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

the guide was meant to be a guide, the quintessential bit of quirky knowledge that could get you out of a fix, or tell you a few vital facts. thats not what it is now

What do you think it is now, Profanity? Why isn't it performing its function as a 'guide' for you?

Paully

It is definitely on its way, the only problem i see with it is that the essence of the hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy is being completely different from any other type of reference. Wikipedia, for instance would not be what the guide is meant to be. Wikipedia is basically a free and useful Encarta, sans the crap and monopoly. The guide, in the guide, was not definitive, like wikipedia. If wikipedia were to have an entry on a battle, it would give the year, the date, the opposing forces, and any milestones in the battle. the guide would also, but would possibly have a footnote to the effect that generals are a bit nicer then they may seem. i hope this is a good answer,
Erm but there is no way to really convey the sort of content in the guide.

I already think that our entries are pretty unique in comparison to Wikipedia. That's always been a factor of what we look for and how we write.

We're not exactly trying to be like DNA's Guide, because I get the feeling that's something of what you're getting at. We're not a fan site. But we do aim to be different, and I honestly don't think we need to go a whole lot farther in that direction.

In my opinion, and as I've posted on other threads, the main changes should be not in our writing style, but in striving to make the site more user-friendly, e.g. perhaps by reforming the PR system or changing FP content.

Yes. Yes and Yes. The entries are different and gratefully unique. i totally agree with you there, also with our PR. what i was trying to say i think was that the style is good, but the DNA zealot took over for a second and i apologize for that. Back to the PR, the more edited entries the better, because an average person will react better and would rather read an entry that has been edited and reviewed then a regular entry, although i can understand that the Guide is in no way designed for an average person. It might serve us well to work on that.

We do try, profanity, but only so many people are willing to write new entries, and only so many people are willing to become volunteer Scouts and Sub-editors and help those entries get Edited.

Do you have any ideas for ways to get people from the community more interested in writing entries and submitting them to Peer Review?

Well, I know I would be much better off as an editor, because I am just like that, and perhaps the oppurtunity to start off as a Sub-Editor could be offered, I don't actually know how that works. The basic design of the site if possible could be tweaked as well, for instance, not having any real links to BBC or any mention except at the bottom, therefore having more room to customize features. The site itself differs extremely depending on what theme you are using, and that can totally change the experience a user has, so perhaps previews of different themes.

Feel free to have a quick read through our Volunteers Page: http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/brunel/volunteers to find out what all of the different roles like SubEditor, Scout, Artist, Guru, etc do.

Cheers!

Paully