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

Funnily enough, my can change history as we know it.

Fixed.

Entry: English History - A Condensed Version for the Average London Tourist - A21382823
Author: Uncle Travelling Matt (the Hoopy) Esq. - U168592


For ease of reference.

I personally think it would be better if it wasn't London-specific, but I don't think there's any need to remove references to specific London memorials and the like.

"The 'Gunpowder Plot' is discovered in 1605, and Guy ends up having his act of terrorism branded as a national celebration in England - held every 5 November night."

Firstly, is it just England and not the rest of the UK? It would make sense given that the Act of Union hadn't taken place yet, but I'm not certain. You have a tendency in this entry to mention England when really UK is more appropriate, though that's probably because of the London focus.

There was something else, hang on...

Ah yes, minor point.

"The Romans narrowly defeat the Warrior Queen,"

Depends on your point of view. She kicked some arse at first, burning London, St Albans and somewhere else that escapes me at the moment and killing a lot of people. However, when the Romans actually faced her in battle, the Britons were slaughtered.

Also, I've got an entry on crossing the road you could perhaps link to at the end.

I really like this. Fabulous job, and I'm impressed to see how many other hootoo entries you've managed to link to.

Thanks E,

I've tweaked a couple of sentences so hopefully it reads a bit better now from your advice, and I've also added the links..I was sure I'd already added an Idiot's Guide, must have forgot! Sorry!

As for the England / UK thing, I've had trouble with that and would appreciate some other opinions on it, I like having the London references, but I'm happy to remove them and tweak the title and introduction a little if people think it would work better as a visitor's guide to England / UK - however, by adding that UK bit, do am I then obliged to include Scottish, Welsh and Irish history too?

1930's, depression and the Jarrow March? Very apposite at the moment.

Also is it worth mentioning the multi-nationality of the Monarchy?

Otherwise, concise and comprehensive!



MMF

I felt the 30s was a bit - well, sparse, but I guess that's what a 'credit crunch' does I'll see what I can add there

Is saying Albert's German multinational enough as far as monarchy goes?
I mean Richard I was pretty much French, Alfred may as well have been German, it all gets a bit mixed up (the h2g2 and outside links to all the bios of the kings and queens enough perhaps?)

Thanks for the comments though MMF

Well, Victoria was German and spoke English with a German accent till the end of her days.

They were also cousins of the Russian royal family, and could have saved Nicholas II and his family from the communists, but refused to offer them asylum for fear of the repercussions that it could have had in this country.

"Victoria, who was of almost entirely German descent, was the granddaughter of George III and the niece of her predecessor William IV. She arranged marriages for her nine children and forty-two grandchildren across the continent, tying Europe together; this earned her the nickname "the grandmother of Europe"."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_of_the_United_Kingdom


"Victoria's first language was German, which she was taught from birth. From the age of three she was taught English and French, and became virtually trilingual, though her mastery of English grammar remained incomplete"

"As for the England / UK thing, I've had trouble with that and would appreciate some other opinions on it, I like having the London references, but I'm happy to remove them and tweak the title and introduction a little if people think it would work better as a visitor's guide to England / UK - however, by adding that UK bit, do am I then obliged to include Scottish, Welsh and Irish history too?"

I would say keep it as English history and don't add Scottish, Welsh and Irish - the entry would become enormous. As I said, I don't think there's any reason to get rid of the London refences - it's somewhere practically all tourist visitors would go - but the entry as a whole would work better if you made it about English history rather than Englosh history in relation to London.

"You have a tendency in this entry to mention England when really UK is more appropriate, though that's probably because of the London focus."

What I mean here is that while obviously the entry is about English history, there's a lot that can't be seperated from British history. So while I get what you're saying, I don't think it's fair to talk about England fighting in Iraq or the World Wars without mentioning the rest of the UK. You and I both know it wasn't just England, but others may not. Bit tricky to word it to be respectful of that while keeping the England focus, though.

It is a conundrum, innit? I'll see what I can do to make it less, um...oh poo. You know.

Let me fiddle.

There, I think that's better. The contentious sections I've removed and made it more England rather than London focussed.

Any more for any more, so I can work out the kinks over the weekend?

The 4th & 5th Centuries: the Anglo-Saxons shouldn't that be 5th and 6th Centuries?

At the end of the '20s & '30s section, the semicolon should be an ellipsis, like the one at the end of the 18th Century section

Oops

All fixed,

"Come 410 AD they all pretty much gone"

You missed some crucial grammar in your rewrite there.

Oops, crikey!

Fixed.

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!

And another one, well done!