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

Entry: Graphology - The Art of Handwriting Analysis - A3537416
Author: ammcie - U1259900

Graphology - jeer at it, or swear by it?!!

Hi there ammcie - welcome to h2g2 and welcome to Peer Review!

Two things which you should always read when dealing with Peer Review are the Writing Guidelines (http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/brunel/Writing-Guidelines) and the page on English Usage (http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/brunel/SubEditors-Style), as you have to pay attention to every nitty gritty little detail

You've done well with your first entry, and it will probably just need tweaking a bit - for instance:

You shouldn't use a header just under the title of the entry - the title itself implies that the introduction will follow.

Footnotes need to be in direct contact with the word they refer to, and so they must come before punctuation.

Have fun!

Alex

Sorry - the second link was wrong - http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/brunel/SubEditors-Style

Hello ammcie! This is an excellent introduction to graphology. It has just the right combination of interest and skepticism that we are looking for in the Guide. It should have no problem getting in once it has been tidied up a bit. There are a few changes you'll have to make to fit this in with our House Style and a few missing punctuation marks.

Changes to match house style:

1. Remove the header at the very start "What is graphology". It's not needed as the title of the piece serves the same function.

2. Say 1600s rather than 1600's.

3. Punctuation in headers is not encouraged. You may get away with the question mark at the end of "What do graphologists do?" but you could rephrase it as "What Graphologists Do".

4. I'm afraid the picture will be removed when this is edited, so you might as well take it away now. But the editors may decide to put a new custom-drawn picture on it. This happens to about one in three of entries.

5. Your use of GuideML is very impressive for a first entry, but it's not quite right. Instead of using to move onto a new line, you should put at the start of each paragraph and at the end, even when there is only one paragraph in a section. This spaces the paragraphs out a bit more and looks good in all four h2g2 "skins" (ways of viewing documents).

6. Full stops (periods) at the end of sentences should appear after the footnote like this¹. The way you've done it is like this.²

7. no spaces around hyphens: self - accreditation should be self-accreditation

8. we try and avoid excessive full stops, so use 'US' instead of 'U.S.'

9. Use commas in large numbers, except in the year. So 165000 should be 165,000.

10. h2g2 uses a particular format for date. June 12 1992 should be 12 June, 1992. Note the comma after the month.


You've a few missing apostrophes and commas:

a persons character --> a person's character

the persons general happiness --> the person's general happiness

by the US police is available --> by the US police, is available

the general publics --> the general public's


Well done!

Gnomon has beaten me to it....

Good entry!

Thanks to Gnomon and Alex for the advice.

In particular, thanks for pointing out some grammatical points that I had overlooked.

The article has been duly corrected.

Good succinct little entry.

I think it could be improved by citing a couple of examples - a few key letters how they're examined and common interpretations, e.g. dotting i's, crossing t's and loops for letters liky g & y, possibly about how the subject writes on the paper (margins, slope of written lines etc.). Don't need to go overboard, but I think it might help explain what is actually being looked at.

I might try that.

The only problem is, I'm a little afraid of giving interpretations that are far too narrow.

It irritates me when I read that knots and ties indicate stubborness and that covering backstrokes mean the person is on the defensive etc.

Interpreting isolated elements of scripts like this makes little sense and can give people the wrong impression of what graphology is really about.

Still, I might be able to include something on the topic, and maybe include a health warning on the validity of looking at isolated elements.

Then you should just make it really clear that graphology is about looking at the whole rather than the parts. Examples would really help this!

This is a really interesting topic for an entry, and I think you've done a good job.

My only niggle apart from what's already been mentioned (it's a small one) is that I don't think the sub-eds want the headers and subheaders in italics.

Apart from that, it looks great, good luck!

Few small things.

No, Elentari is correct, we don't want the headers and subheaders in italics please. Also unfortunately you'll have to remove the picture. I know you probably spent ages searching for it and felt chuffed to find such a nice relevent one, but it has to go.

Also would it be worth mentioning that several samples of handwriting in different situations, eg when you're in a rush, when you're copying dictation, when you're writing from memory etc, are taken to give a wide level for analysis?

Kat

Don't get discouraged by these corrections - you've done very well for a first entry. You should have seen how many typos and stuff I had on some of my recent entries! I think if you just put the headers and subheaders in normal text, and get rid of the picture, you can wait for a scout to come along to pick it.

Or maybe Vice-Mistress Kat (scouting for you) will do it?

OK - I've got the headers sorted and the picture taken out!

Thanks for all the help everyone.

Currently working on a possible addition containing some examples and more details on what a character analysis involves.

Please bear with me though, I'm very cagey about what details I will include! Also, a little snowed under at the moment with some other projects but watch this space!

There's no rush!

You might want to include a link to this entry:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4223445.stm

It seems to suggest that graphology is as much use as phrenology.

Just bouncing this up the pile and wondering whether you want to add any more to it?

I won't be officially scouting for a few days so I can't promise anything but I'm sure a nice scout will pick this when you feel it's properly ready.

Kat

a tech clarification:

When mentioning external links in your entry, use this syntax:
...text...

I see your links in the main text:
1. Institute of Integral Handwriting Studies in the US, and
2. The British Institute of Graphologists
are not working because you have to put http:// in front of your href locations.

Also, put the POPUP="1" tag for your footnote links so that they open up in a new browser window.

overall, it is a good contribution to the h2g2!

Thanks to everyone for suggestions and comments.

I think the article is finally ready now. All the technical aspects seem to be working and I am happy that the article's approach is balanced and fair.

Here's hoping that people find it useful and interesting!

Would it be worth putting in something to the effect that graphology is considered a dangerous pseudoscience in Europe? Laws have been passed in some countries to try and prevent its use in evaluation of candidates for job applications. For example, in Germany it was common practice to insist on handwritten applications which were then sent to a graphologist for character analyssis. This procedure has now been banned. It is illegal to insist on handwritten applications.

Just a little point to everyone - we don't actually support using POPUPs as part of the LINK HREF - that's because some browsers don't accept them. Therefore, they've got to go, I'm afraid!

Just about to accept this one, though... Well done everyone!

Paully