Thinking about writing a Guide Entry? Here are some thoughts for your pennies.

Have you been thinking of writing a Guide Entry – say, for the last six months/year/fifteen years – but never got around to it?

Do you have questions when you look at the Guide? They might go like this:

1. Why is the Guide's 'coverage' incomplete? For example, why are relatively 'obscure' topics covered, but not well-known ones? Isn't somebody monitoring this, and making sure we cover everything?
2. Why should anybody read the Guide, anyway? Surely there are more expert sites out there? After all, the internet's come a long way since 1999.
3. I think the Guide should have a lot of writers. Why aren't there more? What are 'they' doing to make this happen? Why aren't 'they' doing more?

Those are all good questions. I've thought about them, too. And here's my opinion.

Some Thoughts from a Guide Writer

Now, these opinions are just personal. I'm only the Post Editor. If you want an 'official' statement about 'Post policy', I'll consult with the Team, and give you this week's answer. I don't Scout, or Subedit (I might put the commas in the wrong place), or tell anybody what to do over there. I support the Guide, wholeheartedly, like everybody else here: by writing for it, cheering it on, and encouraging others to do the same.

So here are my observations:

1. Why is the Guide's 'coverage' incomplete? For example, why are relatively 'obscure' topics covered, but not well-known ones? Isn't somebody monitoring this, and making sure we cover everything?
   
   
   Hey, wait: you mean my Entry on The Holy Foreskin was too obscure? Well, I guess it wasn't exactly 'ripped from the headlines'. But I thought we weren't writing ephemera. After all, that would really be competing with all those cut-and-paste sites out there. In which case, why do it? Somebody might get something out of that Entry, besides the inevitable snigger.
   
   The obvious answer to the question is: what is 'covered' is determined by volunteer writers. You think Salieri got a bum rap as a composer? You write about him. Write well and interestingly, and it ends up in the Guide. End of story. And no, nobody's ever signed up for the thankless task of trying to assign somebody to cover, say, the causes, course, and effects of the Franco-Prussian War. Or the War of Jenkins' Ear, for that matter.
2. Why should anybody read the Guide, anyway? Surely there are more expert sites out there? After all, the internet's come a long way since 1999.
   
   Have you read those other sites? As the internet grows, so does the confusion of voices. Just look at the first couple of Google pages on any search term. Either they're trying to sell you something, or they've simply copied and pasted the same erroneous information, over and over, or…both. It's wearisome. Somebody's got to set the record straight. And it might as well be us.
   
   There is not only a place for h2g2, there's a crying need for well-researched synthesis articles that help readers sort the wheat from the chaff. Trust me on this: you're helping people you'll never meet.
3. I think the Guide should have a lot of writers. Why aren't there more? What are 'they' doing to make this happen? Why aren't 'they' doing more?
   
   
   1. You wrote your last Entry when?
   2. Have you seen this month's Create prompt? (Have you written for it?)
   3. Who is this 'they' of whom you speak? I've been in cryonic suspension. Besides, I thought this was an autonomous collective.

As you'll see, I'm so primitive, I think the Edited Guide is a peachy-keen idea. I think it's not only even more useful than it was in 1999, but it's a heck of a lot of fun to write for. I want more people to write for it. So…let's get to work:

• Encourage the writers and artists who are there by reading and commenting.
• Tell your friends: they might want to read and write, too.
• Start your next Guide Entry today.

Here Endeth the Lesson. (Meaning: Post Editor, shutting up now.)

Writing Right with Dmitri Archive

Dmitri Gheorgheni

12.01.15 Front Page

Back Issue Page