Jump to content

PISA-caching

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    1140
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by PISA-caching

  1. Oh, oh. The last few WMs of the "Self Guided Walks and Trails" category have been approved by wayfrog. :-(
  2. I haven't created many categories, but nevertheless I'm willing to help. The first step would be to ask the leader of the "Self Guided Walks and Trails" category (personally), if he would allow barefoot walks in his category. The description says: "Self Guided Nature Trails and Historic Walks are the main focus of this Category, but there may be some leniency as long as the basic principle of "Self Guided" is followed.", but it also says "In general though, the Self Guided Trail or Walk should be educational.". If he will not allow them there: I would ask for some feedback from other WMers from different countries/continents. How prevelant are these in your area? Are there any suggestions what would also fit in this category, that we haven't thought about?
  3. The Kneipp pools are meanwhile accepted in the "Spas, Hammams, Mineral Baths and Saunas" category and in my humble opinion these barefoot walks fit to the Kneipp pools as much (or little) as to the Fitness Trails. So, the question is: Are there enough of them to qualify for a new category? And the second question is: How permanent are they? They are quite easy to create, but as easy to be removed. For example: Barfuß-Parcours - Wien zu Fuß (wienzufuss.at)
  4. I blame it to my lack of English, but I don't understand what you are trying to say with that sentence. I once again blame it to my lack of English, but in my example I was trying to say: The Chronograms category shouldn't (and doesn't) exclude all the WM that would also fit in Dated Buildings and the Dated Buildings category shouldn't (and - as far as I know - doesn't) exlude Chronograms (I never tried posting a Dated Building that was dated with a chronogram, but maybe I will one day). I was not talking about any other restrictions of either of the two categories. It was a theoretical example, of what COULD have been added to the category descriptions (but wasn't). Quote from the (maybe one day) category "Funerary Art": Our category, 'Funerary Art' is looking for those stunning, unique 'WOW' works of art.
  5. That's exactly what I was thinking. I understand and agree that new categories that fills some kind of gap to similar categories will not accept WMs that fit in any of the other related categories (f.e. Religious Buildings Multifarious simply says: "Religious Buildings Multifarious will NOT accept any place of worship that can be approved in any existing designated 'denominational' religious building category."). I'm 100% fine with that. A church is either Roman Catholic or Presbyterian or whatever OR something else. But there are examples, where a category excludes WMs (that would perfectly fit to the general idea and name of the category), because they are also allowed in other categories. I don't want to point at any certain category, but I will try to explain with my own category Chronograms. Many of these chronograms refer to the year, the building/structure was erected. One could say that a building with a chronogram on the facade, telling the year of the construction, is a "Dated Building" or a "Dated Architectural Structures Multifarious". Most likely such a building/structure would be accepted in either of the two categories. But would I allow just chronograms that don't qualify the building for one of these two categories? Hell, no! I don't know, if anybody ever made such a crossposting, but even IF somebody did, I would never limit the number of WMs in my category for that reason. Whoever is interested in Chronograms, should find ALL of them, that ever have been documented with a WM, in that category. On the other side: Should "Dated Buildings ..." and/or "Dated Architectural Structures Multifarious" deny WMs, that use a chronogram to date themselves? Again, no (IMHO)! Same goes with "Feeding the Animals". This category doesn't exclude any other category (f.e. Zoos, Petting Farms and Zoos, Fish Hatcheries etc.), because if you want to go and feed some animals together with your children, why would you have to check "Feeding the Animals" and additionally all the Zoos (IF they allow feeding), Fish Hatcheries (IF they allow feeding) and so on? But that's exactly what I see with other categories. You are interested in a certain topic and have a look at the category. But in some cases you also have to check all the categories, that are excluded, because they most likely contain WM that also fit to the topic you are looking for. See what I mean? My impression is - and that's really sad to say (and hopefully not true) - that some officers create categories and think about how difficult/easy it will be for the officers to approve the WMs, how difficult/easy it will be for the WMers to understand why their WM has been declined or not, or how to get just "interesting" WMs in their category. But we should also think about the visitors, who IMHO have the right to find all the WM of one topic in one category and not one category, plus a little bit of the other category and some WMs in a third category etc.
  6. I have lately posted a few waymarks and received all the mails I expected. One when posting it and one when it was approved.
  7. I guess it depends a lot on the situation you're facing. As it is here in Vienna, Austria I'm more or less the only WMer, who is posting new waymarks, but there are some WMers who visit a waymark every now and then (and I think they like that they can post visits to several waymarks with just one photo of a church ). And Vienna is full of potential waymarks, so IF one day another WMer decides to start posting waymarks, there are still plenty of them to create. Anyway, apart from crossposting or not in existing categories, I don't understand why we exclude waymarks from a new category B, because they also fit (and are probably already listed) in category A.
  8. The discussion about what should be excluded/included in the Funerary Arts category made me think about crossposting in general. And I would really like to hear what other WMers think about it. For me, the categories are something like a unified search term, so that if I want to find f.e. Elevated Buildings, I don't have to search for "elevated", "raised", "on stilts" etc. to find all of them. Another good example is "This old church", "Roman Catholic Churches", "Cathedrals" and the like. If I want to find cathedrals, I go to the according category and if I'm interested in old churches (regardless of size and religion) I go to the other and so on. We all know that there are some waymarks that fit in many categories, while others just fit in one. But I don't understand the general logic and/or the reason for excluding/including waymarks from one category, that also fits in another one. Some years ago I used to sell some of my photos on an online stock photo agency. Whenever I uploaded a photo, I added as many search terms as I could come up with. "People", "woman", "child", "house",... (whatever you could see on the photo). What, if somebody had said "You can either choose 'people' OR 'woman', but not both"? We all (or at least most of us) want our WMs to be found. So why do I have to choose whether I create a WM in category A or B, if it fits perfectly in both categories. Or, in other words: Why do we say that category B is looking for this or that, but nothing that also fits in category A? I really don't get it. In a perfect world we would create ONE waymark for f.e. the Eiffel Tower and give that one waymark all the categories that the Eiffel Tower fits in. I know, that this will most likely never happen, but why do we (IMHO unnecessarily) limit the number of waymarks? Is it to save space on the hard discs of Groundspeak, because several waymarks for the same site means multiple photos or what is the reason? Let me know, what you think (but don't shoot me).
  9. Just for the records: I just declined 4 waymarks in "Feeding the Animals", that were no WM at all: XXX
  10. I didn't know Lewis and Clark, but I read the according WM. Those two were real people with an "epic (but real) adventure". As QuesterMark mentioned in the initial posting, a person from outside the USA can hardly understand the term "Urban Legends" to the fullest. However, as far as I understand it, they are stories that mostly likely are not true or at least not completely true. In German there is the word "Sagen" (sagas). Those are stories, that often (but not always) have a real part (something that has happened and is proveable) and also several parts that have been added to the story lateron. F.e.: One of the towers of the St. Stephen's Cathedral in Vienna has not been completed (= fact). There are various legends/sagas, why. I explained the real reasons in that waymark. Therefore, I like the idea of the term "Legendary Stories", but maybe "Sagas" would better fit to "Urban Legends". The questions I have, are: Why does a real person who had an "epic adventure" qualify for the "Epic Beings" category? And when does an adventure begin to become "epic"? Would f.e. Mother Theresa also be considered to be an "epic being"?
  11. All good. You sort the WMs by the date of approval and I sort them by the date of creation.
  12. 300th first-category-in-a-country: Town Clocks in Bosnia and Herzegovina WooHooo! A nice milestone.
  13. For me, something is "interesting", if I would go out of my way (even if it is just a few meters) to see it. When I come to an area that I have never visited before and check all the waymarks there, would I plan to go there to see it or not? When I visit a city like Paris, France I would definitely visit the Eiffel Tower and if I visit a cemetery, I would probably go to an interesting Occupational/Hobby Grave Stone, but would I go to see a sign that's telling me that I'm 1000 miles away from a certain city? Probably not. If I coincidentally see something like that (and somebody else is driving the car), would I be fast enough to grab my camera and take a photo of it? Or would I drive the same highway again to take a photo of it? I doubt that also. Most likely I would try to make one posting and one visit and forget that category. I was also not very interested in f.e. the Advertising Columns, but there are some interesting shapes, some combined with a bicycle repair station, some combined with a telephone, some rotating ones etc. So I changed my mind on that category, but I doubt that long distance signs will ever get my interest. Just my personal opinion of course.
  14. Well, I doubt that my opinion will change anything, but I'm not a fan of limiting the submissions per cemetery (at least not without taking the size of the cemetery into consideration). Here in Vienna, we have the "Zentalfriedhof", which has about 330,000 graves and this makes it one of the largest cemeteries in the world. I know a few candidates for this category, f.e. https://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/wmWEF4, and I am sure that there are more than 5 graves with a "wow" effect, but once I have found 5 of them, I will be finished there and I will definitely not walk across the entire cemetery (which would not take hours, but days!), take photos of all the graves that I think would qualify and then create only the best 5 WMs. Besides: Right now I'm the only waymarker posting in Vienna, so even if other waymarkers could post 5 more, it will not happen soon.
  15. Thanks a lot. Not much, but at least there are now 9 more WMs that have a correct region. BTW: About half of them are new firsts in their region. 9 WMs are not really representative though. It's not spam, if you send one message saying that some of their WMs are missing their region. If I were not active in the forums, I would appreciate such an information. I was trying to say: Why are these not in the list you provided (https://wm.familie-frohne.net/list_region.php)? I have only one WM (with correct state) in the USA, but others would probably see their WMs missing the state and correct them.
  16. "Deutsche Gründlichkeit" Some questions that came to my mind: How many of the 2686 waymarks missing their region will still be in the list, after receiving their correct region? This is a theoretical question. I don't expect an answer. :-) Is there a possibility to send all the Waymarkers in the list ONE note saying that they should check your list for their username and correct their own waymarks? No officers needed if one edits his/her own waymark. If it is possible and they don't correct them (either because they are no longer active or lazy or there are too many wrong ones....), do they deserve to be on the list, because YOU somehow corrected their waymarks for them? What about the waymarks missing their region/state in the USA? F.e. https://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WMC154 or https://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WMAV6M Ok, but I don't just have questions. Here are two ideas I had: If you have a waymark in the category xyz, but without a region and you have firsts in the same category for all the regions in that country, it might be the case that the region-less WM was created later than the youngest first of all the other regions. Maybe that is faster than trying to find the correct region with the coordinates. If you could create the same list, but ordered by category, I would check the categories in which I am an officer or owner and correct the WMs.
  17. I just had the same experience. Then I edited the visit, but instead of just editing the date I also added a blank to the text and the date was changed to the correct one.
  18. "Only" #32 for me (I definitely will work on that), but at least #15 in the "#Posted first in country" statistics. WoooooHooooo!
  19. That's why I wrote "(theoretically!)". As you said, "usually". There are exceptions though: https://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/wmMJHE and the category should say, if and under which circumstances these exceptions will also be approved.
  20. My opinion? Let's talk about extremes. If we (theoretically!) excluded all the categories mentioned above, I don't know if I will ever find a waymark for this category. If we include all of them, we will have a lot of crosspostings, but we will also have a category with a lot of fine art on a grave and won't miss any great pieces of art, just because it also represents his/her hobby/occupation or the deceased is a Dead Poet. So, I guess we need something in between. Maybe we should think about it that way: Is the category to be ex- or included also an art category or not? For example: One of my Out of Place Graves is a wonderful piece of art (in my humble opinion). Not sure, if it will create a "wow" for everyone, but let's just pretend that it does. Would you post that one in "Out of Place Graves" or "Funerary Art"? One is an art category, and the other lists graves that are not on a cemetery (artful or not). IMHO there is no reason for preventing a crossposting in that situation. I would understand, if a grave artwork was posted in two different art categories. F.e. "Funerary Art" and "Relief Art Sculptures". In the bottom of my heart I would even allow crossposting in 2 art categories, but that is most likely just my opinion. What I really would like to clarify: Are we talking about "figurative" art to compensate, what the Figurative Public Sculpture category denies (= animals and humans) or are we also considering f.e. abstract art? I posted a photo of the grave of Hedy Lamarr in this thread on July 28, 2017, but received no feedback. PS: Don't worry, I won't shoot you. I don't even own a gun.
  21. And if you end up with a dozen photos of the potential waymark, but don't have the one that is required by that category, get over it and move on to the next waymark.
  22. There are more than 4,000 waymarks for Denmark. Even IF Groundspeak would add these regions for future waymarks in Denmark, we would still have the problem of 4000 waymarks with no region. Wasn't there a technical solution for this, when the regions for France were changed?
×
×
  • Create New...