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

I'm subscribed to PR out of a sense of duty. I admit I hardly do any actually reviewing, partly because of laziness and partly because I can't offer any good advice. But my subbing means I do notice the rather large number of entries that are obviously not EG-worthy. Some might be poems, personal pieces, rants, or just plain nonsense.

It took me ages to brave PR because I had read carefully what was required and I didn't want my entry shot down in flames. But it seems like most people don't bother. Is it really clear enough about what is required? I would say yes, but are there any suggestions for trimming PR down to relevant entries?

I think we need a bit of clarity from reviewers in PR to be honest. One nonsense piece prompted this reply:

Traveller in Time tit thinking
"Have you read the page above < PeerReview > ?

I think the best for now is clicking the little x next to your name in the listing under the page. "

Now I can't understand TiT half the time, so what chance has a new researcher got? It's little bits of h2g2 quirkyness like this that serve no purpose other than to confuse people. Fine for Ask and Misc, but not PR!

(You should really post that on his PS rather than a public forum, Psycorp.)

It's the Scouts who look after the Peer Review forum, including posting helpful advice to the misguided submissions (to be as polite as I can about them). They also clear out the inappropriate entries regularly, communicating with the Editors via the Scouts forum.

It's very important not to discourage writers - however dreadful their submissions are - they may have simply misunderstood how the site works, and posted something into PR which was intended for their journal.

I must rethink my ACE message. Rather than putting newbies onto the 'path of enlightenment'.. it seems I must now be more pointed in my advice.

One of my concerns - in Brunel - is that on the left of the page we have some help and advice boxes. They are fine and dandy, until you notice 'Write and Entry' is directly above the 'Peer Review' box. What is a curious newbie to do? They 'press the button'!

A lot of this is probably done before an <./>ACE</.> has managed to get there.

lil xx

It wasn't an outright criticism of him, just an example of how what we seasoned hootooers take for granted can discourage and baffle newbies.

One of the latest contributors has been on the site longer than me, Lil. I've never read such rap in my life. (must get that keyboard fixed)

Traveller in Time on his head
"Well, this is not really a new researcher, they have removed other entries from Peer Review before, also quite unfitting.

I think the best policy is at least not to start a discussion about the topic of the entry (if there is any). The reason to drop something in a Review forum, knowing it is in the wrong place, is to start a dsicussion or to draw attention to the subject. "

"I think the best policy is at least not to start a discussion about the topic of the entry (if there is any)."

I disagree with you there. If we identify with the subject matter, then we can suggest improvements, changes, or the appropriate forum for it to be moved to. For someone who's not as involved in the wider community as the people posting here, which of these examples is more likely to provoke a positive response?

a) Wrong forum. Read the guidelines. Remove this by pressing x.

B) Hey (researcher). Your poem's not bad, but it's all in capitals which isn't really fitting with the h2g2 style. Anyway, Peer Review's not really the right place for it, but the guys in the Underguide will love it. If you remove this from PR and stick it in the EGWW, we should be able to find a place in the guide for it.

"the guys in the Underguide will love it. If you remove this from PR and stick it in the EGWW, we should be able to find a place in the guide for it."

Thats a no-no. No point raising their expectations. The Underguide has high standards too.

Well you get my point. Change the "will" to "might, with a bit of work". Better than fobbing them off.

I just think we need to encourage people!

Yes, I get the point

but if they're a newbie they might be more confused by answer B

I'm guilty

I haven't been in PR for ages, let alone commented on an entry and I certainly haven't written for yonks.

But I am still of the opinion that we shouldn't go out of our way to be extra nice and fluffy when an obviously non-EG-worty entry lands in PR.

I know that I appreciate honesty and upfrontness, and I'm sure I'm not alone.

Imagine. You're a newbie, you write your poem (in the first person, for good measure) in capitals and put it in PR.

scenario A
someone comes along and tells you it's the wrong forum and that you should probably review the EG guidlines then think about where to post it.

outcome: maybe a little miffed, but learning by doing is always beneficial IMO

scenarion B
someone comes along and tells you that first person isn't EG-worthy. Then someone(maybe the same person) mentions that all caps isn't EG-Worthy. Maybe a third (but maybe the same person) researcher comes along and says that poetry would be better in X-forum.

outcome:
poet changes the first person references, takes it out of caps and then realises that it should have been somewhere else all along. Depending on time available/internet access (not to mention patience) they go elsewhere (not on h2g2) or they go to where they should have been sent in the first place.

To answer the original question: I don't think the guide lines are hard to understand, but you assume people have read them before submitting their scribblings to PR - and I'd guess that most newbiews haven't done so. They are new to the site. They see, as lil pointed out, a 'write an entry' button. They click it, write what they want to discuss, get answered, etc, then update. Then they see a huge 'Submit Entry' button. They click that - and who can really be surprised they choose Peer Review as the forum to submit their article to? It's the only forum that implies that reviewing in some form will take place, because it has 'review' in its name. None of the other forums have.

B'el makes a good point.

"The reason to drop something in a Review forum, knowing it is in the wrong place, is to start a dsicussion or to draw attention to the subject."

Well, sometimes, I've found that it's more effective to actually read their piece, comment on it, and then ask them politely to remove it and suggest another place to put it. I can remember one specific example where a newbie was being difficult and irritating to people who tried to give him the bum's rush, and I talked a bit about the content and then asked him to move it, and he responded much more positively.

The name Peer Review itself doesn't suggest anything about nonfiction, by the way. Peers could review poetry or fiction or whatever. That's something I might be confused by if I was a newbie. The Writing Guidelines (which need an overhaul, by the way) are not really a part of the natural path of a newbie, as B'el points out. I doubt if I read them before I submitted my first entry.

Sometimes the poetry (or whatever) is quite good by the way.
But when the UG started in '03, we had problems with scouts telling newbies that they were sure the UnderGuide would be interested in their depressive rants or unintelligible poems. If it's a piece of crap, don't refer them to the UG or, I would think, . Don't even refer them to the AWW - we don't want to unclutter PR at the expense of cluttering the AWW.

I think it's okay to show a little patience with newbies, though. Am I the only one who really isn't bothered by their submissions in the slightest? I'm perfectly capable of thinking "I was there once" and helping them, or just simply ignoring them. We should really approach these conversations with a goal of helping the newbies, rather than just making sure that PR doesn't have a few unsuitable entries. In the long run, a little clutter means absolutely nothing.

But it does say in bold type on the 'Submit for Review' page:
"Please read the Review Forums FAQ and Writing Guidelines before using this form, so you can pick the correct Review Forum"
It can get a little tiresome that no one bothers to do so. Though I do agree we shouldn't discourage new writers.

"If it's a piece of crap,"

That's a little subjective. In some cases it's obvious, but I don't think the quality is the issue. What's the point in submitting polished, finished, superb pieces to the AWW? It's a 'workshop', after all, where people can get constructive feedback. So I would say 'cluttering' a review forum means filling it with pieces that don't belong there, rather than filling it with poor-quality pieces.

And I'd say the Writing Guidelines are fairly effective for the newbie. When I first came to the site, I spent a fair while clicking around and getting to know the place, then thought I'd have a go at this EG lark. I read the guidelines and combined that with what I knew entries should be like from the ones I had read. The PR conversation for my first entry was three 'dots' long, and I don't think any of the changes needed were wholesale.

I don't think anyone is advocating saying "it's a piece of crap, bugger off newbie and let us run the guide"

I just think that we could be firm without being nasty.

I don't know how much I believe in ways of dividing people up, but there is this theory that people tend towards being right-brained or left-brained. A charactertistic of right-brained being learning by doing, not by reading manuals, and a chacteristic of being left-brained is reading manuals to learn.

If there's truth in it, impetuous PR posters aren't necessarily being provocative, just following their way of learning how things work.

I try to read manuals and instructions but find it extremely difficult to take them in until after I've had a go at whatever it is.

Weird, and maybe off topic, except I do think the left/right learning patterns are part of why people jump straight into workshops.

In this http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,22556281-661,00.html I cannot see the dancer turn anything but clockwise, can't even see it as possible, unless I look way to her left. Then she does but switches back to clockwise within a half-turn if I look straight at her.

I can only see her going clockwise