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

One of my entries ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A591923 ) was hidden by a moderator, I don't understand why. A very similar entry (they're both reviews/discussions of two different episodes of a TV show) was passed, it's not obscene, it's something I wrote myself (albeit containing quotations and a section indicating who owns the copyright to the quoted works) and doesn't include any foriegn language (unless you count the one Nigerian name that's in there, it's a name, I can't translate it to English cos then it wouldn't be the name) parts.

Could I possibly suggest that it be proposed to the people incharge of the moderation procedure that the front end through which moderators mark entries as passed, hidden or failed be ammended to include a list box from which moderators select the section title for the section of the House Rules they think has been breached and it be displayed to the author when they view the entry.

I realise that it takes some time for the review team to work their way through entries that have been moderated but as I have a number of similar entries in the works it would be nice to know if it's worth continuing to post them or if I should just give up.

Stephen

Small quotations are normally allowed in entries and forums. As Peta is not online atm to give the reason, you could unhide the entry and I'll take a look at it for you. Maybe I can shed some light on the matter. Or you can wait for Peta, it's up to you.

I made a small change and updated the entry which seems to have unhidden it.

The article basically consists of a descriptive summary of the episode I'm reviewing followed by a discussion of what I feel the themes of the episode are.

Thanks.

Stephen

I want to reiterate that my main confusion relates to the fact that this article is very similar to another which was passed. I could understand both passing or both failing but not one passing and the other failing.

Stephen

Hi Stephen

One of the entries was referred to me because the moderator wondered if posting up a storyline was breach of copyright. It isn't, it's fine. You gave more of a series review on the other entry, which is why they thought that one would be fine.

Copyright law is a very tricky thing. Anyway, they both pass with flying colours, and they're both back now.

Peta

Thanks for the clarification.

I know that copyright law can be tricky, I had to essentially have a crash course (albeit self taught) in transatlantic copyright last year when these articles were published on a US site illegally.

It never went to court but the articles were eventually removed after I posted a point by point arguement to the company who hosted the site's server. This resulted in them removing the pages from the site and telling the webmaster that if those articles returned the entire site would be removed and the account cancelled.

I've written a few articles on copyright, mainly about Fanfiction and why it's not covered by 'Fair Use', including a rather rambling copyright page for my personal web site entitled 'Copyright, and why there aren't a lot of pictures, page'. The subclause in the title of that page comes from the fact that a portion of the site is a Buffy fan site and unlike pretty much every other Buffy fan site it isn't loaded down with graphics. This is due to the fact that it's pretty much impossible to get a legal photo without either paying for it or taking one yourself.

Again, thank you. I have two more of these reviews to post, I'll try to beef up the review/discussion section.

Stephen