ripraff

Could Waychapels be expanded to include 'chapels in airports/hospitals' since way chapels "have traditionally served as a respite for travelers." Charity could add a subcategory for some of the other things like soup kitchens mentioned.

We could qualify buildings to avoid sunrise services (often held outdoors). The category would be under Religious Buildings. Included: Unitarians Spiritualists Non-Denominational Churches Mormon Churches (Not Temples) Community Churches Sikh temples We should probably accept Scientologists and other cult types to avoid having to discriminate authentic/inauthentic. Many current denominations were considered fringe at one time. What world religions do we not have that would have buildings for worship? We should probably exclude Waychapels, Abbeys-etc., Megachurches, since they have their own category. You could consider cross-listing, but I wouldn't think so. Cross listing allowed for categories such as Country churches, this old church, medieval church, stone church artifacts, National Historic Places. Also accept named denominations IF the existing category excludes former and the church is no longer that brand.

Some of these points seem to be looking for trouble. The exclusion would be for named brand named churches with a list. Some of the other categories would be fine, country church etc. If you can post a Methodist church in them then you could cross post brand-x in them. The other church categories don't have a problem with a lot of the things brought up. A list of brand name religions and whether they accept former churches would be an easy list. If it fits those, then it doesn't fit brand-x. If a new brand is created, brand-x postings can be grandfathered, but new ones not accepted. Unitarians could be brand-x until Unitarian Church group is created. We are not the IRS, they don't have to fit 15 criteria to be a religion. Have a question, why do you think this is a church? "If it walks like a duck"..."I know it when I see it." Some judgement may be needed, rulings of the managers as in all cases final. You can create that sneaky question, does this fit a,b,c, and if the click yes it gets rejected. Universalists, dedicated storefront (if not Baptist etc.), Mormon, Sikh, Community Church, all good. home, no, not a separate building. Churches, not camps, etc. just like regular brands.

If you want to have a general category, let's do a category for religious buildings that do not have their own category. This would include Mormon churches, but also a lot of off-brand churches. There are a lot of catchall groups that exclude things that have their own category. This could include former churches as long as they weren't a church that can be accepted into another category.

I agree, there are two near me. I also want to waymark all the "off-brand" churches that don't neatly fit into an existing category. Many but not all are labelled community churches. If you can't find that they have been baptist or methodist or any other name brand, but are still interesting buildings what do you do with them?

Is there a way to claim credit if you visited the waymark before you joined the scavenger hunt? It doesn't seem to count it.

DNA test taken, down the rabbit hole, here we go......

It is a little annoying when a reviewer adds something not usually required. The way marks are generally gathered by traveling some distance. If the photos do not contain the necessary information, a return trip may be required (or the waymark is left in a rejected state.).

Since most of the way marks are found, I don't usually know much about them before I start using Google. Some places never get way marked because there is NOTHING out there that I can find. There are churches that look old, but they have no webpage. Usually about all you can find is an address. If they are a big denomination the group, say Methodists have an online directory which has address and name of minister. Only some even give you service time. If they say community church for instance, you don't know if they are currently a known denomination or even if they are still active. Some towns have online histories where they list different churches and when they were built. It is still hard to distinguish between first building and current building. Topics like bridges I rely on a couple sites that list information, but that is all I know. It they don't list, I generally don't waymark. Some places actually do turn up interesting threads that produce stories that a fun to get into. Sometimes the amount of writeup is due to how tired I am, are we on a trip and I want to get down to breakfast, but I want to keep the streak going. Usually if I am asked to do more, I give Google another shot and try to think of ways I can get something related, even if not directly. Or I wait until I have more energy and can spend more time hunting down something. I interested in photos, but I still try to write something. I have had some reviewers suggest databases that have proved useful (New York has National Historic sites on a database including contributing buildings to historic districts). Without this database many sites would not have been way marked. I realize that way marks can be rejected, if they don't please the reviewer, but please give ideas to help with the research or explain what you think I can find and maybe how.

Thank you, about a dozen were just approved (from the last month till yesterday). I joined the group, this doesn't help with mine but...

I just added another waymark to the NY historical signs category. That makes 9 going back to July 19. I was going to wait three more days so that the newest would age and the original would make a month anniversary. If these were approved I would make it more than halfway to my next milestone. Why is waiting hard? In general having a backlog doesn't bother me. Usually there are several in the queue. If I make my next target, the next milestone, I will just need a new target,mmm. I filled in the graph for days of the year and it has been over a year steady with waymarks...The milestone is just sooooo close. In general NY historical signs has been steady in approving waymarks. I wonder if they are on vacation or something has happened.

Some settlements don't have enough people to form separate denominational churches. There are old or rural churches that are small and are labeled community churches. Also sometimes churches change over time, sometimes merging into a community church. There are some charming old churches that could be captured by this category especially if there is not enough documentation to make them this old church. These churches often do not have websites.

It is hard for many geocachers to understand the draw. The natural allies would be those interested in history or genealogy. The activity would particularly appeal to those who like taking photos. I am impressed by how far many way markers travel around the world. World travelers might be fans as well. If we wanted to increase our numbers perhaps we could reach out to these people. I am thinking dialoging with local history groups might be very productive for us and them. We could provide documentation online, they could provide more information. We have already discussed the match with Find A Grave, a genealogy site. The local preservation people and maybe even librarians might appreciate our efforts. Once we create the waymark Google finds it and shows it on searches. Some people may be using our information without it ever showing up as a visit.

This may be an argument for a category 'waymarkers choice'. It would be like favorite points for geocachers. If you have a certain number of waymarks you get a wildcard where you can waymark something that doesn't fit a category.

I have been using another thread about reviewers to find a link to Doug's Statistics. It has been moving down, I don't know what happens to old threads. There could be a thread with links to different statistics. (Or am I the only one obsessing about statistics). Is there another way to find them? I guess searching for his profile....

It's now online published by an officer. Thanks, I particularly like this one.

I have a submission from 6/22/2016 in Carnivorous plant localities, Lily Lake - Chenango Valley State Park, This isn't a month ago but it is a few weeks. Thanks, Ripraff

I don't think the scavenger hunt is very active. I was playing around with it and noticed if you join an active hunt or activate your own, you don't get credit for way marks already visited. I had visited all the way marks of mine after I created it, but had not activated it so no credit. I joined another person's hunt and got credit for the new way marks but not for those already visited.

If you visit a waymark and it is not there and you are certain you are in the right spot do you post it and remark that it isn't anymore? If you have a waymark that disappears do you archive it? Do you just add 'former'? Does it still count or do you lose it in your stats? Is the behavior consistent across categories? (Even if the category states current only).

Thank you. I know you have approved lots of mine since you sign them.

I am getting into this Find A Grave thing. First I created a logon to submit Waymarking photos. Then I started correcting and adding to graves. It is easy in some things you can edit and they approve. Then I started creating my virtual cemetery for my family lines. Then I asked to maintain my parents and grandparents, I got 3 out of 4 requests. I started adding parent and spouse connections. Now I am corresponding with a genealogy buff who is a family member, cousin not too far removed. She is sending me photos and trees. I am adding missing family members and photos. I am linking Wikitree people to Find A Grave entries. Will I have time left for Waymarking?

Yep. I know of a contributor that has over 10,000 records, but with so many errors it's a joke -- or would be, if this information weren't important to family and friends that continually get steered wrong by her slop. So far, she has accepted all of my edit suggestions, so she's good about that. But it's clear that she's only focusing on quantity with little regard at all to quality. I've found entries for small cemeteries that you can walk in 10 minutes or less, but which you could not find the FAG entry listed for the cemetery. Why? Person visits 3 cemeteries this day, writes up a bunch of notes, perhaps takes photos (you hope!), goes home, writes everything up. Puts a person's grave in the wrong cemetery that they visited. Oh well, as long as the information is in there. BTW, of dozens of edits that I've suggested, I've only had one rejected; and that was for the coordinates to someone's grave (probably a centenarian), and for some reason the manager of the entry didn't want it. Okay, fine. There names have been fixed! That was quick. They are now Shepherd. Hopefully that will make them easier to find.

Wow, I just found a case of someone who has entered thousands of entries on Find A Grave (over 3,000 a week) with a very high error rate. Many of the dates are off a bit, but in one case three people were entered as Shepard instead of Shepherd as it is on the gravestone. I left a message on his profile. I only mentioned the spelling, not the several errors in numbers. This is not a hard to read stone, it is a zinc gravestone with very clear letters. It is being fast and sloppy. It hurts to see this. I have noticed that spellcheck makes lots of changes and I need to check after the fact, but how do you enter 3 people with the wrong last name? I added the photos so anyone can see the number errors if they look closely.

We depend a lot on information already on the web. We use links and quotes, but still it means someone else has supplied it. I figure once we post it it out there on the web and becomes community information including our photos, even though technically they are still ours. I sent some family photos to a cousin and she posted them to Facebook without asking and I just found them on Ancestry. I was a bit surprised she didn't even ask. There were other documents relating to living people that should not be public on Ancestry too. Genealogy has always had the problem with deciding if someone is providing good information. There are the professionals and those who are very careful and others that make leaps and connect with anything close. Errors are propagated and seen all over. Then there are the issues that I am assuming DNA testing might correct. People interested in genealogy and cemeteries would be naturals for Waymarking. I was thinking linking my profile would be an implicit invitation. Of course the information on Waymarking sites is all correct.