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

How do we authors in PR get around the fact that a relatively-short PR thread on an entry - which was ignored (or just not posted to) by an author - and it wasn't just spelling, it was content, so this doesn't count:

<>

What are we supposed to think?
It blatently should have gone to the Flea Market, instead it's gone and landed on the desk of a poor sub-ed with a very loud THUD. I have had sub-eds say to me that they like getting my entries because there's so little to do except add links and check guidelines and facts
so I feel sorry for a sub who not only has to check everything but practically has to rewrite the whole entry, which should be the ob of the author.

A quick peruse of the PR thread by the Scout BEFORE the button was pressed would have given them the clue that it wasn't ready and should be left alone in case the author returned to deal with the issues raised.
On another thread this was brought up and it was defended by another, well-respected researcher who said "this should happen more" and I was speechless.

It smacks of favouritsm when something like that slips by, almost unnoticed and it would have hit the front page with no-one knowing but for this forum - and now I know others' aggrievances I can feel secure speaking my mind too, without risking being cold-shouldered by them in PR.

I'm grateful for this opportunity and if anyone's toes get trodden on then I'm sorry, we're talking PR here, not personalities, I didn't rise to the bait when someone said earlier about posting long lists of spelling errors when they should be guided towards a spell-checker, because that could have been anyone, not just me.

But, a spell-checker wouldn't have solved all the problems in the Gym entry which hit the FP with more than 20 errors, most of them were spelled correctly, but the grammar was wrong.

Re: Scouts.

Couldn't we solve that problem by asking it to be put in the Scouting guidelines

"Do not accept entries for recommendation until at least one person other than the author has posted that it is ready for subbing"



or is that too simple?
or does it already state that, and it's ignored?

There's another issue with the editing process - when Subs return entries we can type into the same box as the Scouts do when they pick. This text isn't read by the italics - and never has been.

Way back in 2001 I returned something unsubbed because I didn't think it should have got picked - and I said so in this little box. It still arrived on the Front Page with my name on it.

Having worked there, I'd seen that Eds don't seem to click to bring up that box, and I'm pretty sure I remember Anna 'coming across' that link when I first worked there (although that could have been something else).

Yes, no-one else can know this, as with how long Scouts picks wait before being dealt with, but that's the point of this thread I hope - to clear up anything that might be going wrong, and make sure people know how the system works.

I've seen entries that need a little work picked because it's so nearly there that the Eds don't want to lose it - they can't guarentee that it will be rescued from FM. However, as far as I can see, if they made the decision to let it go through, the responsibility for it appearing on the Front Page error-free does lie with them, not the Scout who picked it or the Sub who Subbed it - especially if it's grammer - we have subs who don't live in England and for who English is a foreign language. That's not an excuse of course, but it's worth bearing in mind we're all volunteers - except the Eds who are professionals.

Choosing Entries to Recommend

You can recommend any entry from Peer Review that:

* Has had a good response from the Community
* Isn't still being worked on by the author


It's implicit in these two I think Annie.

'On another thread this was brought up and it was defended by another, well-respected researcher who said "this should happen more" and I was speechless.'

Yes, I saw this as well; and I was also speechless. Wasn't sure that I'd interpreted it correctly, so left it without saying anything.

Thank you for clarifying that (first post) and I know you're all volunteers, the authors are, first and foremost, and if we decide not to write any more (which I am currently agonizing over) because of the stuff going on I don't understand - hopefully I'm getting my point across if not to save me then for other authors who follow.

Like I said earlier, this is not aimed at anyone in particular and thank you for coming back, you of all people can give excellent input here because you've been both sides of the wall.

Your last post, now I'm more sure than ever that a third implicit guideline should be added.

*Do not accept entries for recommendation until at least one person other than the author has posted that it is ready for subbing*

Does that seem fair to you? What about everyone else? I don't mean Scouts posting to the thread, I mean anyone who has been active in the thread itself.



If the Pirates & Piracy entry was so good that eds didn't want to lose it to the Flea Market, why didn't one of them Flea Market it and work on it themselves? Because when it hits the FP, I'm going to weep with frustration, it knocked the stuffing out of me when I think of all the hard work (and time spent) authors and reviewers do to get entries up to scratch, and then something like that got recommended.

BigAl we simposted - when I am saying "you" in my post I am talking directly to Ideno, in response to her posts 103 and 104; not you, and thank you for saying that, I'm glad it wasn't just me.

Ideno, thanks for that nugget of info! I'd second Annie's suggestion of an addition to which entries could/should be picked.

As for not wanting to lose good entries to the FM - I had a look there and rescued something myself (currently working on it). I'm sure something nearly ready to fly wouldn't sit there gathering dust.

Especially in the current climate - I really think a rigorous application of the rules should apply.

Yep, I realised that Annie

Thanks

There should be an smiley

Re something else you said Idekino (sorry I got your name wrong earlier)

"Way back in 2001 I returned something unsubbed because I didn't think it should have got picked - and I said so in this little box. It still arrived on the Front Page with my name on it"

This didn't happen in the case of the Gym entry because I checked the threads
and the sub-ed posted on the authors PS asking for it to be read through and then said they were sending it off.

I have posted these links elsewhere but I can find them if required. It's always difficult to complain about these things because we're all volunteers, but if the writers are put off by the breakdown of a (what I once thought was fair) process, then the whole thing is going to collapse like a pack of cards.

Oh well done Sho!

Sorry about that - missed your posting - a Sho sandwich, almost makes me want my lunch

What would be the purpose of not accepting an entry until at least one additional person had said that the entry is ready to be sub-edited?

I don't get it.

"One" person other than the author.

because it seems that you're "not allowed" to trumpet your own entry as ready...

and we have had entries picked which are still the subject of PR discussion (ie. not ripe)

so if one person, other than the author says "this one is ok" then it should be basically clear...

Firstly it's not in the author's gift to say that an entry is pickable. They can say that there is 1) more to do, 2) they *think* that it's ready, 3) taken it as far as they can take it. But that's a side issue to be honest.

What I don't get is the need for this other person to come along and say that the entry is pickable. A Scout makes that decision and acts upon it. We don't need a referee to get involved in that decision. The referee, if there is one, are the Eds who either agree (in which case it starts on its way to the EG) or disagree (in which case the PR thread carries on as if no pick has ever been made) with a Scouts pick.

>>There's another issue with the editing process - when Subs return entries we can type into the same box as the Scouts do when they pick. This text isn't read by the italics - and never has been.<<

Didn't know that.

Well, there you are - contrary to what I said earlier it appears that Subs couldn't 'throw things back' anyway, because when they do the comment doesn't get read and the Entry ends up FP anyway.

>>There's another issue with the editing process - when Subs return entries we can type into the same box as the Scouts do when they pick. This text isn't read by the italics - and never has been.<<

hmm I recall in my scouting days sending off items, then receiving an email back fom the Eds and quite often one Mr P (Paully) would add a little note - sometimes saying something as simple as 'nice pick' or I recall him noting, 'great pick, I noticed this one too!'.

So I think perhaps they are *read* at times, but maybe not acted upon in all instances...

Of course, there only being the three (and now 2) of them big wigs, there are going to be times when things slip through the net. I think Jimsters human...can anyone clarify that?

"I think Jimsters human...can anyone clarify that? "

He is, either that or he's a human form Replicator

They are read when dealing with Scouts, but when returned by the Sub there's a separate link that needs to be clicked to bring the box up.

I probably shouldn't make statements like 'no-one ever reads it' when maybe people do, but I've never seen it and when shown how to use editorial tools, it's not one I've ever been shown. I just clicked it cos I was nosy.