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

Entry: The Iliad of Homer - A680753
Author: Saint Vidmaster, ACE, Champion of Light, Life and Love, Patron Saint of Dreams - U185266

It seems I was a little to eager to process this entry for the Edited Guide. So in the spirit of h2g2, I'm resubmitting the entry to Peer Review.

The old Conversation can be found here: F82386?thread=194062

Apologies for any inconvenience caused and many thanks for all the sterling work.

The comments I made in the previous thread still apply:

This is a discussion of the Iliad in terms of Homer and Heroism. What it should be is an introduction to the Iliad for beginners, with a discussion of Homer and Heroism later on. So it needs a good introduction with a description of the three books about the Trojan War (Iliad, Odyssey and Aeneid) and where this one fits in.

Another problem is that it reads like extracts from two different essays paraphrased, rather than one unified argument.

The author should answer these criticisms, either to say they are valid, in which case he should do something about them, or to say they are not valid, and to say why.

I agree with Gnomon. If i see an entry titled "The Iliad of Homer" I expect to read a plot synopsis, at the very least. You should explain what happens in the story and why, and why it's important.

surely The Odyssey and most particularly The Aenaeid (which, though it may deal with Troy, is really separate from Homer's Iliad. I mean, it's not even in the same language!



I haven't re-read this piece since commenting in the earlier thread, though. Has it changed?

Apparently, the author is actually working offline on all the suggestions from the other thread. So perhaps we should wait until he has published those changes.

Aha, just caught up with the end of the other thread, so i see what's goin' on.

As far as the question of whether this one could have been 'finished off' in the subbing and in-house checking process, I for one think that in this case it may well have resulted in quite big differences between what the researcher submitted (and believed to have been accepted) and the finished article.

This can be disappointing and/or frustrating for some writers when they see 'their' work on the front page only to click on it and find something barely recognisable as their own work.

just thinking out loud (well, 'virtually' )