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

I say, Mikey, it would be awfully good of you to respond with your thoughts on the matter.

Was that a good line to get it back up to the top of PR?

The long table of links I was referring to is the one with all the points, etc.

I think a large part of the problem here is that what you have conceptualized is worthwhile, but simply not within what works in the Edited Guide format. For example, anchor links simply aren't allowed in EG entries these days -- and this entry is swimming with them, and I would have a hard time seeing it work elsewise. Edited Guide entries are meant to be articles that are read, not algorithms for jumping to a conclusion, which this is.

If you really want to go with this in its present format, there are definitely loads of places here on h2g2 that might be interested -- the post, the underguide, etc.


Mikey

Hey there, stranger!

A random stop-in at PR revealed this excellent piece!
I don't really have any suggestions, but I did pause to lament the passing of my favorite Linux version, Caldera. (aka SCO)

I was sorry that those guys screwed up so badly.

I don't think 'no anchor links' actually is in the writing guidelines, but if what you say is true, Mikey, then I have an idea (or should I say a cunning plan?)...

I could perhaps put the descriptions of each of the distros in an entry of their own, perhaps expanding on them and making them as complete and detailed as possible. These could go into PR individually. I could then put the 'algorithm' in another entry, which could be put in the Post or the Underguide, and would link to the Edited versions of the separate entries about the OSs.

How about that?

The trouble is, I don't have the time to do that right now, so if it's all right with you I'll just leave it until Christmas (or maybe later).

Thanks for dropping in, FT! I have a feeling you've dropped in to this thread before, though.

There are far too many different expectations for Edited Guide entries to include all the details in the Writing Guidelines -- those have been written to focus on the things that wouldn't necessarily be common sense, and that would likely come up when writing the average guide entry.

The to see the bit on anchors, you actually have to look at the list of approved guideML for EG entries (which is a different page than the Writing Guidelines), and see that anchors very clearly are not included in the "approved" category.

You said: "I could perhaps put the descriptions of each of the distros in an entry of their own, perhaps expanding on them and making them as complete and detailed as possible. These could go into PR individually. I could then put the 'algorithm' in another entry, which could be put in the Post or the Underguide, and would link to the Edited versions of the separate entries about the OSs."

I like this idea.

If it is going to be months in the making, though, it is probably best to go ahead and withdraw this entry from Peer Review, and then submit the component entries when you have time.

Feel free to drop by my personal space with questions on it all, especially if I don't pop up right away in the PR threads for the new ones -- it sometimes takes me a week or three to find PR threads I should be paying attention to, since I don't subscribe to PR.


Mikey

I agree with Mikey's comments here. Although I think this is a very good idea for an Entry, addressing an issue that more of us are coming up against, it is a trial to read. I couldn't see it getting into a dedicated computer magazine because most reader would have got bored halfway through and given up.
Try and be more descriptive. Try to tell (or at least follow) a story of some sort. Start out by saying what OS is, why people are turning to it, and something about your own experiences. Then try examining various case studies: the small business person, the home user, the hobbyist, the web host etc. Then wrap it up with what to do after you've installed it and got it running. Ditch all the detail at the end about each OS.

I will get back to this entry some time, but I do have a bit of a dilemma:

The subject of open source software, operating systems, distros and related software is vast.

I have a number of entries that begin to document these topics, and I think they deserve to be documented in the Guide; however, they should all ideally cross-reference each other. Basically we have:

- Introduction to Open Source,
- Software Licenses,
- Open Source Software,
- History of Open Source,
- Perhaps a dedicated entry about Operating Systems would be good, considering what a big topic it is,
- One entry per distribution, as already mentioned above.

But consider the Open Source Software entry (A2957781) - it will provide a summary of the best open source software. But what happens when someone wants to write a dedicated entry about one program (as I probably will want to do eventually)?

The problem here is that Edited Entries can't link to non-Edited Entries and so in order to have a complete and fully-fledged account of all Open Source concepts, there are a few thousand entries that need writing before they can all be cross-referenced with each other and submitted.

Obviously I don't intend to do that, but I'd like some opinions about the best way to go about tackling this subject. Where to start? When to stop?