iconions

You have 15,000 characters in which to play with in the long description. It sounds like a lot RIGHT up to the point you start playing with html to make the long description look really nice. Here is my waytour of a few of the sites of a U.S. Civil War Raid into Lawrence, Kansas, near where I live: https://Waymarking.com/waymarks/wm13X7N_Re_Ride_with_the_Devil_Quantrills_1863_Raid_Lawrence_Kansas The waymarks I posted all have to do with the stop - not with anything nearby. My thought is that it is more important to give the opportunity to get the visits of the object of the stop that to start wandering off my WayTour. This is especially important when person doing the tour gets to Downtown Lawrence. I have almost every building from 5th to 11th Street along Massachusetts waymarked, and if I added what's nearby, I wouldn't have space. Besides, there was a tremendous amount of information I had to cut to fit the 15,000 character limit as it was. Again, I was only concerned with the object at hand and only at the time of publication. It helps that I am one of the few waymarkers in Kansas. I literally have only 46 out of the 15,000 characters left that I can add to the long description for this waytour.

Yea, I've got words for your "free gifts" - they're the gifts that keep on giving. I have done quite well in life being on a Support Desk answering the phones with my 35+ years of experience in Customer Service supporting software with the user perspective in mind. Problem is that esteemed coders usually can only communicate with end users through Post-it notes and whiteboards - not really the milieu of phone support. Besides, do programmers actually ever leave their caves for anything other than more Diet Mountain Dew and cold pizza? I thought that talking to customers would make the developers break out into the D.T.'s? LOL Nah, I never had the slightest desire to program after dropping a significant stack of unnumbered keypunch cards back in 1978. I pretty much had my fill after that...

With my two waytours, I only used the waymarks I created. I did, however list all of the waymarks associated with the site - whether or not the waymark was mine. I felt like if someone was taking the time to follow this tour - it is only fair to cut the person some slack about what other waymarks they could get creditt.

See, there are two kinds of people in this world... Coders... and the the poor slobs like me on the support desk that have to bear the slings and arrows from customers because of the "undocumented design features" introduced by coders. Just sayin' ...

It's definitely an eerie feeling. I know I survived an apartment fire back in '83 - I only kind of understand what people are going through. Destruction on this scale - no, I can't comprehend. Like I posted, I'm upset I didn't have more time to get more pictures of the town - I love late 19th century, early 20th commercial architecture and Mayfield was a typical town that had preserved the downtown area.

Last evening, Mayfield, Kentucky got hit by a very large tornado. I was lucky enough to get a few waymarks of the town, although now, in hindsight, I am kicking myself for not getting more pictures as there were (past tense) great Victorian buildings contributing to the National Register. I'm posting a picture of the Courthouse; news reports are showing that the ENITRE clock cupola has been destroyed and that the surrounding area looks like Godzilla completely stomped through. Needless to say, prayers for all in the affected areas, as well as any support one can spare, would be great be appreciated. This is why Waymarking isn't about numbers - it is about the moment in time we, as waymarkers, document. Just my two cents....

Yes, there is an edit function Waymarking where one can make changes to other waymarkers submissions and the officers of those categories can approve. The WRONG way to do this is to completely wipe out the title and use words like GONE instead. Also, no backup - no news article, no picture - nothing submitted as evidence that the item is no longer there. First, waymarks should not be archived in my opinion - they existed and they need to stay in the record for historical access. This is especially true for historic buildings - my town lost our historic Courthouse this summer with about 6 of my waymarks, cemetery headstones, and monuments and statues; which seem to be especially vulnerable. Second, the procedure should be - the title - add (former){title} or something to that nature - do not remove the old title with the word GONE or whatever. ADD information to the LONG DESCRIPTION of the waymark giving the reason for the update AND submit pictures - you need to think of it as a reverse waymark submission. Officers in the category are not in the area and cannot and should not take information without proof. They would not do this for a waymark submission. I'm really not sure why this topic has to be a thing - it is rather disrespectful to other waymarkers to completely wipe out a title like that so that the waymark no longer shows in the listings.

That's probably why I tend to deny more than most and am considered a strict reviewer. Well played on the last statement, though....

I was taught to review by the late, great, BruceS. I was taught to look objectively at the submitted waymark and compare it to the standards set by category description - no more; no less. Funny thing- if one READS the category description either before or during their write-up just to make sure they haven't missed anything, they will get an approval from me. There isn't malace or favoritism - just a desire to see quality waymarks. Just a secret - I go over the category description before I do an approval session for that category just to make sure that I have the requirements fresh in my mind. I do this each and every time. That's probably why I'm the "strict" approver, but I can also back up WHY I sent the denial.

You know - a joke REALLY isn't funny if you hafta explain it.... https://genius.com/Burt-bacharach-the-world-is-a-circle-lyrics Just Sayin' .... I at least thought, Keith, you being at least as old a fart as I am, you woulda given me a well played or at least a smiley....

...and remember that the world is a circle without a beginning where no one knows where it really ends.

We have had several of these go up around town temporarily, especially down at our Union Station. They are especially popular when our sports teams get ready for opening day or they go into the playoffs....

Believe it or not, URLs go bad. People do not pay to keep websites active. Please remember this when you are posting waymarks and you only just put the URL link in as the long description. If that URL goes bad in a year or 10, what happens to that information? Go ahead and put the actual information into the long description and use the URL as the sourced reference.

I made the edit - the reason you couldn't was that the waymark was REALLY old and the date of dedication was in the wrong format. You had to edit it, also.

I know I appreciated you getting back with me helping me get past my ignorance on a category I was reviewing - it was appreciated. As far as the other category - I would rather someone get with me first than get pissed off at me after I denied it.

That's pretty funny - you called out the same waymarker on two of the three categories. Just to be fair, and to make sure that we are comparing apples to apples and not to toaster ovens, the Feeding the Animals category isn't trying to be the catch-all category like Dated Buildings Multifarious is. The reason for all of the restrictions is because of the catch-all nature of the category - if the founder just allowed anything with a date, then it wouldn't have passed peer review - too broad and covered by other categories - which is one of the four main reviewable tenets. The founder HAD to be VERY restrictive of what could and couldn't be accepted because of what he was trying to get waymarked. Dated buildings weren't allowing non-historical plaques or other kinds of very specific dated material and it was better to get that put in as a category than to get the category denied for being too broad. Your impression isn't true. Categories are created to: a.) get approved in peer review; and b.) create a set minimum expectation to both the waymarker AND the officer of what is expected as to a successful waymark. Unfortunately, the b part is just the minimum - your statement about "interesting" waymarks is dependent on the waymarker - not the officer and certainly not on the category creator. The category creator gives the framework - the skeleton for the waymark. The waymarker can either pretend s/he is in 7th grade art class and turn that in and get by; or actually go above and beyond the minimums and try to create a Picasso; a Rembrandt; a Pollock. That's on the waymarker - not on the officer or the category creator. As far as officers not understanding what is or isn't acceptable in a category - that officer has a duty to get with the category creator and ASK!!!!! I still ask for clarification and I have been doing this since it started.

Here's my take - I'm usually working either historic buildings on the National Register here in the US or I'm in a cemetery working Woodmen or Historic figures or what not. I'm doing some significant research, especially on these buildings, and yes, if I find that the building was a former bank, or a former Post Office, or has a cornerstone, or whatever, I am going to post whatever waymarks are going to be germaine for that situation. Think about it, your research isn't just for other waymarkers, it could be useful for students, etc. Cross posting could draw someone interested in former banks, but not in the National Register. Also, if my research was deep enough, another waymarker may not FIND that reference to the former Post Office, etc. If you only want to post one waymark per object, great! Don't, however, get upset if another waymarker follows behind you and grabs however many waymarks they can find on that object - 99.9% will not followup with just one - I wouldn't, especially if I wrote a very lengthy long description...

Since the building allows remains, this makes the building a mausoleum. This is why, when I wrote the category description, I had to state that no remains could be in the chapel - mausoleums were already accepted.

Here we have a classic example of WHY we have peer review for new categories. Talk about a category that is completely subjective - one person's "urban legend" may not be another's... Then, you have the creator of the category bugging out of Waymarking the same year he created this "interesting" piece of Waymarking. My question is - if you expand to just "Legends", and these are people, how would this be different than "Epic Beings" if Epic Beings allow a statue of Lewis and Clark to be included in their category????

I've only come across a couple of zincs that I would say have the "Wow" - this being the most impressive: https://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/wmDDGN_J_E_Barrow_Mt_Mora_Cemetery_St_Joseph_Mo I like the idea of limiting submissions - I know in Bellfountaine Cemetery in St. Louis there are some spectacular examples that I can't wait to load into the category.... I hope we can see a proposed description before peer review....

Sometimes the map works for the reviewers - sometimes it doesn't. You put your money down and you take your chances....

You are welcome.

Again, that is exactly why I wrote what I wrote. The deal breaker with cross posting is if ALL of one type of waymark is going to go into the new category, As is being demonstrated so far as I can see, this is not the case. Of course, I always reserve final judgement until I see the real mockup of the category description - so far, we are still dealing with caviar wishes and Champaign dreams...

I would also post this under World War II Memorials. This was part of the U.S. Army's efforts to build the Trans Alaska Highway during that war and this incident was the largest single loss of life that occurred. It cannot go under Non Specific Veterans because only one war was involved. Specific Veterans is out because multiple units were involved. This involved active duty Army personnel so the Citizen Memorial category would be out. Hope this helps.

My take - make it true Funerary art - that is, it must be part of a headstone or grave marker. I can tell you that the Veterans Memorials , both Specific and non-specific are now out of the picture as they specifically exclude headstones. Woodmen markers, as a general rule, should be denied as most were mass produced tree trunk style markers (there were other tree trunk style markers sold by Sears through the catalogue, another story.) A lot of late 19th and early 20th Century headstones had very shallow, mass produced, relief art put into the stones - hands pointing up, hands shaking, pearly gates opening, etc. These probably should be denied - otherwise your category is just going to be overwhelmed with the mundane. Broken Columns are usually pretty austere and devoid of decoration - this reflects the fact that the column is demonstrating a life cut short before it had reached its full potential. My concern is that officers in this category are just not going to have the knowledge of what is mass produced and what is actually unique, It takes time and walking lots of cemeteries to gain that kind of knowledge... Other categories such as dead poets, graves mentioning cause of death, and other headstone categories should not be a concern. There will be some cross-over, however, not every dead poet grave or other headstone category headstone will fit here - far from it.