fi67

It is OK. After all you've been there to take the pictures and collect the coordinates, I hope. ;-) It is up to you, some do it, some don't, and some only log visits when they come back to this place later. In the early days there was no option to filter one's posting from a search result, only visits. So many waymarkers visited their own waymarks for this reason. Today I personally do not see the point in owner visits, it only spoils the statistics I think. But it is perfectly acceptable.

You found an interesting type of objects to waymark. And you made an effort to create a category. I appreciate that, but what you wanted is already covered by another category: Static Train Cars. I know there is a misleading sentence in the description: "Please only submit regular sized train cars (from real trains)". But this excludes miniature railroads and model railroads; minecarts are narrow gauge cars, but this is the regular size for real maincarts. There are already some examples in this category e.g.: http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WMCHRR_Haulage_Train_CAT_Corris_Gwynedd_Wales_UK http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WMC8GM_Coal_Mining_Cars_Canmore_AB_Canada http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WMB58Q_Mine_Train_at_Independence_Mine_State_Park_Alaska http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WMA0TH_Broad_St_Mining_Car_Nevada_City_CA http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WMA0RM_Grass_Valley_Mining_Car_Grass_Valley_CA So your category proposal is redundant and there is nothing we can do about it. Sorry! On the other hand you can start posting your finds today without having to go through a vote. Coming to the forum with category ideas from the beginning is always a very good idea. You will find out what has to be changed, if it is supported by other waymarkers at all, and often you will find that there is an existing category for the idea. Nobody can keep all the 1000+ categories in the head. With over 1000 categories (over 600 of them must be available in Germany I guess) you will find enough interesting locations to post. When you don't know where to post then come and ask. We will find one that fits or maybe it can be the beginning of a great new category. BTW: Germany is not that no man's land you describe; there are some heavily active waymarkers around. Most activities are currently in the South, but you can help to spread it to your area. We have a group: German speaking Waymarkers. Interested?

Local categories have no chance to be accepted by the voting community. Better find something else! Back to your general question: The steps are described in the FAQs. You have to create a Group. Then you need some officers, a group with three officers can start a category. When the work is done, the category goes to the primary vote (you and your officers), 100% Yea is needed. Finally you can send the category to Peer Review, here you need 66% Yea and this is gonna be tough. Some things the FAQs do not mention are important. Get a good crew, some helpful but unexperienced geocaching friends will not be appreciated in peer review. You need active, experienced waymarkers with a certain reputation. Go the forum with your idea, you've done that; this was a good idea. I don't remember exactly but it's been a looong time since the last new category made it without going to the forum. Don't refer to other categories. Your idea has to stay on its own. Many existing category would not make it anymore if it was new today. You have to work hard at your proposal and a concise wording. Some of the newer categories read like legal texts, the easy days of category creation are definitively over. I don't want to frighten you away from creating a category, there are still many viable ideas around, but it is not that easy. There is no guarantee for success.

It depends on the quality of your pictures, if they show what is on the web page then you should give the Relief Art Sculptures a try. They cannot be soo picky...

A good start, but the examples are fairly obvious. I see the main difficulty in the definition of the limit. Something that is in between those; what is still acceptable and what just does not make it, and for what reasons?

DougK maintains a list. See the link on his profile page.

The polygon coordinates are messed up. Instead of: lon1,lat1,0 lon2,lat2,0 lon3,lat3,0 [etc.] the kml file contains: lon1,0,0 lat1,0,0 0,0,0 lon2,0,0 lat2,0,0 0,0,0 [etc.] The result is a (invisible) thin line that jumps around at the equator.

I like them, but it will be tough to define a distinct differentiation to unwanted, boring ones. Also a small overlap with Pictorial Pub Signs has to be considered.

Around here many restaurants have these as well. I have also thought about this as a category, but maybe in some places there are too many of them. And they are not necessarily medieval: Your second example has the date 1903 at the bottom, but the logo used in the center was not introduced before 1948, I even think it is the revised shape of 1972.

Your edit suggestions have to be approved by an officer first before they become active. It is not that anyone can just change anybody else's waymarks.

The category has been accepted and is now active. I am going to add some minor changes that hopefully will cause less confusion. Thank you all for your great support!

I agree with BruceS and Team Sieni. Extending the idea to general (natural) disaster evacuation zones would help a bit, but I still wonder, why anyone should want to visit these places, except for icon hunting. I mean, there usually is nothing special, only a sign.

There is the Bookcrossing Zones category. Little libraries fit well in there.

It looks very good at the moment. There is clearly a need for clarification. I will try to improve this as soon as the category is editable again. And I feel quite stupid for messing up the original posting and visiting instructions. Copy/paste should not be that difficult, one might think. ;-) My ideas for clarification: All current and historic tripoints on international and first national division level are valid. In most cases there will be some kind of "marker" on site. These "markers" are not necessarily man-made; often these are river confluences, mountain peaks or something similar. If there is really nothing at all we want some documentation to prove this is the correct location. All the above applies for locations where a border meets the sea. Lower adminiatrative sub-division levels only are valid when the number of borders/political entities are five or higher with the same basic requirements as for the higher levels. For the corners I will add some illustrations to show what we mean.

Your thoughts are reasonable and I think you carn turn these ideas into a successful category. However, the plan to use the Waymarking site as a reference for travels might not be a good idea. Even highly successful categories cover less than 10% of the potential locations, what is in the database is completely random and will stay like this for maybe many years. Use Waymarking for posting and visiting! Be happy about every submission coming in and learn about many locations, but trying to build up a complete reference guide will most probably not work and only lead to frustration.

What about broken or even lying colums, e.g. Ancient Roman or Greek in an excacation site?

The category is now in Peer Review.

I have worked most of your suggestions into the category description (I left the quoted wikipedia part as it was, I prefer to have it clearly separated from the rest). I do not see any inconsistency between #2 and #3: #2 is no tripoint, because there are only two political entities, but there is a third area: the sea. This makes them easy to identify. On the other hand corners without a marker would be extremely difficult to find and document, and even more to judge for officers. Thank you for all your valuable input! The category is no going to Officer Vote. Wish me luck for Peer Review!

Great! I will add your suggestions soon. Municipality Five- or more points: Yes, is this paragraph not clear enough? Documentation: There is a URL variable for further documentation, and you would not be able to find a historic tripoint if there was no documentation and no marker. If it's not documented (I guess there are many of those) it will not be found and posted. IMHO this is enough. One last thing (hopefully): Please check also the language! I am not a native English speaker, so I am sure there must be something that should be corrected. If there are no more additional suggestions, I will send the category to officer review next morning.

No, I don't think there's a category for that. I see more than just one problem: 1. They are usually indoors; I am not aware of any outdoor items. Not ideal for a GPS based game. 2. They are easy to move. Even when this does not happen for many decades, they do not have a fixed location as other categories. There are some interesting things to photograph that just do not fit into Waymarking. I often think we should have a site for those things, something in between Flickr and Waymarking.

I like well defined naming conventions, but we have a problem here. Depending on how you define it, we have either none or three correct countries or states. Sorry, it was too early when i wrote this I added this to the posting instructions: "We know that the usual naming conventions will not work for many tripoints. But we expect something meaningful that fits well into a waymarks list like a search result. No funny games, please!"

I like well defined naming conventions, but we have a problem here. Depending on how you define it, we have either none or three correct countries or states.

I have I first draft of the category page. Tell me what you think. What can be made better? I am also interested in small details like typos.

I know some locations where the real tripoint is on water and they have a marker, pillar or monument nearby. From my original proposal: "If the tripoint is located in a body of water, the location of the marker will be accepted, if there is none try to find the closest point on dry land that can be accessed."

Tripoints on state level are valid, with or without marker. Markers for 'corners' are a good start. We have border stones here every fifty steps or so. So these markers would have to be something special. That's what I'm looking for. I know it when I see one, but I am searching for a clear wording for officers and posting waymarkers likewise to avoid vagueness from the beginning.