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

Entry: identity cards - A824979
Author: oblongomaculatus - U193809

paranoid? who, me?

not sure as it stands this really qualifies as as a guide entry
- it is an opinion piece
- it doesnt contain any information about ID cards
- it would be good to include info of how they might work, which countries have them, whether they work in those countries, possible future changes, what the main objections to them are etc.

Hiya oblongomaculatus!

Nice little opinion piece, but since Peer Review is for entries which are to considered for the Edited Guide, and that is meant to be as subjective as possible, unless it is from a personal perspective, (My Life with a Cyst on My Brain, for instance) - you might want to consider removing it from this forum for the first reason that Ross has posted.

You could then work on the points that Ross has outlined, check to see if it falls in line with the Writing-Guidelines, and then resubmit it

Stay ,
WD

that's only your opinion...

Hi there!

Ah, but to submit into Peer Review, Entries have to comply with the Writing-Guidelines. Now, unless you also consider that to be an opinion piece I would suggest you read that and try and change your Entry so it fits with each of those points.



Caper Plip

So where would it better be suited, as it stands?

Well, as it stands, I would say that it'd be better suited as a Journal Entry and not Peer Review... they go in the Journal section of your Personal Space. However, if you want to do an in-depth Entry on ID Cards, I would then suggest that you remove this from Peer Review and put it in the Writing-Workshop so you can work on it some more

Caper Plip

well, I second your sincere suggestion.

Alternatively, <./>Alternative-Writing</.> is also an option.

I'd say it's time to reap it, isn't it?

I don't understand. Explain, please.

That was h2g2 jargon ... Peer Review is for factual (etc, etc) entries, with the Edited part of the Guide as their destinations. As this here thread appears to be in the wrong place, the proposal to 'reap' it means to get another Scout's seconding voice and then move the thread into a more suitable place (see U198667). 'More suitable' either means another review forum or the entry in question, or (in extreme cases) the Sin Bin.

Seeing that you're around ... you can go to the PeerReview page itself, scroll down the list and find a 'remove' link in the rightmost column. Ooooor, you could leave the thread in place and see what you can do to the entry in order to make it fit to the Writing-Guidelines which tell you everything that an entry for the Edited Guide needs.

oblongomaculatus has unsubscribed so I'd say it's time to move it back to the entry...

Are you sure oblongomaculatus has unsubscribed Bossel, I've been to oblongomaculatus's personal space(U193809), and this thread still seems to be on there, in the conversation list.

Ooops! I've been there too, and I could swear the thread *wasn't* there!

'Tis there Bossel It's been two months since the entry was submitted, five weeks since the author's last post here, but only two since the author's last h2g2 post. Too early for a move back to the entry?

It doesn't eat up much space, yes. However, it needs a rather severe rewrite before it's really stuff for PR. I'd say move it back and wait for oblongomaculatus to read the guidelines and post it back once he's finished.

I bow to your superior experience in these matters. Seconded

thanks a lot, M'lord!

would you still say alternative writing is still an option