NW_history_buff
-
Posts
375 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by NW_history_buff
-
-
Greetings, fellow waymarkers,
I've been trying to contact the leaders/officers of the Gazebos category to possibly include Pergolas as an addition to the category vs. creating a whole separate category for pergolas. Many architects and historians consider pergolas a type of gazebo. (You can read more about pergolas by clicking the link on the word)
I've become very interested of late in these often elaborate and ornamental structures and recently found two pergolas in Seattle while visiting over the holidays that are listed in the National Register of Historic Places here and here. I also know of two more in California that I came across in my travels last summer. I just know that hundreds of these pergolas probably exist worldwide. I believe they were first built in Italy in ancient times and have spread out as a form of architectural cover for pedestrians. Some are hundreds of years old or older. Of course, I feel a potential waymark for a pergola would require it to be permanent and publicly accessible and follow the same guidelines as gazebos.
If the Gazebo officers aren't receptive to including Pergolas as an addition to their category, how many of you reading this would consider the possibility of adding a stand-alone Pergola category?
Happy Waymarking!
thebeav69
-
I chuckled when I saw this thread because I recently visited Groundspeak HQ in Seattle, WA and spoke with the two lead creators/administrators of Waymarking and I asked them the same question.
Nate, one of the administrators told me that the icons were once created by a talented graphic artist who worked for Groundspeak for a number of years before leaving to go onto bigger and better things. I believe Nate told me that she was also behind the development of 'Signal' (the frog), the mascot for Groundspeak. Currently, the icon production is left up to other designers to tackle within the department and Nate was honest in his conversation with me that the Waymarking entity as a whole piggybacks onto the popularity and revenue of Geocaching.
As most waymarkers know, the Waymarking.com community is very small compared to the Geocaching.com community and all activity and administration of it is only made possible through trickle-down funding from Geocaching.com's revenue. Waymarking would not and could not survive without the Geocaching entity and as a result, some of the development and administration of Waymarking gets pushed back into backlogs of the 'to-do list'.
I, personally, am enamored by the great potential that Waymarking can become for people young and old in appreciating all the history, places-of-interest, and endless waymark locations that exist worldwide. I asked Brian, the other Waymarking administrator about creating a mobile app for Waymarking for a smartphone and he replied that although the idea is a good one, it will not happen at Groundspeak anytime soon.
-
No problem with a category being confined to one country or region. We have many, many categories that are limited this way.
The problem is, as BruceS has pointed out, ALL of these are part of the National Register of Historic Places, and many of them are already waymarked in that category. I suppose it might make a good variable, but I see no compelling reason to pull them out for a separate category. That would be 100% redundancy.
After going back into NRHP and looking at their database, I agree, a new category for National Historic Landmarks would be 100% redundant. With that said, I would HIGHLY suggest the officers in the U.S. National Register of Historic Places category ADD a variable to include a URL link option to the database for any National Historic Landmark locations they may come across. In this way, all bases are covered and would help educate other waymarkers to the variety of historic landmarks that exist.
-
Greetings, fellow waymarkers,
As I've gotten into Waymarking more and more, I've become more excited about the wonderful history that surrounds us and have gained a much better appreciation for the preservation of this history, whether it's preserving a home, a building, a bridge or a piece of art. Just about anywhere one goes in their travels, a town, city, or in the countryside, there is history to be appreciated. If any of you have waymarked a location in the U.S. National Register of Historic Places category or the NRHP Historic District - Contributing Buildings category, you will know what I mean. With these two categories in mind, I've discovered that there is no category that exists for U.S. National Historic Landmarks. These landmarks have their own database that reside within the National Park Service website domain, along with the National Register of Historic Places database. There are currently over 2400 National Historic Landmarks (and growing) that exist in every state of the U.S. New York alone has the largest collection of landmarks with almost 300 locations.
The following text is taken off the NHL website and says this: National Historic Landmarks are nationally significant historic places designated by the Secretary of the Interior because they possess exceptional value or quality in illustrating or interpreting the heritage of the United States. Today, fewer than 2,500 historic places bear this national distinction. Working with citizens throughout the nation, the National Historic Landmarks Program draws upon the expertise of National Park Service staff who work to nominate new landmarks and provide assistance to existing landmarks. National Historic Landmarks are exceptional places. They form a common bond between all Americans. While there are many historic places across the nation, only a small number have meaning to all Americans--these we call our National Historic Landmarks. National Historic Landmarks are exceptional places. They form a common bond between all Americans. While there are many historic places across the nation, only a small number have meaning to all Americans--these we call our National Historic Landmarks.
There was a National Historic Landmarks Managers group established a few years ago but has remained quiet the past few years with no activity. I've become an officer of this group and there is a U.S. National Historic Landmarks category that has been created that I will be creating a writeup for and will be posting here soon for input/feedback from fellow waymarkers. I am anticipating that this potential category will get some flack from waymarkers outside the U.S. for it not being global and restricted to the U.S. only. BUT... considering that this potential category complements the previously mentioned NRHP categories which are also U.S. restricted, I would hope that waymarkers will acknowledge this and give it the benefit of the doubt. I will also be following the same conventions as the other two NRHP categories to maintain continuity.
I welcome any and all feedback!
Happy Waymarking,
Doug
thebeav69
-
Anything remotely related to benchmarks/survey marks gets a 100% approval and support from Yours Truly! Great category addition, you get my vote.
Also should mention a very nice category writeup too.
-
We did it! The Soroptimist International Markers Category is now online and ready to accept waymark submissions! Thanks to all who gave input and helped to make this category official.
The Matriarchal Advocates group is eager to see just how many monuments, markers and other points-of-interest for Soroptimist International exist around the world.
Happy Waymarking!
thebeav69
Max and 99
saopaulo1
bluesnote
-
It is a little strange, isn't it, that there are so few monuments to the conflicts, the wars, between our native Americans and our immigrant forebears? I think part of it is a deep, underlying prejudice and unwillingness to recognize the atrocities of the past. But, I think it is also because most of these conflicts were never classified as wars. (I think this accounts for the lack of representation in the Specific Wars category.) Where would one classify things like the Whitman Massacre? (I grew up near there.) In new England, the only references to all of the conflicts with Native Americans seem to be in connection with other historic sites, such as forts, or museums.
I'm not convinced that this couldn't still be a viable category, although prevalence and redundancy are issues to be addressed. It would take some very careful crafting to develop such a category so that it works. Oh, we do have some categories like Trail of Tears, and Nations within Nations that might also overlap.
Silverquill, I agree with you wholeheartedly with your "underlying prejudice and unwillingness to recognize the atrocities of the past" statement. I also wholeheartedly disagree with the assumptions of these Indian wars and conflicts not being common throughout the U.S. I STRONGLY believe if one opens their mind to many of the Indian conflicts that existed the past 300+ years, one would find MANY more locations for potential waymarks than originally imagined. Whether they be memorial monuments to both the American natives or settlers/soldiers who warred with each other or monuments to the actual conflicts themselves, I strongly feel there IS enough of these references to make a category dedicated to them viable.
As for a potential 'American Indian Wars Monuments and Memorials' category being global? That remark is irrelevant, especially when one considers that this 'criteria' can be applied to many of the other CURRENT categories that are only centralized within the United States and yet are STILL viable in their own right. They include categories like American Revolution Patriot Graves, American Revolutionary War Veteran Graves, American Civil War Monuments and Memorials, Civil War Discovery Trail Sites, U.S. Civil War General Statues, U.S. Civil War Sites, categories specific to historic individuals within the U.S (George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Benjamin Franklin, John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Jr.) and many others. Creating an 'American Indian Wars Monuments & Memorials' category could be yet another great addition to the existing U.S.-only categories and in a way, complete another chapter in American history.
Silverquill, you are also very correct that a potential category like this would need careful 'crafting' of words and examples to support it so that the rest of the Waymarking community realizes that this chapter in American history DESERVES its own recognition and spotlight SEPARATE from any other current category (like the Specific Wars Monuments and Memorials category). Silverquill, would you be willing to assist me in writing up a great description for this potential category?
I invite other waymarkers reading this post to assist me in this cause and if interested, join my newly-established group (American Indian Wars/Conflicts Historians) here.
Happy Waymarking!
thebeav69
-
Greetings, fellow waymarkers,
I've submitted the Soroptimist International Markers potential category for Peer Review. I appreciate the comments and suggestions that a few fellow waymarkers made on previous posts and cut the description down and simplified it to aid in understanding. I am excited to see where the vote goes. As I've stated before, this category falls in line with other current categories that exist within the community service/fraternal organizations such as Rotary International Markers, Lions Club International Markers, Kiwanis International Markers and Knights of Pythias, etc.
You can go directly to the Soroptimist International Markers page with the following link to vote:
Soroptimist International Markers
This potential category represents some wonderful community service outreach for young women around the world and and I feel Waymarking the monuments and dedications from this organization would be an enjoyable experience for many.
Happy Waymarking,
thebeav69
-
OK, I see that this War-Specific category is pretty new (created in July) and I also couldn't find it, like Max and 99 (I'm thinking there aren't enough 'keywords' typed in the category description to helps narrow down the search).
With that said, I'm still wondering if a category devoted to American Indian Wars would be a nice category addition, much like the U.S. Revolutionary War, American Civil War, Spanish-American War, World War I, World War II, Korean War, and Persian Gulf War categories that currently exist. Naysayers may say, "Why do we need yet another war category?" I would respond that a category devoted to all the native conflicts with American settlers and the U.S. Government would house them in an entity of their own and make waymark submissions to these historic conflicts much easier for others. If you read my first post, I mentioned that the Native conflicts with American settlers lasted over 300 years! That is MORE history of these conflicts than ALL the other American wars COMBINED!
I've already come across a good dozen historical monuments dedicated to just a couple of native conflicts/wars in my neck of the woods alone. This category could conceivably host hundreds and possibly thousands of waymarks across the country. Currently, the American Indian Wars waymark submissions (there are only three submitted from the U.S. to date, and two of them are monuments from America's conflicts with the Mexicans) get lost in the mix of many European wars/conflicts that make up the majority of submissions. I would love to be able to waymark American Indian Wars historical markers to its OWN category. I hope many of you agree.
-
As I've traveled across Northwestern Oregon and California, I've come across a good number of historical markers that cover various conflicts between Native American peoples and either white settlers or the U.S. Government. I then did some research online about other conflicts between natives and settlers/U.S. Government and discovered there were quite a large number that existed all across the United States, some lasting many decades. I would not hesitate to guess there are hundreds of historical markers that highlight these various conflicts over the years. There is also no category that exists for Waymarking conflicts between native peoples and American settlers or the U.S. Government.
I have established a new group titled American Indian Wars and is open for membership. I would welcome any interested waymarkers to this group for support and potential officership in this category.
Although this category is limited to only historical conflicts within the United States, I don't feel this reason alone should minimize its potential and historical value for other waymarkers. There are many current categories within Waymarking.com that are centralized to one area of the world and yet they provide value and merit in their own right.
Please click the following link to Wikipedia's American Indian Wars page and you will notice that there are plenty of conflicts covering much history of America. They include:
Colonial Period
East of the Mississippi (1775–1842)
American Revolutionary War 1775–1783
Chickamauga Wars (1776-1794)
Northwest Indian War
Tecumseh, the Creek War, and the War of 1812
Removal era wars
Second Seminole War
West of the Mississippi (1811–1923)
Texas–Indian Wars
Pacific Northwest (Cayuse War, Yakima War, Puget Sound War, Rogue River Wars, Spokane – Coeur d'Alene – Paloos War, Snake War, Nez Perce War, Bannock War, and Sheepeater Indian War)
Southwest ( Navajo Wars, Yuma War, Mohave War, Apache wars, and Black Hawk War (1865–1872))
California (Mariposa War, Klamath and Salmon River War, Tule River War, Bald Hills War, Pitt River Expedition, Mendocino War, Owens Valley Indian War, Snake War, and Modoc War)
Great Basin (Walker War, Paiute War, Bear River Massacre, Goshute War, Snake War, Black Hawk War (Utah), Eastern Nevada Expedition, Bannock War, White River War, and Ute Indian Campaign)
Great Plains (Treaty of Fort Laramie (1851), Treaty of Fort Wise, Dakota War of 1862, Sand Creek Massacre, Colorado War, Powder River Expedition (1865), Red Cloud's War, Great Sioux War of 1876–77, Battle of the Little Bighorn, and Wounded Knee Massacre)
Dakota War of 1862
Colorado War, Sand Creek Massacre and the Sioux War of 1865
Red Cloud's War and Treaty of Fort Laramie (1868)
Black Hills War
Custer and Bloody Knife (kneeling left), Custer's favorite scout.
In 1875, the Great Sioux War of 1876–77
An amazing reference on this Wikipedia page: 'Some time in 1924 both the Renegade Period and the Apache Wars ended which had begun decades earlier and brought the American Indian Wars to a close 302 years after the Jamestown Massacre of 1622.'
Keep in mind that any and all conflicts from the above list could potentially equate to HUNDREDS if not THOUSANDS of waymarks!
If, after reading this, you still don't think a category for American Indian Wars is justified, then I hope you have a pretty darned good reason why!
Happy Waymarking,
thebeav69
-
Thank you, Max and 99 and fi67. Good suggestions. I also agree with requiring two photos, one as a closeup and one farther away as a reference photo. I will try to change the English requirements to simplify the description and use simple words. I have to keep in mind not all waymarkers speak and write English but a basic sentence description in English should still be a requirement for submission.
-
Greetings, fellow waymarkers,
The Matriarchal Advocates group (enrollment is still open for membership!) has approved the potential category for Soroptimist International Markers and invite anyone to click on the provided link below to view the category description and make any comments or suggestions on it within this forum before it is posted for a Peer Review:
Soroptimist Internation Markers
Matriarchal Advocates is excited to see this category gain momentum as well as to see how many markers exist out in the real world (hundreds, potentially). This category's organization does some great philanthropic work for young women and other women in communities across the world and they have dedicated markers, plaques, memorial gardens and other monuments to reflect this. Think of this category in much the same way as you think of Kiwanis, Rotary, Lions Club, Knights of Pythais and other fraternal or philanthropic organizations that are current categories in Waymarking.com.
Happy Waymarking,
Matriarchal Advocates Group
thebeav69
Max and 99
saopaulo1
bluesnote
-
@silverquill, I actually have seen two soroptimist markers in my hometown in just the past month. This inspired me to find out more about the organization and discovered there is no category for them, so I created one. Since they do VERY positive work for young women and women in general in communities throughout the world, I would bet they exist much more than you think.
@Ianatlarge, I've also noticed many websites dedicated to Soroptimist activities in Australia. If this category gets approved, I welcome any and all markers you may find!
I'm posting the category writeup for Soroptimist International Markers in this forum shortly for all to comment/make suggestions and then will post for Peer Review. Crossing fingers!
Happy Waymarking,
Doug
thebeav69
-
My personal opinion is that we do not need yet another honorary or charity organization marker category. There are enough and I don't find them particularly interesting. I can easily live without them, but I would also not be bothered if it was approved. I am going to abstain as long as the technical quality of the proposal is fine.
fi67, I don't think you truly read the mission of the Soroptimist organization no did you pay attention to the picture I posted. As someone who has waymarked flags and plaques from the Rotary, Kiwanis and Lions Club organizations, as well as citizen dedications (which this category could cross-fit into), I strongly feel that Soroptimist International falls right into that category of volunteer organizations WORLDWIDE whose mission is to enhance people's lives and the communities they reside in. I don't know how you or ANYONE would NOT find markers such as these valuable assets to the communities and something to appreciate in a philanthropic way. I personally find these types of markers MUCH more interesting and enjoyable than Waymarking a McDonald's fast food restaurant or a Target store, IMHO.
I think I can convince enough folks, particularly female waymarkers, that this organization deserves its own category. The fact that this organization is worldwide only adds to its legitimacy.
~Peace
-
WOW! I was shocked recently to discover that there is NO category for Soroptimist International Markers anywhere within Waymarking.com. This maternal organization enjoys much the same international reputation as other volunteer organizations such as Lions Clubs, Kiwanis and Rotary organizations that are currently categories within Waymarking.com in reaching out to certain sects of society and enhancing lives all over the world.
The Soroptimist website states its mission as:
An international volunteer organization working to improve the lives
of women and girls, in local communities and throughout the world.
I have started a group called Soroptimist International Markers and am inviting anyone who is interested in joining this group to help me manage this potential new category. I am specifically seeking female members since this is, after all, a maternal organization. Please click the below link to go to my group's profile page and join if you are so inclined: Soroptimist International Markers Group.
The idea behind this potential category came to me after seeing a Soroptimist memorial garden marker near my home and after doing some research came to the conclusion that no category exists, but SHOULD. If you have never heard about Soroptimist International (my ex wife was a member for many years, so have been very familiar with their mission), please click the following link to their Soroptimist International official website to learn more about what they do worldwide. This is an exciting opportunity for waymarkers to visit and log various markers, plaques, benches, fountains, what-have-you worldwide and submit them here.
-
I'm interested in officership in 'Bed and Breakfast' and 'Antique Shops'.... Thanks.
-
FRUSTRATON with category officers NOT approving waymarks in a timely manner! Compliment that frustration with many officers having not been logged onto Waymarking.com in days, weeks and even months just adds to the frustration.
ALL category officers have a responsibility to their respective categories that they manage to either stay active in the Waymarking community or resign as officers if they don't have the time or energy to approve or deny waymark submissions in a timely manner (72 hours).
For example, I submitted a waymark in the Lonely Chimneys category THREE WEEKS AGO and STILL haven't gotten any approval or feedback after numerous attempts to contact the few officers that manage this category.
I have another waymark submission in the LEED Buildings category that I submitted TWO WEEKS AGO and also haven't heard anything back.
And finally, I've submitted numerous waymark submissions in the Worldwide Cemeteries category and the ONLY active officer of that category continues to deny my submissions because certain variables in his category are CORRUPT and won't allow typed in info!! I've contacted him numerous times to offer to become an officer and fix the problem and assist with waymarks since the other two officers haven't been active in weeks and months and get NO RESPONSE. I personally think he enjoys being a one-man team and that's a D A M N shame (his profile name is Max Cacher, BTW).
Is there ANYTHING we waymarkers can do to alleviate these frustrations. Have any of you attempted to contact the Waymarking establishment and call out these individuals to make them shape up or ship out??? I'm looking for suggestions and feedback here. I love Waymarking and appreciate those individuals who stay active in the community but am at my wits end with what to do with those few that continue to abuse the privileges that are bestowed upon them.
-
Go for it beav! Be sure to be careful in the words you choose and keep it clear, like you see a little slip up of a word causes a great deal of debate and misunderstanding. You have made the point well that current cats don’t serve the need. Don’t let anyone tell you if it is interesting or not, that is the place of the self righteous to do, let the voting tell if it is interesting and viable. What scares so many folks is that McDonalds did make it as a cat! Go for it! Voting is free, lets see what happens.
No need to be scared, McDonald's did not make it; it was there from the beginning long before Peer Reviews started. All those chain store and restaurant categories would not make it anymore today. So it is not helpful to refer to them because they can be considered historic relics in this respect.
Don't go for it too fast! It was denied the first time, if you do not manage to convince some of the Nay voters this will happen again.
Unfortunately most voters do not read the forums, so what was said here will not have any effect on Peer Review, it all has to be in the proposal itself.
First you have to make clear that Fire Lookouts are NOT Lookout Towers. Then you have to find clear and concise words for all the points that created confusion, that is "accessible" and "destroyed".
My idea is that a fire lookout should be accessible to be waymarked. Not the lookout platform, then it would be a lookout tower, but the base or a location close enough to the base. It does not make any sense to allow submissions that are not accessible at all. How would you get the coordinates and pictures?
The same with "destroyed", what does this mean? Are you intending to allow a location of a former fire lookout with no remaining traces at all? How could you tell this is the right spot? And why should I go there? But if destroyed means ruins, then I am fine with it. Active, converted, abandoned, or even ruined; but not completely gone.
I think this is an interesting category and I would like to see it fly.
Thank you so much to all who have replied to this topic. I agree with most all points and suggestions and I will spend time to CAREFULLY choose my words and points before I submit this potential category again for Peer Review. The Look-Out Towers officers have shown no interest in absorbing any new variables into their current category. With that said, I'll do my best to make convincing arguments that Fire Lookouts deserve a category to themselves. In reference to ACCESSIBLE fire lookouts, YES. I agree, they need to be accessible in order to waymark them. That doesn't mean they need to be able to be climbed to the top. But they need to be able to be driven or hiked to without trespassing on private property. As for DESTROYED fire lookouts, read the home page of Former Fire Lookout Sites Register website (http://www.firetower.org/) and it explains well their mission of recording any traces of former, abandoned or removed fire lookouts and all they require are some memories and pictures. I feel we could apply those same principles to this category. We would be helping their organization in tracking down former fire lookouts and providing coordinates to these places for historical value. I've been communicating with both the current and former Historical Lookout bodies and they have been very supportive of what I'm doing.
Peer Review Version 2 coming soon...
-
silverquill, I disagree with your opinion of not Waymarking fire lookouts that have been destroyed. Fire lookouts SHOULD be able to be waymarked to record any remaining evidence of their existence, much like an archeologist looks for ancient evidence of prior civilizations and documents any discoveries (below picture is of a destroyed former lookout and its current replacement in the background and represents my point).
The official Former Fire Lookout Sites body (www.firetower.org) WANT people to seek out evidence of prior fire lookouts that have been destroyed and document them for their Former Fire Lookout Registry. I'm not asking waymarkers on Waymarking.com to submit destroyed or even active fire lookouts to the official Fire Lookout Historical Registries, but this would be a PERFECT OPPORTUNITY for a category like this in its long description to aid a waymarker in learning about the official Fire Lookout Registries and inviting them to submit their documentation to these Registries if they choose. It should also be noted that the Benchmarks category currently allows Waymarking of destroyed benchmarks (as well as Geocaching.com) to let other waymarkers know that they have been compromised and shouldn't be searched for and the pictures they upload are the proof of their demise. Benchmarkers can even submit their recoveries to the NGS and USGS folks to share with the surveying community.In reference to non-accessible fire lookouts that a waymarker may come across, I'll clarify that I am NOT intending for waymarkers to log and visit publicly-inaccessible fire lookouts that may be on private property. I'm referring to fire lookouts that a waymarker may come across on public lands but can't access the lookout due to it being shut down for the season, closed temporarily due to lack of funding, or inaccessible to the public because the fire lookout operator isn't willing to allow visitors to climb the lookout or visit the inside of the lookout. BruceS is correct in that a fire lookout that isn't climbable to get a view shouldn't be a reason to dissuade a waymarker from visiting the fire lookout, taking some pictures of its surroundings and logging the coordinates.
silverquill, I agree with you in that I think the focus of a potential new Fire Lookout category should be centered around the fact that many fire lookouts (towers and non-towers) cannot be waymarked into the current Look-Out Towers category because they can't be climbed or accessed in accordance with the requirements dictated by that category. Some fire lookouts are not, in fact, towers at all but are dug outs in the side of a cliff. A separate category allowing these fire lookouts to be waymarked without the current limitations of the Look-Out Towers category should be some justification for a separate category. Complimenting this argument with the Waymarking of destroyed or defunct fire lookouts as evidence as well as variables to help those waymarkers possibly submit fire lookouts to the official Fire Lookout Registries would be icing on the cake.
-
Well, THIS is frustrating.
I messaged all the officers of the Look-Out Towers category last week with the topic of adding new variables to include Fire Lookouts as destroyed, part of the National Historic Lookout Register or World Historic Lookout Register as well as in the Former Historic Lookout Register and got ABSOLUTELY NO RESPONSE BACK. I also asked each officer if he or she weren't willing to add these variables, if they would make me an officer so that I could accomplish this task myself. NOTHING.
With that said, my plan is to refocus my words for a second Peer Review in hopes of establishing a Fire Lookouts category.
The previous category denial centered around redundancy issues and I can understand the concerns from others regarding an already-existing category for fire lookouts. BUT... here are my responses to those who voted 'NO' for this category:
1) The current Look-Out Towers category does NOT allow waymarks for DESTROYED fire lookouts. The proposed Fire Lookouts category WOULD allow them AS WELL AS defunct fire lookouts (not in use).
2) The current Look-Out Towers category does NOT allow non-accessible lookouts (i.e., those which are off-limits to the public) as waymarks. The proposed Fire Lookouts category WOULD allow non-accessible Fire Lookouts.
3) The current Look-Out Towers category contains NO VARIABLES for fire lookouts which may be included in the National or World Historic Lookout Register OR the Former Historic Lookout Register. There are two websites devoted to conservation of previous and current fire lookouts and have a national database and world database for the public to seek out fire lookouts. www.nhlr.org and www.firetower.org are the websites which devote their energies to conservation of any fire lookout out in the world and they do the public a GREAT service by trying to save many fire lookouts from destruction.
The above three points I've addressed should be enough, IMHO, to warrant another take at a new Fire Lookouts category, especially if NONE of the current officers of the Look-Out Towers category are willing to address my concerns.
Fire Lookouts do a great service to the country and to the world in that they constantly sniff out potentially destructive fires, thus SAVING LIVES in the process. If the Waymarking world could CARE ENOUGH about fire lookouts as they currently do with all the fast food restaurant categories that currently exist, then a Fire Lookouts category DESERVES a second chance!
-
FIRST of Its Kind accepts other wording, such as oldest, original, etc., IF the wording indicates that the site commemorates something that was the first of its kind. In the Case of Dunant, probably a "FIRST OF" is not indicated. I suppose one might exrapolate that he was the first member of the Red Cross. John Wesley was the founder of the Methodist Church, so was he the FIRST member? I would say that unless the plaque or sign clearly indicated this, then they waymark might not fit.
As the founder of the Superlatives category, which was started partly to include sites that didn't qualify for the FIRST of Its Kind, I'm also ambivalent about including these. Of course, the category doesn't accept "plaque only" waymarks anyway.
I don't think a category for the few cases of these that would not fall into some other category would be such a good idea. With a little head scratching, I bet you could find a home for them.
Silverquill,
I agree with most of what you're saying, and I know that with enough 'head scratching', a waymarker could probably fit most of these 'Founders/Father of..' plaques/monuments. etc. into a certain category. BUT... I DO believe more of these types of public recognitions exist than you think, especially around the world. I'm just proposing the idea that it might be nice to single out these particular individual accomplishments into a category devoted to these individuals rather than have them get lost in a mix of Superlatives, First of its Kind and Citizen Memorials. For me personally, I think it would be neat to go through a list of 'Founder of...' or Father/Mother of...' waymarks in much the same way as I read down a list of First of Its Kind or Superlatives waymarks.
-
I've come across a couple of plaques of late that mention 'Father of..' or 'Founder of...' in reference to originating a particular national monument or an invention. I'm wondering if plaques, monuments or other official dedications should be included as a new variable in the First of Its Kind category or do they deserve a category of its own?
I'm going to assume that since most waymarkers don't want redundancy or extra confusion when trying to waymark something like this, that any 'Father/Founder of..' (or Mother of...' for that matter) dedications should easily be an additional variable to the First of Its Kind category. But, if enough of these dedications exist worldwide, maybe a category dedicated to highlighting individuals who are credited for accomplishing something grandiose in their lives should exist?
Wikipedia includes a list of Father of/Mother of accomplishments in all areas:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_considered_father_or_mother_of_a_field
If there was a category dedicated to these individuals, future waymarks for these individuals would require a plaque, monument, or other proof that visitors could take pictures of and share them with the rest of the Waymarking world.
A new category name for this could simply be titled, Founders and Fathers of...
Thoughts?
-
I've made an appeal to the officers of the Look-Out Towers category and explained to them what the issue is regarding my potential Fire Lookouts category proposal. The following is my letter to the officers and awaiting their responses:
Greetings,
I recently tried to send a potential new category, Fire Lookouts for peer review and it was denied due to redundancy issues. I've been told to re-write the category proposal and bring up any new points that weren't addressed in the last peer review and re-submit. Before I do, I wanted to ascertain as to what your opinion and desire is currently as a Look-Out Towers officer in regards to implementing some new variables that I've researched and am trying to include into either your category or into my own category proposal.
The following excerpt is from the Groundspeak forum in regards to the Fire Lookouts Peer Review:
"For example, the Fire Lookouts category CAN include destroyed/former lookouts, something the Look-Out Towers category does NOT allow. It's also been pointed out by fellow waymarkers that the Look-Out Towers category includes only publicly accessible towers whereas the Fire Lookouts category can include either publicly accessible OR non-accesible towers.
I consider the Fire Lookouts category as a specialized category, much like the U.S. National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) category. Why? Because there exists a U.S. and World Historic Lookout Register database, complete with Fire Lookout National category #s and State #s that work in much the same way as the NRHP category. The fact that there is a World Lookout Register database makes this category worldwide and not limited to just U.S. Fire Lookouts. A specific category for fire lookouts would be very beneficial in getting waymarkers to seek out any former, destroyed or current fire lookout to include in the National Historic Lookout Register, something that ALL officers of this category would be willing help waymarkers accomplish. I see this specialized category as very beneficial to the folks managing the Fire Lookouts database (www.nhlr.org) AND the folks at the former fire lookouts site (www.fflos.com).
If the current officers of the Look-Out Towers category are willing to include ALL of the U.S. and Worldwide Historic Register/database information as new variables in their category, then a separate category for Fire Lookouts is not needed. BUT... Are the officers willing to take on these additional duties and responsibilities for inclusion of former, destroyed, current and future fire lookouts into the National and Worldwide registers? If not, then myself and a list of other officers are willing to do it NOW and do it expeditiously!"
From reading the above excerpt, are you willing to include this new information as variables into your category? If not, would you be willing to make me an officer so that I can administer these new additions myself and oversee any fire lookout waymark submission into the National Historic Register? If you and other officers are willing to accept this, then I won't pursue the re-submission of a Fire Lookouts category for Peer Review. If you're not willing to include these new variables at this time, please let me know and I'l continue pursuing this on my own.
I feel there are many fire lookouts worldwide that aren't getting the attention they deserve, whether they've been destroyed and need updating, or need to be included into the National and Worldwide Historic Registers and by Waymarking them, are providing a wonderful service to the folks that maintain/oversee these Registers.
V/R
Doug
thebeav69
-
I'm disappointed that the Fire Lookouts category was denied but I will definitely create a revised write-up and re-submit with a new take.
For example, the Fire Lookouts category CAN include destroyed/former lookouts, something the Look-Out Towers category does NOT allow. It's also been pointed out by fellow waymarkers that the Look-Out Towers category includes only publicly accessible towers whereas the Fire Lookouts category can include either publicly accessible OR non-accesible towers.
I consider the Fire Lookouts category as a specialized category, much like the U.S. National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) category. Why? Because there exists a U.S. and World Historic Lookout Register database, complete with Fire Lookout National category #s and State #s that work in much the same way as the NRHP category. The fact that there is a World Lookout Register database makes this category worldwide and not limited to just U.S. Fire Lookouts. A specific category for fire lookouts would be very beneficial in getting waymarkers to seek out any former, destroyed or current fire lookout to include in the National Historic Lookout Register, something that ALL officers of this category would be willing help waymarkers accomplish. I see this specialized category as very beneficial to the folks managing the Fire Lookouts database (www.nhlr.org) AND the folks at the former fire lookouts site (www.fflos.com).
If the current officers of the Look-Out Towers category are willing to include ALL of the U.S. and Worldwide Historic Register/database information as new variables in their category, then a separate category for Fire Lookouts is not needed. BUT... Are the officers willing to take on these additional duties and responsibilities for inclusion of former, destroyed, current and future fire lookouts into the National and Worldwide registers? If not, then myself and a list of other officers are willing to do it NOW and do it expeditiously!
NEW Category Proposal: U.S. National Historic Landmarks
in Recruiting and Category Proposals
Posted
BruceS,
I noticed you added the variable to include a link to the National Historic Landmark page. Thanks for the addition. The only other thing I noticed is that from reading the long description to the NHRP category, one section reads:
The Primary URL must be a link to the specific page of the Nationalregisterofhistoricplaces site that contains the listing for the historic site.
Only as an alternative, the link may be to an individual listing on the Landmark Hunter site. Landmark Hunter or FindTheData. (It is not possible to link directly to an individual listing in the official NRHP database).
I disagree with the last sentence saying it is not possible to link directly to an individual listing in the official NRHP database. It IS possible, I've used the official NRHP database to link my previous NRHP waymarks many times. The main caveat to doing this is that the official site goes down frequently for minutes on end. I've contacted the NPS folks and asked them 'What gives?' and they replied that they are in the process of updating servers and equipment and to be patient (typical P/C answer).
I might suggest reviewing the official database site for NRHP (here) and let me know how it works for you. I recently submitted a NRHP waymark from Seattle, WA and the Nationalregisterofhistoricplaces.com database stopped at the letter 'V' for King County and my waymark name fell under 'W', but I was able find the individual listing for it in the NRHP database here.