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

Entry: The Immortals - Realms Of The Gods By Tamora Pierce - A886340
Author: Jimmy Nugget: I thought Christmas only came once a year. - U182750

This is my book review. It's supposed to be opinionated, so don't get too upset. If you think there are too many references to the author's patriotism, GET OVER IT.

I really don't think this is right for Peer Review. Book reviews are fine when it comes to Edited Status, but in order to express your opinion about it, you need to cut down the middle in terms of good and bad points. However, you don't seem to have done this. You use childish language, which borders on offensive at one point - it takes a lot to offend me, but the *grandfather* comment in the first paragraph did it quite well. If you don't like the book, fine. But if you want something to become an Edited Entry, you nned to brush up on your objectivity skills. Methinks you are just trying to hit back at an author you don't like.

"You use childish language, which borders on offensive at one point - it takes a lot to offend me, but the *grandfather* comment in the first paragraph did it quite well."

I am using this to experess how I feel about what is going on, but if you don't like it I'll find a way to accomodate both of us.

"But if you want something to become an Edited Entry, you nned to brush up on your objectivity skills."

I think you are right. I'll have a go at it.

"Methinks you are just trying to hit back at an author you don't like."

The reason this review is like this is because I'm disappointed - she"s usually good.

This review is screamingly funny in parts and I agree with your statements about Daine's age-inappropriate relationships!(Numair borders on paedophilia in places.)
In your other reviews, I feel you should have more +ve stuff...
Good work!

Am I missing something here then? I always thought that Book Reviews were meant to be an informative guide on the positive/negative aspects of the book. Which this isn't. If I had just happened on it somewhere else, it would be a different story, but it's in Peer Review, and I'm not entirely sure it should be...

Jimmy -- If you think Tamora Pierce's books are usually good, I'd suggest that you try writing an entry on something like:

1) Tamora Pierce and her books
2) The 4 books in the Daine/Immortals series

or what have you.

As it is, this entry doesn't seem to me to be enough to stand on it's own in the Edited Guide. While h2g2 is a great place to express your opinion, entries in the Edited Guide almost always contain more content than *1* person's opinions and jokes about *1* book. It's OK to be funny, but this entry reads like the whole point is to poke fun of the book.

Here are some example of entries that have made it through Peer Review and into the Edited Guide that are about books that come in series:

A292790 Terry Pratchett's Discworld
A689042 The Cherry Ames Books
A696170 The Wheel of Time - the Books
A712423 Monty Python - the Books

While at least one of the previous commenters thought your writing was quite funny, I (personally) found the style to really detract from what you were trying to say. After all, when I see someone write "(puke)" at the end of the sentence, I'm unlikely to place much weight on what else they have to say.

However, that doesn't mean that I think your entry is pointless or bad or anything like that. I just don't think it has the degree of style and content scouts are generally looking for when hunting Peer Review. Of course, another scout may well disagree with me -- who knows?

If you're interested in changing and/or expanding this entry to make it more "Edited Guide Potential", then I bet people here in Peer Review will have lots of helpful comments. My first suggestion would be to take a look at some of those links I posted of other Edited Guide entries on books -- that can give you an idea of what scouts are looking for.

Just my 2 cents...

Mikey

I would suggest putting it into the Writing Workshop!

Knew I wasn't wrong though

Mikey if you go to my space you will find that I have started a review of another Tamora Pierce book.

"As it is, this entry doesn't seem to me to be enough to stand on it's own in the Edited Guide."

What exactly do you want?

"While at least one of the previous commenters thought your writing was quite funny, I (personally) found the style to really detract from what you were trying to say. After all, when I see someone write "(puke)" at the end of the sentence, I'm unlikely to place much weight on what else they have to say."

If you like I will make some stylistic changes.

Thanks for your comments.

"What exactly do you want?"

I gave you some links of other entries to look at -- those should give you an idea of what people are looking for. Like I said -- your entry, as it stands, doesn't seem to be anything but poke fun of the book. If you want to have a whole entry about just this book, it would probably need to do things like:

1) Summarize the book
2) Summarize the contents surrounding the book -- info on the series and the author
3) Discuss the different characters in the book, and how they develop
4) Discuss the different plot-lines in the book and how they interact with each other
5) Discuss the good and bad points of the book

Mikey

And perhaps reading the Writing Guidelines for Peer Review would help too!!

"1) Summarize the book
2) Summarize the contents surrounding the book -- info on the series and the author
3) Discuss the different characters in the book, and how they develop
4) Discuss the different plot-lines in the book and how they interact with each other
5) Discuss the good and bad points of the book"

If you read it I have done 1, 2, 4, 5 and there is no character development

"And perhaps reading the Writing Guidelines for Peer Review would help too!!"

I did that you idiot and if you think it doesn't apply that's your problem.

I haven't mentioned many good points, so what does that tell you?

I'm just about to make the changes I've mentioned, And I'll add another good point.

Now you are just being rude. Don't put stuff in the Peer Review if it doesn't match up to the guidelines and you don't want people to criticise it. And don't call me names.

Better yet, grow up.

You have been being rude all along Saturnine, and I thought it matched up to the guidelines. If you don't tell me how you think it can.

What do you think of this paragraph I just added - and Saturnine, Don't get rude, if you don"t like it tell me exactly why and we'll see what we can do.

"Daine, for a start, is not the best caracter to use for a heroine. She is arrogant, selfrighteous and she expects people to know and think things that logically they shouldn't. for example, she hears people say that a (genuinely dangerous) animal is dangerous, and she gets arrogant, selfrighteous and angry, insulting those people's family and intelligence, saying "it's just misunderstood". she expects people to ignore years of experience and completely channge their views, just because one specimen of the species failed to kill Daine.

There's no one to like in this book - all the other characters are just as two-dimensional as cardboard."

I don't think I have been rude, and I also think it has been clearly laid out in the above posts what you need to do to improve the article. You are the flamer my friend...and there was no need for it. Like I said, don't put your entry straight into the Peer Review if you don't want people to criticise it.

Ever heard of *constructive* criticism? I think that I have done what is mentioned above, and you're still not happy. You want me to take out the emotive language? It's a book review.

And you didn't tell me what you thought of the paragraph.

I thought I gave you constructive criticism. It's not my problem if you get upset that I don't like the tone of the article. There was no call for you to call me an idiot, it was simple flaming and not at all mature, and considering the childish attitude of the article, I'm beginning to see a pattern here. I'll check up on the article in the future, when you've seen the light; instead of reacting without thinking.

"I thought I gave you constructive criticism."

What gave you that idea? all you are saying is that you don't like my tone, and that it's full of... Opinion!

I'm going to have to get a new dictionary, I was under the impression that book reviews were meant to be opinion pieces.

Why haven't you read and replied to the paragraph I posted above?

Right. In the above posts, it has been made clear that myself and another researcher do not think it is up to standards. The least you can do is read the posts and contemplate what we have said.

But if I have to take you through it, then fine.

One, There is nothing wrong with opinion, but there is a certain style in doing it. Your first priority in writing a h2g2 article should be to inform people. That is the merit of every Edited Entry. They all inform people. Two. The tone of the article is broken and childish. I think you should rewrite it in it's entirety, perhaps start it off with an introduction/summary of the book, moving on to giving information about the book itself, its positives and it's negatives. Just because you don't like it, it doesn't mean to say someone else didn't. It's not self-published is it? If it is, then fine. But on the whole, if it is published by a company, and is part of a series then someone out there must be reading it. Another thing could be to not insult people that like it, or insult the characters. Instead of writing some half-ditch insult about *grandfathers*, try making a sentence out of it and saying something like "The author has a tendency to make relationships out of the impossible, and indulges in the cliche of an older man-younger woman fantasy"...h2g2 is an open place, and non-discriminative. People out there in real life may have a relationship with a much older partner. Making comments like that just exposes pretty distasteful personal opinions, or at least makes you look as if you do.

What else. Try including some more factual information. List the main characters and their role in the book, the background to the story - setting, history, timespace. List the previously written books by the author. What the author is doing now. Any other information about the author and publishing house that might be relevant and open up the article to other articles.

But most of all, try and lose the childish tone. Be objective - you can still hold an opinion and be outside the world of snide comments.

Is that *constructive* enough for you? I have a review article up in the Peer Review myself. I believe I have done my best to present an objective and informative view. And I await an apology for being called an *idiot*...