a couple of s/ps for you
Entries should be readable;
The UnderGuide prefers entries which conform in look and feel to the *guidelines* for the Edited GuideSee A540253 and *associated* links.

Hellman's Anachronism" (insert link) discusses a scientific subject in a *distinctly* unscientific way.

shazz

Thanks Shazz. I will tackle the typos later, (I did this all with my original account). Can you come up with a form of words for the Guidelines entry which describes what the Post does accurately and succinctly? Or I can say something succinct and add a fuller explanation as a footnote. It is important that we get this right.

Are you going to be at the January Meet? If so, hopefully I'll see you there.

All the best

Ben

These are great, something to go by but emphasising that they are flexible. I think you've got the balance right. I also think that the evidence that this provides that the issue has been properly thought out within the UG adds to its credibility.

2 points

"Entries must not be suitable for the Edited Guide - This guideline is not to say that entries shouldn't abide by the Writing Guidelines,.." Now we have UG Guidelines I think that needs to be "abide by the Edited Guide Writing Guidelines,..". And should 'shouldn't' be can't?

"The UnderGuide prefers entries which conform in look and feel to the guidlines for the Edited Guide, and so entries which include blobbed images, moving graphics or whacky fonts and colours are unlikely to be picked." I think a note of the reason for this would be useful, just a reference to non approved tags not being guaranteed to work in the future. And a link to A264520, SubEditors-GuideML.

I take it we do restrict UG entries to Approved GuideML? It seems only practical. I will change the Gem Polishers' guidelines to say so, so if it's not the case could someone say?

Having not been party to the UG set up, these guidelines seem to make sense to me and cover many eventualities, however a note to the effect that they will be constantly changing and updating to suit the need of the UG as it too evolves may encourage people to comment on them more liberally.

I like the fact that you state they are only guidelines and not rules but maybe a section for things which are 'rules' would help, I think most of the points under 'the basics' fit into this category.

One little thing which may just be personal taste but I'll let you decide:

'"A True Story" (insert link) assures us it is not fiction, though it is narrated as if it *is*' -> as if it *were*
I know the subjunctive in everyday English, what a sinner I am

Mel

The three basics are the only two hard guidelines. I believe Ben borrowed these from the UG Editors' UnderGuideLines, which lists some of the rest as tips.

>>a note to the effect that they will be constantly changing and updating to suit the need of the UG as it too evolves may encourage people to comment on them more liberally.

Is it going to evolve more? But I'm tired...

The entire site evolves, for good and bad, so I expect that although the UG may be stable at times we cannot expect it to remain 'as is' forever.



Mel

Ok, dudes, here is what I have done:

Shazz, I have corrected the typos, thanks for pointing them out. I have also added in a footnote about the Post saying that you take non-topical stuff too.

Waz, I have completely re-written the point about entries which conform to the letter of the Edited Guidelines but which still aren't suitable for the Edited Guide, and I have also made the point about GuideML with a link to the Subeditors GML page.

Mel, I think I prefer the basics/guidelines split rather than making it a rules/guidelines one, if that is ok.

Finally, I have added a section which refers to Editorial Policy, and basically says that there are guidelines beyond the guidelines.

If anyone has any more comments that would be cool. And does anyone have the link to the EG version of "A True Story"?

Ben

UG version is at A1983413

Looking good, Ben You bring a creative, poetic quality to even the most dry of UG pages

Anyway, holler when everybody's satisfied and I can copy and paste this into the "official" guidelines space (with all due credit to Ben, of course)

As I have said many times I just throw in ideas, if people don't take them on I really don't mind as I am not a regular 'user' of AWW or the UG so my points may well be a little wide of the mark. What I can hope to add is to make people think of the alternatives however they may sound.

Basically what I'm trying to say very ineloquently is that of course I don't mind if you don't take my ideas on board, what matters is that you considered them

Mel

Jodan. For "poetic" of course read "pissed off and sarcastic" - but it amounts to much the same thing a lot of the time!

Thanks for the suggestion Mel, and I did definitely consider it. (I do the same - it used to infuriate my Dad) I am just allergic to Rules!

All the best.

Ben