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

Jeering is back in?

In that case, to English teachers! Har!



Actually, I hadn't noticed the 'had' and had it not been mentioned at all it would have had as easy a time slipping by unnoticed as a haddock would have had. It's too bad.

I think if we ignore it, it'll blend into the background again.



Here's something I thought was conspiculously absent - some words from Grace herself. Then I noticed footnote two. I'm not satisfied though, and I think that it would seriously improve that particular paragraph to lose the footnote and work in a quote instead. Just my opinion.


Other than that, I have to say this piece is finely turned and polished.

Thanks. That's a genuine thought.

Ah, and I realise why. The quote is in the past tense, of course.

Entry: Grace Gifford's Wedding - A53069051
Author: dmitrigheorgheni - U1590784

Dmitri, the link at the Stretcher Submissions thread brought me here. I probably shouldn't have critiqued it yesterday in that case, but I hadn't realised this was a Stretcher admission, I just reviewed it as a PR-regular. I think I'll go have some

GB


Ms GB

That's fine now.

Very sad and moving story. What a cruel lot they must have been, to stop the newly-weds even having a final hug.

You really bring the history to life

Thanks for the comments.

Yes, Tib, I agree...I have further speculations on why they did what they did, but I left them out. Hypotheses non fingo. This is PR, not the AWW...

GB, it's my own fault. I didn't point out that it was a Stretcher entry, I should have.

It's a very good Entry, dmitri, but it seems to assume that the Republicans were in the right and the "British" in the wrong. Not everybody at the time agreed with that. Most of the population of Dublin were quite happy with the political state of Ireland at the time, and continued their daily lives as the rebels occupied (very badly chosen) strategic sites around the city.

Which is where the jeering originally came in, I believe

Which is where the jeering originally came in.

This is a good piece of writing and the content hardly needs worrying about, as far as Peer Review is concerned. Some nitpicks:

You've only linked to one other Edited Entry - there are plenty more to which you could link.

"something-old-and-something-new" - the hyphens are unnecessary.

"past eleven o'clock at night [....] At 11:30 [....] At 2.00am" - only the latter is correct - see EditedGuide-Style.

Alex

Thoroughly enjoyed the entry dmitri, WD!

Hyphens offend? Removed.

Changed to 'past 11.00 pm', although that's clunky. It isn't 11.30 pm until the guards come in.

More links? When I have time, I will look for them.

From looking at the way entries have been edited, I gather that the Wikipedia idea is being followed - link to every possible word in the entry that has an EG entry?

I had been linking only to entries that would explain more about the topic at hand - for example, linking to an entry on the Easter Rising, because it was germane. (I hunted for links to the key players or events, didn't find anything, will be grateful if anyone spots anything.)

I haven't been linking to, for example, 'marriage' (I'm sure there's and entry), or 'weddings' (ditto), or, say, 'Dublin'. I'm sure there's one there.

Largely, I think, because I feel that readers clicking will then get distracted and not read what I had to say. Are those what you meant, and do we now need to do this - link to basically off-topic entries?

Thanks, Keith.

I'm with you on the links things dmitri. Gratuitous links are one of my pet hates, although I'm not averse to the odd one taking you to somewhere unexpected if it's really appropriate.

Irritating indeed

But if h2g2's search is ever fixed, it might well give any entry linked to a higher search ranking...

Nonetheless, I am selfish enough to want people to actually read the entry I wrote without the distraction of a witty piece on, say, how to buy a wedding ring.

I know I shouldn't say so, but I hardly ever click on links provided in entries. I may go back and do so after I've finished reading, but it is a very rare event that I get distracted by links.

That's interesting to know, in terms of the technique of hyperlinking, B'Elana.

Most of my links so far have been intended to deepen the understanding - provide an illustration or more information on the topic at hand. It doeosn't matter whether you click on them first or last.

I usually go through and read anything that looks interesting after I've read the entry, but wouldn't think they work like footnotes, for the most part. If it's anything you need to know to understand the entry, I personally wouldn't simply hyperlink it, but add both a brief note and a link if available.