Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Torgut

  1. For some reason the community decided that everything is a history museum, no matter what. Exceptions made for science museums and little more. It's an old problem. Oh well. As a historian and a former museum curator I find this approach very sad.
  2. Also World War II Memorials / Monuments
  3. Thanks folks, Fi67 is right, that's the one I had in mind and I have a spot to submit there. I see it is now a bit far from its original purpose... last waymark approved there was about Van Gogh. Thanks.
  4. I remember seing a category which was something like Founding Fathers, dedicated to historical figures who found nations. But can't find it now... any of you folks remember the exact name of such category?
  5. I am sorry I missed this vote. I love everything related with cemeteries and funerary rites. At the moment the category is still not available so I can't have an opinion. Just curious to see how it will be unique, considering the numerous cemeteries related existing categories :-) Update: found it, thanks to PISA Caching link in this thread. I will not participate with more than one WM to this one. Don't really like how the category came out, all the subjectivity (who's gonna say what's wow and what's not wow, who's gonna distinguish a locally mass produced of an unique), and besides, I don't want to enter a good cemetery (like those in Lviv, Buenos Aires, Milano, Paris, etc) knowing there are literally hundreds of tombs eligible for this category. "- Provide the full text on the headstone. Some headstones/slabs are adjacent, but separate from the the monument as it is a family memorial. You may wish to include this text." I don't understand. Is this mandatory or I "may wish to include the text" if I want so? But anyway, the category is there, the debate is closed, so, have fun.
  6. Oh yes, I think there were two topics developing in paralel. About this specific case, as far as I am concerned, I started by saying it would be up to the rules of the category and that was it. Then you started daydreaming with a Waymarking where there aren't officers with a bad atitude focused in making things harder to the submitters, and that became an off topic. Of course, it was OK for you to express similar criticism two years ago...
  7. 1) You may even doubt the Earth is a globe, but it is. And some officers like to make things hard to waymarkers. It's easy: it happens anytime a WM is declined based not in a category rules but in the "private" rules of an officer. Nobody has (or should have) the power to decide at his own discretion. That's the pilar of any set of rules. The same way a judge can't decide as he like, overlooking the law. But it happens, over and over. So, shortly, yes, some officers like to make things hard, because there is no need for it. 2) I don't expect flexibility. None. Either a WM follows the requirements or not. If not, a declination should follow. There is no way of being more objective. Along the years I collected quite a few examples, most of them described in these forums. They speak for theirselves. By the way... I wonder who wrote this:"I've had similar experiences in another category. The answer was something like "Just because it is called a xxxxxx memorial, doesn't mean that it is a xxxxxx memorial" and when I asked the officer per private note for an explanation, the answer was .... nothing. :-( Fortunately, I have waymarks in that category already and from now on I pass on taking photos for that category, writing a description in local language plus English, just to have another waymark declined for reasons that only the officer (if at all) understands."Oh but then, nothing wrong here, right, just a strict, and fairly so, officer, right? :-)
  8. It comes down to "the law". If it is says in the rules that can't be, then it can't be. But by Aribena words I suspect he his dealing with an officer who has his own rules which apparently overrule the categories rules as I saw it happening with me. Or perhaps I am just wrong.......
  9. Personally, I will always vote against a category dedicated to such specific and hard to find thing. I am 55. Saw a lot. Travelled around 100 countries. Never found one of these. Didn't even knew they existed. Oh, and I am not US American, but it seems it's something rare or inexistent over there, accordingly to Bluesnote.
  10. Ariberna, it is what is it, some folks in this game take themselves too seriously and like to make things hard to everybody. When I face atitudes like that one you described I just add the category to my ignore list and make sure they will never again receive anything from me. However, if there is a clausule in the category rules saying a part of the originally structure cannot be considered, than, it's ruled, you will have to accept. By the way, although I understand the impulse - and I have done it myself - perhaps pointing examples in this context is not a good idea... after all, you can't kill someone because others did it. A past wrong doing from someone else shouldn't be a reason for a second wrong doing.
  11. Good point. Temporary displays should not be allowed (but then, this applies to most categories, I guess).
  12. How many waymarks can you make out of a single catholic church? In some cases, perhaps a whole dozen. Does it means those 12 categories shouldn't exist then? Besides, as I wrote before, and nobody expressed contrary opinion, these signs are not intended to be art. Everything interesting by the roadside will be an attraction. Hold on, in fact, almost everything interesting will be a roadside attraction. And most likely they will not be mentioned as a Tourism Attraction by theirselves. So, is it OK to deal with wrong with more wrong? If these signs were (or can be) placed in categories where they don't fit it's no reason to deny them a proper home. Just commenting, I am aware you don't oppose the category.
  13. I saw them in airports (not a city neither a village) and smaller towns. My town is 45 k inhabitants and there is one. I saw them in specific neighbourhoods and saw them by landmarks in the middle of nowhere. And I saw them in South America, Europe, Africa, Asia. Considering the kind of some new categories I see created recently, this one is more than prevalent.
  14. As I think I said before, this category will have my positive vote. It doesn't matter if some of these things were in the past, wrongly, included in an art category. These signs are not intended to be art. Are intended to mark a central spot (most of the times) of a town, city or village, even a landmark, where visitors can have their picture taken. I would simplistically define them as decorative objects of considerable dimensions containing the word love or the symbol of a heart, intended to be used as an anchor for tourist portraits on the spot.
  15. Or some browser causes. I can't recall the details of the issue when it happened to me a few days ago.
  16. I am sure it's happening, it's just I didn't notice any case apart from temporary closing.
  17. When one changes a category of a created WM the variables are supposed to be lost. Well, what happens now is that ALL is lost. Coordinates, title, descriptions. All gone.
  18. Of course it depends on the categories. But statistically speaking, this is already a considerable universe I have here compared to one year ago.
  19. Roughly one year ago my country was in lockdown due to the COVID-19 thing. At home, I was creating two waymarks every day. They were basically approved on the same day, sometimes in 24 hours. Now, my country is again in lockdown, but I am a bit tired of Waymarking, so I am not even creating two every day. Not even one per day. However, I have currently 10 waymaks awaiting for approval. The oldest is from 24th January. Is this a coincidence?
  20. There is a detail. It's not me on the hook. It's the incident and the refusal of a legitimate WM accordingly to the category rules and requirements. If some people have a problem with such rules and requirements, not my problem, not directly. But I can understand the feeling. There are plenty of categories out there with rules and requirements which deserve my disagreement. Starting by Murals and this obsession with the verbal description of what is shown in the provided images. All murals are already acceptable. Not only because the category description and definition says so, but also because there is a past of acceptance of wider pieces of street art, including some to which the submitter called MURALS, which didn't stop this officer to accept them. There isn't much to add to this discussion. Some folks seems to think it's OK for an officer to openly challenge the rules and definitions of a category to which he was invited, in the name of his and others vision of what is right for the category. I believe that's the beginning of chaos and the sparkling of conflicts.
  21. Sernikk, somewhere in these forums there is a tutorial with the required steps to takeover an existent and abandoned category.
  22. I could provide the politically correct and deny it, but it's true. I do write what I consider is a fair amount of text in my WM's, but describing a place as I would do to a blind person it's a bit too much for me. For that, there are the pictures. Scroogiell, for the fourth of fifth time: whatever it is, it's clearly respecting the definition of the category. Yes or no? If yes, then it is to be approved. If the leading team of the category decide so, they should edit the category definition and I am happy with that. As it is, they have only one right thing to do: approve anything which is a " deliberately inscribed marking made by humans on surfaces, both private and public. It can take the form of art, drawings or words. When done without a property owner's consent it often constitutes vandalism".
  23. Again, in this context it's irrelevant what you, me or someone else thinks graffiti is. What matters is the definition provided in the category and in its rules. For the zillion th time, the place I waymarked is eligible in the category. It's not me saying, it's the category acceptance conditions saying it. An officer cannot (or should not) decide he knows better than the category description and rules. Just this.
  24. I could agree, it's a sensible definition, however it's not the definition existent in the category and accordingly to it, the thing I documented is edible to the category and an officer should not be able to decline because... because what... he doesn't agree with the category's rules?? As I wrote above, I find it hard to comply with the Mural's demand to describe the piece of art in a way that a blind person could visualize it. It is what it is, but nevertheless it's capricious. Please understand that it's not my thing to disagree with existing category's rules, I am just mentioning this due to the context.
  25. It is fine but... it MUST be explained. Not by you, of course, but in the category rules and description. As it it, my WM is undoubtedly edible for the category.
  • Create New...