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

Excuse me, but I made a pretty simple request that an entry of mine be reviewed, and asked that any flaws be pointed out.

That part I got, thank you.

What I then asked was a ruling on whether the subject is for some sane reason forbidden.

That, I didn't get.

What I got was a note that other similar entries did not get in the EG. My response was, 'What kind of reasoning is that?'

Many subjects have multiple non-EG entries, sometimes because nobody submitted them to PR, and sometimes because they failed in PR for reasons like length, not following the Writing Guidelines, or because they were considered a forbidden topic.

My entry does not fail on any of these counts. The fact that nobody else wrote a cogent entry on the Ultimate Question is no reason to claim or assume that mine does not meet the current standards.

Do we researchers not deserve the kindness of a conversation when we have these concerns, instead of a summary dismissal?

FordsTowel

BTW:

I decided to do a complete re-write of the entry, to simplify and distill the vocabulary and subject matter.

FordsTowel

I just noticed that my entry has been 'hidden' and is scheduled to be 'moderated'.

Thank you for the quick response!

I look forward to hearing back from you, because there has been no suggestion that anything I've done on h2g2 for the last eight years has broken any 'House Rule'.

[I did, early on, violate a writing guideline or two, until I understood them better; like writing in the first person!]

FordsTowel

Dear Fords, sorry for the delayed reply! We simply do no have the time or resources to engage in lengthy point-for-point discussions on Entries that people write. We have given you our feedback. We recognise that you are a long-standing and very important member of the h2g2 Community and it pains us to think that you are so upset about all this. The Entry as is (or was) is just too dense and esoteric in its tone right now to make much sense to the non-Hitchhiker fan and, equally important, to the casual non-signed in reader of h2g2. It is our Editorial opinion that it crosses the line that separates an easy-to-understand factual Entry about The Hithchiker's Guide To The Galaxy and one that strays into fandom.

However, we also recognise that you have made an attempt at re-writing it and we look forward to seeing that.

By the way, can you show us the url of the Entry that you say is currently hidden?

All the best,

h2g2Editors

As always, thank you for the response.

Yes, I'd come to realise that the entry was too dense. I had a marvelous discussion with someone who mentioned being bogged down by all the 'big words'.

Obviously, I would want to write for my audience. That is why I re-wrote the entry in its entirety just before it became hidden:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/A65950257

Now I'm not sure if it was, perhaps, Yikesed?

I had thought there may be copyright concerns, but I was careful not to use any more in quotes than was required to make the reference, and broke even them up with text of my own so as not to provide a continuous quote.

I feel it should receive another peek, if just to let me know whether I messed something up.

I think my problem all along isn't that there wasn't a point-by-point discussion of what was wrong, but that nobody was able to point out a point to discuss. All the objections I've read were some version of 'I didn't like it, and don't think anyone would want to read it'. I could site at least 20 entries like that which are not to my taste; but I wouldn't kick them from the guide.

I see this as being a site that would welcome people of all interests, not just for those who agree with the thinking of a vocal few.

Thanks again for the personal attention. I'll wait to see what happens next. It may be my 'Last Chance to See'!

FordsTowel