ripraff

I am trying to develop a methodology for identifying a potential pool of reviewers. While there are reviewers that don't meet all the criteria, the task is to identify potential reviewers. It may be possible to issue an invitation to prime suspects? It could include a list of categories in need of help reviewing. Maybe a description of the job could be included. Maybe there could be a post on the main Waymarking screen with an invite. Are there mentors that might answer questions a new reviewer would have?

Having 5oo or more waymarks is not a qualification for being an active reviewer. I have less than 200 but review most submissions to the two categories I manage (officer) within a day or two. I also alternate between being a premium and regular member, and I don't understand why that's even part of the discussion since it has no bearing on one's ability to manage existing categories. And one more thing. Don't read too much into the last visit date - the last visit date is when the payer logged into Waymarking OR geocaching, and many "former waymarkers" are still active geocachers. So it may appear they are still active, but they total tuned out on Waymarking.

If you look at the 224 waymarkers with over 500 waymarks, less than half are active. If 100 people each reviewed 10 categories that would be 1000. If you have 2 or 3 per category that would be 20 or 30 categories per waymarker. If you looked at the categories waymarkers have posted at least 10 waymarks in, you could develop a pool of potential reviewers.

Well, I am trying to learn the job of reviewing. I put my first vote up. I don't think the waymark follows the rules, but other similar waymarks have been accepted. Do you ever change the rules or disallow previously accepted way marks? Both I think could cause problems. I only put one of the submissions up for review but there are 2 similar, all should be accepted or rejected. Should I put the others up for review too to keep them from being handled differently? How good are people about voting? If people complain about waits they can always volunteer to review. I saw that some people review their own, but this doesn't seem right since they might have missed something. I know it is hard to keep all the different rules straight, especially the ones that are different. There are only a small number of people active. The reviewing is falling on a few people who keep us going. Seems the whole group has to work at this while they are active. Instead of complaining, volunteer. Maybe someone else will volunteer for the group you want reviewed too.

Up to 5 so far. I bet we have 500 by the end of the year.

There is one other already approved, I just added mine to the queue. (updated with more info I found).

Yea!!! I submitted a Mormon Church. Is this a first to find?

How does this get from here to being a listed category we can add waymarks to?

It says "churches/places of worship" several times. Why not just "places of worship". This sounds more inclusive with less bias and loses no meaning. Also Sikh could be added to the example list.

dictionary: multifarious = of many and various kinds as opposed to nefarious = (typically of an action or activity) wicked or criminal. The closeness of these words gives it an edgy feel. I used the term Brand-x, when I would say "no, I can't waymark that it is brand-x. (not belonging to a category)." Its good word. You could add the definition to the description.

Yea!!! My first vote. I have wanted this category for awhile now. You have probably talked about it before, but it seemed to happen very fast.

I would like to be an officer. This is the first category I have been a part of forming. I am just starting to do review stuff. I know people like writeup, but if I can't find anything to say it is a real effort. I like taking photos and finding stuff. Sorry to the people that like write-ups. I can usually mange three lines, but it can be an effort.

Yes, I can go there. If a building was Baptist, but is now community it can be way marked as Baptist, therefore excluded. If a building was a Community Church, but is now vacant or a restaurant it can be way marked.

Many religions...Potential for a large number, but how many are we really going to find? For the sake of the waymark, could we add a question to describe the religion, its origin and generally where it is practiced, by about how many people? How often the building is used for services. (restrict to at least monthly?) List which categories cannot be cross listed and which can, at least have guidance for reviewers of which are definitely included or excluded. (leaving the possibility for more). There must be a building which is not part of a larger building, but can be a storefront. Current or former or ancient? (I vote for all of them.)

Excluded Religious Buildings (Existing Categories) Anglican and Episcopal, Assembly of God, Baptist, Buddhist Temples and Public Shrines, Church of Christ Scientist, Church of the Nazarene, Continental Reformed and Congregational Church, Hindu Temples, Kingdom Halls of Jehovah's Witnesses, Lutheran, Methodist, Mormon Temples, Mosques, New Apostolic, Orthodox, Presbyterian, Quaker Meeting Houses ,Roman Catholic, Seventh-day Adventist, Synagogues, Wesleyan or other denominational religious building category (unless they exclude former sites). Waychapels, Abbeys-etc., Megachurches, Outdoor site without ruins. Sites that are a part of a larger site such as chapels at airports and hospitals. Religious buildings for non-worship services might be administrative headquarters, homes for wayward persons, rehab centres, homeless shelters, soup kitchens, pastoral residences, camp buildings, etc.

A list would show what would be accepted and help clarify and suggest. It shows how many are currently excluded. Not restricting to the list would be good too. We are getting a good list started. Polish National Catholic Church based in the US which is not accepted in the Roman Catholic category Pentecostal (except Assembly of God) Three-Self Patriotic Movement, the only denomination approved by the Chinese government. Unitarians Spiritualists Non-Denominational Churches Mormon Churches (Not Temples) Community Churches Sikh temples Scientologists Bahai, Jainism, Shinto... ? Aztec, Mayan, Peruvian religious ruins Stonehenge, Mideastern ancient temples Former Church of the Nazarene, Assembly of God and Wesleyan

Whether cathedral or humble parish church, ancient or contemporary, village chapel, or towering spire, all church buildings identified as Roman Catholic places of worship are welcome. active and former Anglican and Episcopal Church buildings. currently and formerly used as Methodist Churches. active and former Baptist Church buildings. active and former Lutheran Church buildings. Buildings that were once Presbyterian Churches that have been converted to another use may also be included as long as its history can be documented. Congregational Church buildings and historical sites associated with these denominations. Also welcome are historic sites or ruins of synagogues, or ones that have been converted to other uses, as long as they can be clearly identified and documented. any official mosque, past or present. It includes structures that were originally mosques and then converted to other purposes. Please specify if it was originally built for a religious purpose or later adapted to suit the needs of Quakers. current and former Church of Christ Scientist buildings. currently and formerly used as New Apostolic Churches. The general wording is active/current or former. "converted to another use may also be included as long as its history can be documented." is good wording. Since we talked about including the former churches of the few categories that are current only, that would mean accepting former. Also since this is an inclusive category we should go with the majority and accept current or former. I really like the idea of ancient ruins, even though we won't get many.

Most people aren't going to find exotic ruins, but it does add a certain exciting quality.

Most religious categories accept former. This could be extended to ancient.

Sadly building would exclude sacred mountains. Another category?

Ancient historic sites is an interesting category. We may want to exclude Stonehenge, Midwestern ancient temples for religions no longer practiced. This might exclude Aztec, Mayan, Peruvian. Although it might be fun if someone found these. It might be fun to include these and see what people find.

Stand alone building is a good qualifier. I just was Googling and got into some religions that might not have buildings, conduct services in the open. These would be excluded since it would be hard to waymark a site. I wasn't sure if any of the Native American religions had buildings, maybe the Mayan ruins? Aztec, Peruvian? Oops, may want to include storefront churches, standalone would count these out. Stand-alone OR storefront.

Do we want to go there, perhaps a "stand alone locations" meaning not part of a larger entity such as an airport. I am concerned if it is too broad and all consuming then we have lost the whole concept of Waymarking religious buildings that hold a worship service and are not part of the already existing denominational categories. I got off topic, These are exclusions for the current topic, but maybe things mentioned to consider in other topics.

There are twelve classical world religions—those religions most often included in history of world religion surveys and studied in world religions classes: Baha'i, Buddhism, Christianity, Confucianism, Hinduism, Islam, Jainism, Judaism, Shinto, Sikhism, Taoism, and Zoroastrianism. Which of these have worship buildings? Maybe Bahai, Jainism, Shinto...

Categories that explicitly say current are Church of the Nazarene, Assembly of God and Wesleyan. Most are explicitly saying current and former, including ruins. A few don't mention it either way, Orthodox, Buddhist, we could have them clarify.