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

"For instance, a Sub-Editor now presses a button when they feel they are done editing an entry for h2g2's main page. Once that is done, they can not modify the entry again in any way. Even if they notice something horribly wrong, they have little choice but to contact one of h2g2's employees and ask them to correct the problem."

Of course, this problem was still present in the old email-based system... so nothing's changed there.

"The Scouts, meanwhile, don't get much chance to discuss amongst themselves whether an entry should be in the Edited Guide. Once the button's been pressed, what's done is done."

True, but there's nothing to stop them discussing choices about which they are uncertain, before the choices are made.

Fair point, though, that Scouts can't have their choices spotted and discussed by other Scouts before the Editors get to approve or reject them. Perhaps a page showing pending recommendations, viewable by the Scouts, would be handy, but I dunno...

"One possible solution brought up during our conversation was that perhaps someday Sub-Editors could press a button telling h2g2 to email the entry's original author and ask them to check the editing job."

Or Subs can drop a message to the author's Personal Space, of course, inviting comment before they click on the 'Return to Editors' button.

I agree, Mark. You've brought these points up on the discussion page as well. I think there is a certain amount of wishing going on. 'These buttons are great! Why don't they do everything in the world?'

I'll bring up your points in my next column, along with whatever I hear in response. I'm not too terribly surprised that the conversations are still going on. I only wish I'd asked you to send out that message sooner so we could have discussed it more before my column.

I guess that's always going to be the response - if we got things 100% perfect first time, we'd all have to pack up and go home. Luckily h2g2 is a never-ending project, so as long as we continue to *improve* things, then what'll be a Good Thing!

Looking forward to the next column already - and did you get a chance to check out the proposed Peer Review replacement system at http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A591473 ?

You see, Mark, we like to keep you and the team busy. If we didn't keep asking for things, you wouldn't have such great job security.

No! I haven't seen that page. Woohoo! I'll pop over and join the discussion, I think. Unless you tell me otherwise, I'm going to assume you won't mind me advertising this page in my next column.

*rubbing my hands together feverishly*

That's absolutely fine. I thought I'd mentioned it in one of my recent emails to you containing those PR stats - obviously I didn't.

It's an interesting read, and the comments in the Forum are very astute.

"The Scouts particularly like how it is easier to move entries to the Writing Workshop or the Sin Bin if they aren't ready or appropriate for Peer Review" - I'm sure Mark will correct me if I'm wrong on this one (and then counsel me on my lack of participation ), but I do believe we don't have this yet... it's still in the developmental stage. We're still discussing the best way to do all this. In the meantime, threads are still being moved the hard way, via emails in the Scouts egroup.

The only thing we have right now is the simplified recommendation process. I agree that the ability to discuss recommendations among ourselves is something that will be missed... we can't expect the current administrator of the Scouts to know the particulars of every entry, after all. I think that page of upcoming recommendations might be a good idea. Or, perhaps it could be something mailed off to the Scouts' egroup.. say, weekly. Anyone who wishes to register feedback on a particular recommendation could respond in the egroup.

You're right Colonel, but I *think* the point was that the editors can respond to recommendations for moves much more quickly. Previously they had to save up all their movees to send to me once a week, and I'd run the SQL required to move the relevant Conversations, but now they have a tool to do it themselves, so moves are done as soon as the editors know about them.

This is also why Peer Review Conversations for approved Scouts' picks are moved at the same time as the pick is approved; previously there would be a delay for the same reasons.

Good points about discusssing picks, though. That discussion is normally very positive...

I know I'm pestering...

The Workshop statistics aren't what they appear to be, and a week ago I posted the actual numbers into a new thread off the PR Discussion page. In short: there are ~160 threads which should not be there, and rising.