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

Exactly how it sounds. Any thoughts?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A614585

This is the link

This is quite informative, but a little difficult to read, try putting smaller paragraphs in, break the text up a little.
(Some of us are getting on a bit and find it hard to concentrate on a full page of text).


whisky

Hi there, nice work I reckon. I found this a very interesting article and I see no problem with it getting into the guide.

I agree with the comment that it could do with a little breaking up though. Huge chunks of text don't really allow the reader to give their eyes a rest and don't really look too good either.

Also, this sentence needs rewording as it doesn't make sense in its current form 'Custer column of men met the steamboat at a temporary camp where the Powder river met the Yellowstone, there to plan their strategy'

Apart from that though. Excellent

Custer was actually a lieutenant colonel. He was named brigadier general during the Civil War at age 23 (not 25), so at the end of the war he wasn't officially a general. His comrades only regarded him as such because it was customary at the time.
Also, the word is spelt 'Appomattox'.
The rest of the article seems riddled with not so much inaccuracy as an inordinate lack of flavour. By disregarding a colourful event like Bloody Knife's brains spattering all over Reno's face or the past history of Rain-in-the-Face and Tom Custer, and by forgetting characters like Lame White Man and Mitch Bouyer, you really don't capture the essence of the event. It's the little things which make the massacre at Little Bighorn so interesting, not the big picture. Read 'Son of the Morning Star' by Evan S. Connell, 'Killing Custer' by James Welch or the excellent 'Archaeology, History and Custer's Last Battle' by Richard Fox, whose theories as an archaeologist are an order of magnitude more sound than those of many historians.

maybee you could try using sub-header tags to break it up a bit, also makes it more coloful

there were a couple grammatical mistakes that needed correcting, but what do we have editors for if not to fix the little blemishes? (actually, i just cant remember exactly where the mistakes were)

fairly comprehensive, very good without going into too much detail. If more detail is needed, maybee a Uni o' Life project should be started?

I've just re- done the entry in GuideML, so now it's more colourful. I also did more headings and corrected the typoes. MCB, I agree that a few more anectodes would add spice to the article. Could you suggest any please? Thankee.

Also, how does an article get into the Edited Guide in the end anyway? Is there a vote, or something? Forgive my ignorance, I'm new 'round here. But please don't try any horrible hazing tricks.

I think its a great article and deserves to be in the edited guide. Its nice to see it as impartial too: my old school history textbook always made him out as a bit of an old fashioned american hero. Go on someone, recommended it

I think its a great article and deserves to be in the edited guide. Its nice to see it as impartial too: my old school history textbook always made him out as a bit of an old fashioned american hero. Go on someone, recommended it.

oops sorry

Mr L.

The entry will have to stay here for a week before it can possibly be selected.

After that, hopefully one of the scouts will recommend it.

Good luck,

(imo it should be selected, but im not a scout)



Whisky

yep, one of the scouts will recommend it for the edited guide, and a subed will start working on it... next to the entry it'll say "recommended" once the sub-ed has finished his bit, it'll be a "pending" article, awaiting final editing. then one of the italics will look at it, and then its on the front page! woo hoo!

ooh, one other thing.. you may want to insert tags before and after the subheaders to free up the text a bit....

Thanks a lot Lurker, svabaha, et al. It's great to have positive feedback. I think there's a lot of love here.

Darn, svabhava, go your name wrong. No offence.

hey don't worry about it- everyone does- its sanskrit.

I'm not so sure about some of what the article says about Custer. It seems to imply that he sought command of the 7th Cavalry just to fight the Sioux because this treaty deal was coming up. There were various indian wars throughout the west in this time period. Glory hunters would be glad of any posting out there.

My regiment, the 5th United States Infantry, spent a lot of time in the west fighting indians. They were dispatched under Colenel Nelson A. Miles to seek out the indians from Little Big Horn. Colenel Miles defeated them and negotiated their surrender.

Sorry if I gave that impression. There is the theory that Custer needed a big victory because he wanted to become President, but, like a lot of these theories, proving it would involve grave- robbing and necromancy (that's *talking* to the dead). Anyway, the article has to focus on this particular campaign, and not on the Indian wars as a whole. There's just too much material to fit in otherwise, interesting as it is. I have put in links so that whoever wants to can find out more about the subject - Custer is still a very popular man, and there are a load of sites about him.

Nothing wrong with necromancy - need some help?

A lord called Orcus

Mua ha ha ha ha ha ha!