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

I for one would really love to understand this question. I'm sure it can't be a trade secret?

I'm curious as to why Worlds Best Beaches, written in 1999 is coming in at number 15 in Googles results? I had a look at the source code and it definitely has a no-follow tag. I'm perplexed. and on that note, have to go to sleep

As fascinating as all this is, it doesn't seem to have much to do with encouraging writing.

Isn't that what this thread was started for?

Well, yes.

But it's relevant.

1. We need more people, so more people will write. For that, they'll have to find the site.

2. Several current members have said that they find it discouraging that nobody seems to read their entries. Making them more findable would change that, too.

Of course it is relevent. But this discussion in itself is becoming slightly clique-ish. I just found that slightly ironic.

Even the way the question is framed makes me wonder: Peer Review is part of the process. It's a review forum. A critique forum. It's not an end in itself.

"What can we do to improve Peer Review?"

Encourage people to write, that's what. Encourage people (people who know what they speak of) to point out errors.

And encourage people to point out what's working, too, rather than just generally saying they like something. I find that much harder to do.

I do feel that that is worth repeating. Peer Review is part of the process that makes good Entries. It isn't an end in itself.

I remember a discussion some time ago when people were talking about how to make Peer Review harder to find, because there were too many newcomers submitting things. Perhaps it was when the Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy movie came out - perhaps not - and people felt that Peer Review needed to be defended from these newcomers.

No, no, no. Look where that's got us. With an empty Peer Review.

I certainly don't remember that!

Well, it happened.

But you're right, improving PR is only one step along the way.

People certainly suggested hiding Peer Review. But it wasn't done. We welcomed those people with their two line entries, and some of them stayed and wrote longer ones.

To me, it just means that it's not being made obvious enough what PR is for and what we expect. I doubt most of them were trying to be disruptive.

Doesn't matter how many explanations you post, some people just won't read them, so it's better to put up with the entries that don't fit than miss out.

Also last few times I ventured into PR there were a lot of people saying 'not suitable, please remove it' or worse 'look, I've rewritten it for you' and hardly anyone saying 'not quite what we're looking for, but here are some suggestions to get it going in the right direction'.

I stopped writing because even though PR is mostly EMPTY entries that were ready, or didn't need much work were being ignored for over a month. What's that all about? It's not just me either, I saw it with other Researchers. I can understand it when there were a lot of entries needing help, but otherwise everyone seems to pile into a few threads and everything else can be ignored.

Also with it being cleared out so often I'm not sure that's entirely a good thing.

Entries only get cleared out if they are there for two or three months with nothing happening on them and the owner has disappeared. That's not a bad thing, surely?

I don't make suggestions in peer review anymore because when I make suggestions, the authors either get really cross and insulting or just ignore my suggestions. But when I did, I never told anybody that they should remove an entry, unless it was completely impossible to make the entry suitable.

Post 181: Jordan said: "Wanted to actually recruit new members to the site, but that was roundly ignored, so much so that Alex didn't include it on his list of ideas."

I did say:

...followed by the idea of advertising h2g2 somehow (without spamming!)

I was only summarising - we're not deleting the thread as we go

Anyhow, the way I'm thinking about the problem is in terms of making numerous small improvements to the way things are on the site, rather than just fiddling with Peer Review, which as King Bomba rightly pointed out is "not an end in itself".

How well Peer Review is doing and the number of new authors on the Front Page can be used to measure the need for change. What we need is to work out what sorts of changes we can make, beyond simply being nicer to people and working harder. So far, though there haven't been tens of different people posting here, we've been coming up with some interesting ideas. Thanks to everyone who's contributed so far

I wrote two articles in The Post recently on how to write Entries:

A51213449 discussed a type of collaborative entry (in this case about the colour Purple)

A47515133 was how to write a simple Entry in about 30 minutes (in this case about talking to cats)

I hoped that these would encourage other people to try their hand, but I don't know whether they succeeeded. Is suspect not.

Not every entry can be written in 30 minutes...

This is true. But some can. And if people realised this, they might be less scared of writing an Entry.

Indeed, and it's often these shorter pieces, about totally random subjects, that I find the most interesting to read.

I enjoy reading the light-hearted stuff, as well.

For what it's worth (not much, I'll bet), it usually takes me about 5 hours to write an EG entry, research included. So it's a matter of finding the time.

I am gratified to find that my entries pop up on Google - often on the very first page. (This is useful at job interviews in rooms with computers in them.)

Having been raised on the Dewey Decimal System, I find the idea of NOT separating fact from fiction frankly appalling. That should contravene laws of the European Court, or something. The web is unreliable enough - don't do that to the schoolchildren who are using your guide entry to write a paper.