| 
Posted Jun 29, 2001 by King and Cripple
don't post if you're not trying to get the article into the edited guide entry. This is an obvious attempt to be humorous, but it didn't work...be respectful
|
 
|  | |
| |
Posted Jun 29, 2001 by Aaron O'Keefe the anti-pajama man (ACE)
have you read the post on biowar. . .nothing about it is humorous. . especially to a man like myself who is on the recieving end...as I am an infantry officer. .. I understand the intro might be a little sarcastic but the body isn't. . .don't jusdge the article my friend, until you have read it. Check the references and the facts. .. it is true and honest. . and I am offering it to the peer group to judge.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jun 29, 2001 by Galaxy Babe
I'm sorry.
Have you read the http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/writing-guidelines ?
Your entry is in the first person.
You also posted here in the incorrect format.
~AGB~
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jun 29, 2001 by Aaron O'Keefe the anti-pajama man (ACE)
wait a minute king.... not even the intro is funny. . .read the article before you reply.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jun 29, 2001 by Aaron O'Keefe the anti-pajama man (ACE)
I can understand if I posted in the wrong format. . this is a subject I am passionate about. . .and errors can occur. . being that I am a proud US Army infantryman. . .what I seek is peer review to make this article a guide entry. . .I don't need links and I don't need postings from someone who hasn't read the article. . I need true and honest input. . .can anyone help.
Aaron
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jun 30, 2001 by King and Cripple
True. I was out of hand and over the deep end. Sorry. Had I read I would have seen it was not humorous at all, sorry.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jun 30, 2001 by King and Cripple
True. I was out of hand and over the deep end. Sorry. Had I read I would have seen it was not humorous at all, sorry.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jun 30, 2001 by Mycroft
There are a couple of errors in your article. Firstly, Sarin is a nerve gas and therefore a chemical weapon, not a biological one. Secondly, your concern about a tourist contracting the plague in China and bringing it back home may be technically valid, but it's also misplaced: plague can be found in many areas of the US and on average there are 10-20 confirmed cases of infection in humans every year.
I also think you've editorialized far more than is necessary: I doubt you'll find anyone who seriously thinks biological weapons are a good idea, and the facts on this subject pretty much speak for themselves.
Speaking of facts, the article could do with a few more. The 14th Century incident you describe towards the beginning of the piece is the siege of Caffa in 1347 by the Mongols. The defenders were Genoese, and when they sailed back to Genoa they took the plague with them, thereby causing the Black Death which killed roughly one third of Europe's population. If there was every a cautionary tale about the pitfalls of biological warfare then this is it.
There's also the 1763 case of British soldiers giving blankets infected with smallpox to Native Americans, as previous unintentional outbreaks had proved devastating (95% mortality).
I also think it's a little unfair to single out China and the Soviet Union. Churchill and Roosevelt had a hefty stockpile of anthrax ready to drop on Berlin in 1945 and it would've been used had the war not ended. Testing began in 1942 on Gruinard Island in Scotland which was subsequently the source of anthrax outbreaks in cattle on the mainland. The island was then torched, which stopped the disease becoming airborne, but the disease was found to still be present in the earth, so the island was quarantined. It would have taken until around 2050 for the disease to dissipate naturally, but in the end the quarantine was lifted in 1989 and the problem resolved by the simple expedient of injecting 50 litres of dilute formaldehyde into every square metre of land.
Then there are the test sprayings of 'harmless' biological agents carried out in Britain and the US throughout the 1950s and 1960s in isolated places like the London Underground and the New York Subway by the good people of Porton Down and Fort Detrick respectively. Needless to say, such tests coincide with a variety of mysterious increases in ailments/miscarriages/deaths, etc.
Obviously other countries have been engaged in this sort of thing too, but I haven't read about that stuff yet  . One I have read about, however, is the former regime in South Africa's unsuccessful research into biological agents to which white people would be immune. This is one of the more alarming developments, as it seeks to disprove your belief (and everyone else's until recently) that biological weapons have no loyalty and know no bounds. Thanks to advances in genetics, targeting biological weapons is going to be a real possibility within a decade or so.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jun 30, 2001 by Galaxy Babe
I did read your entry.
Unfortunately it will not be considered for inclusion in the guide unless you alter it from first person to third person.
Again, I suggest you read the http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/writing-guidelines.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jun 30, 2001 by Mina - Older on the outside, inside still 14
Not only is this thread in the wrong format, but it is in the wrong place. The contribute page states
"Peer Review: If you've written something that you're really proud of and think it would make an excellent Edited Guide Entry, then you should put it up for Peer Review. Don't be afraid to air your compositions here, as it's a really friendly place to talk about what Researchers have been working on, but if you'd rather get others to help you put the finishing touches to your masterpiece, visit the h2g2 Writing Workshop first."
As you are asking for help for the entry I suggest that you post again at http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/Writing-Workshop.
I admit I haven't read the entry, but neither will anyone else if you can't take the advice of an ACE (Galaxy Babe) and read the guidelines.
Sorry if I sound harsh, I'm trying to be helpful. 
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jun 30, 2001 by Monsignore Pizzafunghi Bosselese
Ok, converting the style from first person is nothing too complicated.
You've done a great job in collecting the examples (hopefully they aren't copied from the book).
The Guidelines also mention another point: There is the Edited Entry 'Biological Weapons' at http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A180244 which you also should have a look at. The point is that the Guide will only have *one* Edited entry per subject matter. Seeing that the latter entry is rather rudimentary (sp?), there is huge potential for upgrading it and you seem to be the person to be able to do that
The h2g2 Update HQ is at http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A496451 , the update process will bypass the Peer Review scheme while still earning you an Edited Entry in your list
Another possibility is to shift the subject matter such that collisions with existing Edited entries are avoided, and starting a new Peer Review thread. One thing I would like to find in such an entry is something about international regulations about usage or non-usage, banning etc. - if there are any 
Just for housekeeping purposes: headers for PR threads should follow the pattern 'A123456 - TitleOfEntry' so that people can recognise what the thread is all about 
Bossel (Scout)
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jun 30, 2001 by Aaron O'Keefe the anti-pajama man (ACE)
THis is a reply to mycrofts posting...
Now this is the type of help I would entertain. . .The specifics of your postings are in deed helpful, and I will endeavour to include a broader subject range. . .I was dealing from the strictly US/Capitalist point of view. . .but I will say this much. . .Bio/Chem warfare in it's present definition was started by the Japanese. . .it wasn't until the atrocities of UNIT 731, that the data and research was given to a scope outside Japan (am I refering here to the purchasing of it by other nations).
Sarin is a nerve gas. . .an ugly one at that. . .but the BIOCHEMWAR as a title didn't sing to me . . .
All agents have a naturally occuring cousin. . .the only reason ebola hasn't swept across the globe is that commercial travel capabilities to back jungles of africa don't exist. . .and yes 10-20 people die of the Plague in the US every year. . .but that doesn't define as warfare and it's aftershocks does it? But I am bantering with you. . .
Thank you for the reply and I will rework my article. . .or perhaps start a new one with a less subjective reality...thank you again. the insight is valuable and appreciated.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jul 1, 2001 by Whoami?
As a SubEd and a Guru, I felt I should just politely infrom you that now that your entry has been deemed unsuitable to be processed for whatever reason, you won't get it Sub-Edited in it's current form. Once the Scouts have done their bit, which they have, all that you can constructively do is move on and try something else. Maybe take the suggestions to go via the Update route, or a reworking of the emphases (plural of emphasis, not misspelt ), of your article and submit it again. Otherwise you could spend all your time getting worked up about nothing. The Sub-Eds love to edit articles, but two on the same exact subject goes against the idea of the Edited Guide. I hope I have cleared up a few things, and good luck, whatever you decide to do next.
Whoami? 
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jul 1, 2001 by Aaron O'Keefe the anti-pajama man (ACE)
Decisions along this line of progress have been made some time ago. . .but thank you for your candor anyway. . .
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jul 2, 2001 by Aaron O'Keefe the anti-pajama man (ACE)
I appreciate all the input I have recieved. . I sought only to get a review from my "peers" and I wished only a review of content so I could edit my entry just once, I looked for information not links. . .but I was not aware of the militant process these entries were subjected to and I apologoze if I have offended anyone in this particular post. . .I will endeavor to keep my postings closer to a medium where it belongs.
Thank you all.
Aaron
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jul 2, 2001 by Shagbark
As one of your peers who also finds the system cumbersome, I hope
you don't givbe up. I am sure you put a lot of effort into the piece
however the format looked more like a newspaper article than a
h2g2 entry. After studying the way they do things at h2g2 I bet you will come up with something that makes people sit up and take note.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jul 2, 2001 by Shagbark
As one of your peers who also finds the system cumbersome, I hope
you don't givbe up. I am sure you put a lot of effort into the piece
however the format looked more like a newspaper article than a
h2g2 entry. After studying the way they do things at h2g2 I bet you will come up with something that makes people sit up and take note.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jul 2, 2001 by Shagbark
As one of your peers who also finds the system cumbersome, I hope
you don't givbe up. I am sure you put a lot of effort into the piece
however the format looked more like a newspaper article than a
h2g2 entry. After studying the way they do things at h2g2 I bet you will come up with something that makes people sit up and take note.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jul 2, 2001 by Shagbark
my apologies for the multiple post. I should restrain my impulse to reclick.
|
| | |
| |
| |
Key |  |  |
A: An older reply to the parent Posting
B: The parent Posting, to which this is a reply
C: A newer reply to the parent posting
D: The first reply to this Posting
| | |
Click on this icon to make a complaint about a specific Posting | |
|
Home
Reply
