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

On the h2g2 Front Page you'll find a quote from our late founder, Douglas Adams:

"A collaborative guide, one that was written and kept up to date by the people who used it, in real time, might be a neat idea. I just didn't really realise that such a thing might be possible in my lifetime or how powerful such a thing might be."

There's a strapline that follows:

"A place to share knowledge and celebrate the things you love by writing about them."

* * *

Leaving aside for a moment the technology that implements this idea (it's our servant, not our master), is this idea still sound, and are there people out there who will still want to collaborate?

And where do they live?


Please share your thoughts and ideas.

"A place to share knowledge and celebrate the things you love by writing about them."

That is why I like it here

Ditto

When we had a large participating community, I'd agree. The trouble is what it's become.

Writing for the Edited Guide these days is a bit like wetting yourself while wearing a dark suit. You get a pleasantly warm feeling for a little while, but nobody's ever going to notice what you've done.

The question is who do we write for? I've always written for myself and don't imagine that the rest of the world is desperate to learn about, say, the post boxes on the Isle of Wight, but enjoy being able to do so in such a way that I know that a few people will read it.

I do often wonder what the stats actually are, and how many people read an entry when it is on the front page compared to when it is in Peer Review. Most of the time I read entries when they are in Peer Review.

<BB<

Yes indeed - I also write for myself and if anyone else is interested, that is a bonus.

It would be good to know the Analytics, but from what I see on Facebook, Entries are generally noticed by hundreds of people, if not thousands, which is not bad... Better than my essay, which had previously only been read by my lecturer and me until I unleashed it on an unsuspecting h2g2

It would be interesting, also it reward established authors and encourage new entries.

~ ~

I write for Arthur.

I wrote my recipe entries for the millions of people who might want delicious one-pot meals at reasonable levels of expense and effort. I realize that I'm in competition with professionals like Martha Stewart and The frugal Gourmet, but it's unlikely that they have such limited equipment as I have. If I can do it with simple means, maybe others can, too.

I like your recipes "from the real world" the Tuscan Vegetable Soup is brilliant and serves as an example that we do not know who is reading what.

I have written entries on subjects that I enjoy, and for the challenge. Also because it prods me into doing research. A lot of research as, being OCD about these things, I want it to include everything on the subject. This is why it takes me so long to write them.

Unfortunately life, in the form of my Mum's dementia, my truly wonderful girlfriend, and trips to the Big and Little houses for both Mum, and myself have seriously curtailed writing entries, but I hope to ne back in the yoke next year as I miss it.

Plus, hopefully, I'll have access to all my natural history books, so I can get on with Gandalf's Twin's entries on Sea Birds, plus get typed up the (very long) entry on Raleigh bicycles - The Company.



MMF

When I was a Guide Editor we had a program which told us which were the most popular entries with the readers. My collaborative entry "Animal Sex" was top of the list by far but then we realised that while lots of people searched for it, most only stayed lokking at it for less than a second. They were actually looking for a different sort of page.

We were told not to reveal figures for popularity of entries but I can say that topical entries and recipes were always very popular, which is drive behind the Create section of the front page.

I think that Douglas Adams's basic idea was and is quite sound.

~ I'll drink to that. . . . .. ...

ok then, so if h2g2 had never existed, how would you implement that idea today?

Well, Wikipedia and Tripadvisor seem to do quite well what he had in mind, if not in quite such a witty way.

On this subject once before, I linked to a wiki article explaining the word "pear-shaped" - it was just like an h2g2 entry should be. If you look at it today, it's completely changed - stripped down to the bare essentials. Shame. It's worth browsing through some of the older versions.

There used to be a page on Wikipedia that encouraged h2g2 authors to enter articles there. With their current policy of 'no original content' I am glad I never submitted anything.

>"A place to share knowledge and celebrate the things you love by writing about them."

One of the main things that has made me reluctant to submit more Entries into Peer Review is the current focus on length. I have several Entries about thing I love that are split into two, or more Entries, but, in my opinion, cover the topic in a more enjoyable and complete way than most other Web articles on the subject I don't know how many readers I have drawn here, but surely the more hits we get on a Web browser the more people we get to at least look at the site, and some of them may want to join. That is how I got here



F S

Traveller in Time trying to compare
"Wiki aims for perfection, something 'we' dropped before(?) the first entries.

This site always feels more like a melting pot, a complete complex research university. Not only are there the most serious places to study. Also a large section is just for experimentation and practice with no other goal then to enjoy/learn from the experience.

Janitors keep an eye on the students living in the dormitory and gently help them to find their ways in the complex society . Even if the only thing they want to find is the party. Or the statues of the passed for a yearly remembrance service. "

What's the issue of length, FS?