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

LQ's last post refers to a different Entry, A2591129, on the series in general; the plan is indeed for there to be a separate Entry for each game. Hence the request for assistance in his tagline.

'However, in those cases, it is usually a topic that *needs* a longer entry. I really don't see that as the case when the topic is a video game.'

Which I take to rest on the assumption that mere video games are in general unworthy of extensive treatment. Now I could have put forward a straightforward summary, offering no advantage for the Guide over any other summary available on the Internet, and ignoring altogether the points of fan debate that surround the game and help to draw out its depths. The result would have been, in a word, adequate; and I should have been quite prepared to damn my own work with that faintest of praise.

However, when I came to work on the Entry, I was faced with the question of how to replace an excessively sketchy Entry with one that represented my best attempt at guidance around this part of Life, the Universe and, well, Everything. For another game -- another Final Fantasy, even -- a summary of reasonable quality would probably suffice, but FF7 has been picked over so obsessively that something more seemed appropriate, for the game and for the Guide. There was a service that a Researcher could offer, and it was thorough research into some of these areas of debate, and the bringing together of various scattered fragments of information and interpretation. Lengthy though it may be by Guide standards, it is distilled; it summarises details of a long and complex game and of some aspects of extensive debate and analysis. For anyone seeking any of this information, it has a utilitarian value; and some people even find this stuff interesting.

Not that I should be driven to seppuku were a Sub-Ed to decide that my kanji analysis, my collections of name theories, etc. were unworthy of the E.G. I understand that they will catch neither the editorial nor the public eye. My problem is not with your criticisms, which I accept as perfectly reasonable, although naturally I should like to hear some more views on the matter; it's not even with the interminable time it took for another person to comment (and I'm glad someone has). Rather, my concern is twofold: the suggestion that the Entry, irrespective of its other merits or demerits, is to be discounted as too long -- not misinformed, or unclear, or boring, but simply long (although I understand that you are referring to editorial policy rather than simply expressing your own opinion) -- and the suggestion that, though some topics may warrant more than 2000 words, video games as a class do not.

I ask that _this_ Entry be judged on its coverage of _this_ video game, as much a part of Life, the Universe and Everything as anything else, and one of the most bought, played, discussed, analysed, and genuinely beloved of all time.

I think you might be missing a bit of the point here.

I'm not saying that it's too long because no one should ever write that much about a video game. [Although yes, quite frankly, I do think that a broad topic such as "Human Genetics" or even "Video Games of the 1980s" has room for a lot more useful detail than does a single video game, regardless of how popular.]

I'm saying that, as it stands, this entry is too long to capture and maintain the attention of the audience we have here for the Edited Guide.

You wanted to know why loads of people weren't here paying attention to your PR thread -- I'm telling you why. Don't shoot the messenger.

I was trying to put it reasonably... If I came across as unreasonable, that probably does reflect some annoyance, but not directed at the person who actually did turn up and communicate with me. I'm sorry if I failed to express myself properly.

Since I personally lack knowledge of 'the audience we have here for the Edited Guide', and what can capture and maintain its attention, I do, in fact, appreciate your comments -- enough to have spent some time composing a response. My mind is not closed to the possibility that this Entry might change considerably were it to make its way to the E.G.; but if recommendations do not immediately strike me as definitely necessary, naturally enough I query them, explaining why I did things differently in the first place; and that, of course, requires the recommendations to be made in the first place. You made some -- thank you -- and I explained why I did not accept them at face value -- perhaps a little brusquely, but not without taking your comments seriously enough to write a full reponse accounting for my decisions.

Some more debate, some more views, and agreement on the proper length might have been reached some time ago; that hasn't happened, and I thank you for telling me why not, not least because you have offered criticism. I may not be in sympathy with your criticisms, but that doesn't mean I'd rather you hadn't offered them, or that I'm beyond persuasion. It's just that I have a very strong preference for active debate over echoing silence.

I've removed the Entry from PR and will discuss the viability of a cut-down version with LQ.