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

Exactly!

There's no reason you can't say something needs changing without deliberately upsetting people.

People who can't take *any* kind of criticism - even if it's constructive - shouldn't go into PR.

Maybe we need a "how to review an entry" entry to go alongside the "how to write an entry" entry?

Good idea - the little note on the PR page appears insufficient.

It will have to be collaborative, of course.

Of course!

Oh goody - something else to argue about !

New thread for collecting ideas?

Oddly enough, once upon a time, I had a play with the Guidelines. One of the themes that comes in is a Reviewer-oriented reworking: A693515.

It never got finished, and I kind of gave up on the idea of a critical mass of Researchers agreeing with it.

Any use/interest?

That's for entries, though, not how to comment in PR!

Yeah - I always meant to query that piece with you Pin - surely advertising copy-writers are lower than journalists ?

Adverising copy-writers are redeemed somewhat by the fact that they secretly know they're tawdry little whores.
Hacks, on the other hand, suffer from the appalling delusion that they're somehow champions of justice and guardians of the public interest.

It's a bit like the way that night club bouncers are slightly more human than policemen.

"Adverising copy-writers are redeemed somewhat by the fact that they secretly know they're tawdry little whores."

Cheers Pin.

Psycorp, I'm sorry. I had no idea you were a tawdry little whore. Tell you what, you may delete one adjective of your choice. Can't say fairer than that...

...maybe time to get back on topic, yeah?

As this is a thread that's drifted through many topics, and under the circumstances, I feel that's a tad out of order.

I think I misread the manner in which '...maybe time to get back on topic, yeah?' was intended. Sorry if that was the case.

No offence intended, Roymondo

To be clear, it was no more than an acknowledgement that I'd taken us off-topic, and that maybe we ought to get back.

And I hope Psycorp isn't too insulted by being either tawdry or little, but not both.

...Oh b*gger. Off topic again...

Is it possible for an advertising copywriter to be insulted?*



*those that know what I do for a living would probably say the same of me.

On topic: Skankyrich legitimately called me on something I said about the 'Where are you going to put this entry' options. He's right, the options are clear. I think, in retrospect, I was framing something bigger in the context of the options available.

Having pondered what I really feel I reckon it would be good to have a 'What sort of entry are you writing' option [i]before[/i] writing the entry, asking if it's for the EG or if it's something more personal/creative, with an 'I'll decide later' option, and disabled for journal entries.

How big a problem *is* it really, though, that unsuitable writing goes into PR? Yes it happens, yes, it can be a nuisance. But really, though, it is a minor irritation. It doesn't do any harm to the Guide or the site as a whole unless they slip through into the Edited Guide, which should never happen.

It's something that's always happened, and I think it always will, no matter what technical tweaks are made to try and prevent it.

Can I just point out that I already knew Psycorp was a tawdry little whore.

I had no idea he was an advertising copy-writer, mind you.

B