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

Entry: Relational Guide Mechanics - A87715542
Author: Gaston Prereth - U14993418

Moved from Peer Review to here.

Well done, now, assuming i can't find any more mistakes, I think i might join the actual debate on your entry's ideas - please, don't take them personally, I tend to get quite aggressive to argue my points, though at least never against the person

Well, that's the first answer to your idea - 'moved from Peer Review'. It's a hard sell.

But I'm with you in saying that we need a broader approach to the way we handle our content. I think the first step might be to consider all our writing as part of the inclusive Guide - not only the factual entries.

There's a project afoot to label our content better with better tagging. That's a long-term goal.

Of course, in the meantime, there's the search function. If you stubbornly unclick 'Edited Entries Only', as I usually do, you'll find more on hedgehogs than just the Edited Guide.

I already would consider all entries to be part of "the guide", whether they be EG UG or Post (or even none)

Nevertheless, I will mostly defend the status quo, things should remain separated as they are. I need to be able to navigate the EG and know what i hunt is purely factual
What i would say is a vital part, is we need as many entries coming into, and as many volunteers handling the Underguide as the edited guide. With equal precedence given to both on the front page (though whoever gets put in charge of classifyfing future and past UG entries should be given free meals for life)

Then the two "guides" can be considered separate but equal parts of the Guide

That's a good thought. Would anybody like to volunteer to revive the UnderGuide?

Would they get a badge?

I'm sure of it.

How would reviving take place too? I'm happy to do all I can to help.

Hi Gaston!

What do you think of our new scheme 'The Showcase'?

You know, I'm unclear at this moment about the mechanics. I think it would need a team...

Tell you what, I know the person I want to ask isn't around at the moment. Could you drop a PM to Lanzababy, and ask her what this would take?

I'm encouraged that there's some interest.

Aha,

There she is!

'The Shwcase' I like, anything that helps people find things they wouldn't normally read is a good thing. What are the criteria for it?

We have multiple badges already concerning the UG - both miners and polishers, who fulfill similar roles to things like the Scouts and Sub-eds

We would however need a chief of each, and most importantly dozens of entries in AWW that are Active and fully fledged, as opposed to just a couple of lines dropped in randomly.

Sub-eds have to spend a lot of time on h2g2, and they have to be very good,
As such we always have a shortage of both them and scouts, as well as a perpetual worry that we might lack in entries (we used to have two new entries per weekday)

In an ideal world, just for the EG, we would have 6 or 7 sub eds, probably 8 scouts, who would have a varying allowance of entries they could pick depending on how much was wanted. We would have sufficent good entries that we could update 10 per week (with the attached icnrease in writers), all, of course, with an illustration.

For the UG, we would need a similar number of Miners and Polishers, an even larger number of entries in the AWW since the AWW would provide the entries for both the Post and the UG.

And my final suggestion (in an ideal world) would be that each weekday, we would have two EG entries and one UG entry, while not done atm, i don't think the CEs would mind having some UG entries put up alongside EG entries, as long as it was made clear which was which

Parity between EG and UG would be equal since alot of AWW entries would be in the Post, which already is a very active part of h2g2

In fact, I'm tempted to write up what would be an ideal layout of the EG/UG separation - do you think those who spend lots of time on this board (who i encourage to help here, since I don't have much experience outside PR/EGG) if several people put up possible ideas, even if they couldn't be enacted?

Four posts snuck in while i was writing that monster

Excellent, all that.

You're in good hands, here. I've got go - it's complicated, involving my time zone, my dinner, and the need to defend same from a ...I'll check in later!

Gaston

This draft version of a new A page may explain a little bit about the Showcase

A87716488


Additionally, if you wish to see some of the selections made so far ( this is only our second week ) they are on the Front Page, in the Showcase section.

I had already read the entries from the front page

OK, it sounds good . Your life would be made much simplier if people could flag entries for your attention from the entry itself though, I have no doubt you'd get a higher response then.

BTW, due to my long adsence, i'm not so hot on the changes that have happened here recently, why has the underguide fallen into disrepair?

Hi. I'm one of the proponents of the UGT, and was a long-serving editor and miner for the UG. So while I'm generally pretty open-minded about the Guide's future, I really do (respectfully) think you folks have the wrong idea.

"I already would consider all entries to be part of "the guide", whether they be EG UG or Post (or even none)"

This is a longstanding tradition on h2g2. That's why there's an "Edited Guide". When one refers to "The Guide", that's a reference to everything, not the "Edited Guide", otherwise the modified "Edited" would be unnecessary.

"I will mostly defend the status quo, things should remain separated as they are. I need to be able to navigate the EG and know what i hunt is purely factual"

First of all, I challenge the idea that EG as it stands now is "purely factual". Our best feature is not our ability to offer loads of accurate info. That's what wiki does.

Second, the distinction between "separate but equal" and "equal but identifiable" is a semantic one, but ultimately important in deciding how h2g2 wants to move forward. The UGT argues for "equal but identifiable". There's no reason that an EG entry can't be "tagged" as fiction in a clear, searchable and identifiable way.

I reject the hierarchy inherent to segregation. After all, if we're arguing that including fiction next to non-fiction would diminish or somehow taint non-fiction - yet we don't argue the reverse, that fiction would be tainted by proximity to non-fiction - aren't we subtly saying that one is more important? I don't meant to inject any undue emotional potency into the conversation (though to be fair I didn't introduce the "separate but equal" language), but ever since the UG was created, the EG/UG relationship has been rather Plessy v Ferguson-esque. After all, African-Americans didn't feel like they needed to be separated from whites, or that their lives would be tainted by proximity to whites. That's all a bit silly and conceptual, I know. But long experience has made me feel this way.

Mostly, I believe that the UGT offers a system that's better suited for h2g2's niche in Internet-land.

Also, I should think that discussions about h2g2 aren't what the review forums are for. Ask h2g2, The Post, the soapbox or the million other articles about h2g2's future would seem like more logical places. But then, who really cares? <./>RF5</.> isn't exactly busy.

"BTW, due to my long adsence, i'm not so hot on the changes that have happened here recently, why has the underguide fallen into disrepair?"

Like many things on h2g2, the UG suffered from a certain malaise and lack of enthusiasm once the BBC stopped caring about the site. I am adamantly against the resurrection of the UG, as much as I love it, because I believe that its existence provides a place for the "non-fiction" only advocates to point to as a "separate but equal" alternative.

Suddenly realises who Danjor is Glad to see you!

I think this might make a very interesting discussion, and we could always broaden it to include a thread in one of the conversation forums?

Just for now though, I'd like to continue here. If it wasn't so late I am sure I'd make a bit more sense.

Until the morning - goodnight.

LB