Bernd das Brot Team

Still very slow and almost not usable. However, I'm glad to see it's not my computer but the website.

Count me in too! Love the idea!

Thanks for the valuable additional suggestions! I like the coordinates Idea. However, in the original proposal I wrote that for large features we'd allow more than one entry per waymark, like the north and the South entrance. Should we go with general coordinates instead and only allow one entry per feature? I agree there has to be credible information about the namesake, but I would not insist in an online source. A picture of a plaque or print media (with proper quotation) should be sufficient. Lastly, in my personal opinion (and that really is just me) I am not very comfortable disciminating non-English speakers. Google translate has gotten pretty good. Lately,I have approved waymarks in French, Czech, Dutch and Portuguese without any problem. I will send you an invitation to join the group and work your suggestions into the proposal. Thanks for helping!

Thank you! Invitation is on its way

You can use me if you want! Thank you! Just sent you an invitation.

I just noticed my home town has a small equestrian park where people can ride horses, jump over obstacles and things like that and I noticed there is no way to waymark this. I honestly don't know enough about horses to start a category, but I thought I put it out there, maybe someone else is interested in starting this. It is global and it shouldn't be too hard to put it together. It is something like this:

I finished a proposal for the category and put it up for vote twice, but KaPs and I were the only two voting. The third officer (not naming any names here - you know who you are ) has not been online for quite a while. We desperately need one more premium member to get this category going. Thanks to everybody supporting the idea!

I really like this idea! And I am with fi67: don't make it too complicated. If you found a good place to observe the reserve (an access road, an overlook or anything else that is good enough to take a picture of it - that is your coordinates to waymark the place. The only problem I see is that of all large places: Do you allow more than one waymark for the same Reserve, if they are reasonably different?

Add "Donated Engraved Bricks and Pavers" to the list too. I've been waiting for an approval for three months, then contacted the offices, but haven't gotten any answers yet. There are three officers in this group, the last time, they have been online at Waymarking was on 9/23/2014, 4/23/2013 (almost two years ago!) and 2/6/2014 respectively. There has to be a way for Groundspeak to demote inactive officers and to replace them with someone who is willing to do do the job. A group leader, who has not checked on his category in three and a half months is either too incapacitated or otherwise preoccupied or has simply lost interest in Waymarking.

Sorry, I was out (first sick and then on vacation) for a while. But now I really want to get this category going. I think we have the information and comments we need. Last question: Who would be interested in starting a group for this category?

No. I am sorry to hear that. I was one of the No voters, but I hoped it would pass anyway. Please reconsider a broader spectrum (including other religions) and re-submit. I think we can really use this category. Let me know if you need help.

That is a very valid point. I'm glad I waited a while for more comments before moving ahead, because I would have missed this one. Yes, I wouldn't like to see places like Jack's Peak or Cooper's Meadow, unless there is clear explanation, who Jack or Mr. Cooper was and why he deserved the merits of a place named after him. Should we make a short, one paragraph biography a requirement? It certainly would increase the educational value, and for me, Waymarking is not about listing 10,000 places I can take a picture of, but learning something new with every waymark I post.

I like the idea! It will need some work, but count me in.

VERY good idea! Thank you!

Come to think of it, I agree: one entry per feature it is No problems with waterfalls (I know one), Islands etc. Anything that is in an unaltered natural state (I see we are going to have a problem with reservoirs and canals). Countries, Continents etc. age not a natural feature, but a political one - man-made, thus excluded. "People named Places" excludes religious and mythological names, and I think, we should do the same How should we handle places named after organizations (Society Islands, named after the British Geographical Society, Admiralty Islands (named after the British Admiralty) etc.? There also is a mountain top in the Altai Mountains named after a German Newspaper. I would love to include them but I'm afraid it would cause more problems than benefits.

How about this for coordinates: If there is a plaque or anything else with the name of the feature, use that as location. If you can't find such a plaque, provide a picture of a map with the feature clearly named and use a viewpoint from which one can get a good view at the feature. I also tend to allow only one entry per named feature for viewpoints. So you can't drive through the Gibson Desert and waymark every turn in the road. I am, however open to allow multiple plaques or markers for the same feature as long as the name is written on it. Or maybe not. What do you think? As for water bodies: Since these are explicitly excluded from people named places, I am leaning towards allowing reservoirs and canals. Anyway, it is often hard to tell a reservoir from a natural lake and a canal from a river. Again: what do you think?

I just came across a mountain in Arizona, named after the the first Native American Woman who died in combat serving with the US military. I would love to waymark this place, but the closest category "People-Named Places" only allows structures built by humans, such as cities, counties, airports, bridges, dams or buildings. If we can waymark every school named after George Washington, we should be able to waymark Mountains or Rivers named after their discoverers or other famous people. I imagine this to be a rather easy categories to put together and it matches all the common requirements. Allowed should be anything in its natural stage (not altered by humans) - mountains (Mount Everest), mountain ranges (Uinta Mountains, Utah), rivers (Hudson River), lakes (Lake Victoria), valleys (Castro Valley), deserts (Gibson Desert, Australia), etc. Only exception (since bodies of water are excluded from "People-Named Places") could be reservoirs, such as Lake Powell. We may run into some problems defining where exactly to point the coordinates, but other categories have solved that too. Let me know, what you think.

That's what I was looking for. I knew there had to be something! Thank you!

Hello everybody. Human mythology is full of mythical creatures, from the Birdmen in Egypt to the Gila Monster in Arizona. Not to mention dragons. And the world is full of statues and pictures of these creatures. Am I missing something or is there really no way to waymark those? We have "Famous Fictional Figures", but that is for specific creatures. So, "Puff the Magic Dragon" would fit, but a general statue of a dragon would not. The only other category we have is Sphinxes - what about all the others? I really hope, I'm just missing something. If not: Who is interested in filling that gap?

Now, why does Kansas have eight of each and not seven? But we could of course just call it "Wonders of the World" I have thought a little bit more about where to draw the line and would suggest to accept anything posted by a credible group, institution or organization, but not to accept lists created by a single individual.

Of course there is going to be some overlap. With 1000 Places, with Tourist Destinations, Castles, you name it. And of course with Wikipedia Entries. But all these categories somewhere overlap each other, still leaving enough room for unique targets.

I recently discovered a Life Magazine Book called "Wonders of the World." It made me wonder how many "Seven Wonders" lists there are in addition to the antique "original" one. The list is endless, ranging from the semi-official "New7Wonders of the World" to things like "Seven Wonders of the Buddhist World" and "Seven Wonders of Texas Architecture" Bottom line: after one night of google research, I had located 98 sites in 43 countries, as well as in antarctica, at the bottom of the ocean and in outer space. I went the extra mile and created a little presentation. Overview: http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WMHFKP_Seven_Wonders_Introduction Detailed description of lists of Ancient Wonders http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WMHFNY_Seven_Wonders_Ancient_Wonders Detailed description of lists of Natural Wonders http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WMHFW9_Seven_Wonders_Natural_Wonders I think the biggest problem will be to decide what qualifies and what does not. I'm inclined to say, anything with a website is OK but we would have to draw the line somewhere to not to end up with "The seven wonders in my grandma's garden" (Which is something my sister and I did 45 years ago as a birthday gift). Looking forward to comments, input and criticism.

As officer of a category I recently approved a waymark that had just an absolutely amazing picture. Who do I contact to suggest that this should become a featured waymark? Thanks and happy Waymarking.

Recently, I noticed that pictures uploaded in "Portrait" format are becoming very blurry in the automatic downsize process for the default picture. That even happens, when uploading a small picture in the size of the default picture (250 pix high). Last week, I almost declined a waymark because of its "Blurry cell phone picture", but fortunately, I noticed that the original picture in the gallery was as crisp as can be. Is there a way around this problem (In some categories, like flag poles or columns it is unavoidable to have tall standing pictures.)

I'd join too. Not many walls where I live now (California) but I grew up in Brandenburg/Germany which had a pretty famous city wall. Link me up to the group Volker, Bernd das Brot Team