Adding Under A Topic

[+ChaseOnTheGo 0]

Hello,

 

Does anyone know how to log a new place on a subject. For example I found a lion statue and have coordinates and a picture of the statue. How do I log this on the "Lion Statues" page?

[+The Royles 0]

Go to the Lion Statues page, and on the right hand side in the category options box is "Record Waymark". Click on that and you are on your way.

[+Zzyzx Road 0]

Okay,

I have a wooden statue of normal size (6 feet or so) of a Viking. He doesn't fit as an insect, lion, sphynx, musician or something of ginormous size. Where will he go? Seems there is no subcatagory for him that I can find...even though there is a slight possibility that I am cross-eyed from reading ALL the catagories...and I am not able to make a subcatagory...

 

(Man, I never realized there were so many varied virtuals!)

Edited January 10, 2006 by Zzyzx Road

[tozainamboku 5]

Okay,

I have a wooden statue of normal size (6 feet or so) of a Viking. He doesn't fit as an insect, lion, sphynx, musician or something of ginormous size. Where will he go? Seems there is no subcatagory for him that I can find...even though there is a slight possibility that I am cross-eyed    from reading ALL the catagories...and I am not able to make a subcatagory...

 

(Man, I never realized there were so many varied virtuals!)

Aha! This is the problem with Waymarking as a substitute for virtual caches. Wooden statues of Vikings just aren't "Wow!" enough to deserve being waymarks. In the future, if enough waymarkers think that Viking statues or wooden statues or something else is "Wow" enough they will be able to create a category for that and then you can submit your waymark.

[+Zzyzx Road 0]

...Wooden statues of Vikings just aren't "Wow!" enough to deserve being waymarks...In the future, if enough waymarkers think that Viking statues or wooden statues or something else is "Wow" enough they will be able to create a category for that and then you can submit your waymark...

So is all this catagory discussion pretty much just up to a select few that choose what gets listed?

 

Our Swedish VIllage (as it is called) has some very well advertised events, all relating to the heritage theme.

 

Seeing as he (this Viking) is one of several "Symbols" of our town's heritage, I thought it deserving of something. He could be statuary, a monument to the Swedish culture that this town has, along with the fiberglass Dala horse located across the street and down a ways. There is a Water Tower catagory where I was able to place the Coffe-Pot shaped container, which again, is a a symbol of our town.

 

What about statuary that is abstract? There isn't a catagory for that either, and that is the next one I am looking to place.

 

When I read how many catagories there already were, and how abstract from each other they were, I thought about a "whole other can of worms" and there it is...

 

I will try to be patient.

[+Touchstone 1024]

 

I will try to be patient.

I think that's the operative phrase here.

[+Zzyzx Road 0]

Thank you Touchstone!

 

I left the forum last night thinking I had been told, "Yours isn't good enough!"...but I DO really undersand this is still evolving.

 

I am just eager to get these few items here at home up on the site. Like with the caches themselves, I seem to be a "day late and a dollar short" frequently, so I was hoping to get some things in there. When I search my zip there is nothing, otherwise I would be going around to the published waymarks and taking pics and logging the areas...

[tozainamboku 5]

I left the forum last night thinking I had been told, "Yours isn't good enough!"...but I DO really undersand this is still evolving.

Sorry if I gave that impression. I realize your question was more of "how do I get this waymark listed?" rather than "why are virtual caches not allowed in geocaching.com anymore?", but I couldn't resist making a comment that applies more to the second question.

 

Prior to Waymarking, if someone wanted to create a virtual cache for some place in their town they wanted to share, they would have to convince the cache reviewer that 1) a physical cache couldn't be placed there and 2) the location was sufficiently unique or interesting enough to make the find say "Wow". With Waymarking you don't have to meet these requirements anymore. But you now have different problems to get a location listed. 1) there must be a category your waymark fits in. If there is no category you may be able to suggest one. The mechanism for creating new categories hasn't been rolled out yet, but it seems like it will involve getting a group of people together that want to have this category.

[+Zzyzx Road 0]

Thanks. I was hoping I wasn't just being over-sensitive which I guess I am at times...

 

No, I am NOT going to ask, "why are virtual caches not allowed in geocaching.com anymore?" <---(spoken with a little whine and cheese...)

 

I have thought before... <that IS scary!> that if one could choose first, People, Place or Thing, then move on to (alphabetized) a general list of "subjects" and then into specifics (just like listing something on eBay) with a "misc" catagory in each one. Then there could also be a person (or several, many even) that could oversee that Misc catagory and file those things that DO have a home...

 

Thing:

...Art:

.......Sculpture:

...........Stone:

...........Wood:

...........Metal:

...........Clay:

.......Paintings:

...........Murals:

..............Inside:

..............Outside:

 

OR

 

.......Sculpture:

...........Abstract:

..............Metal:

..............Wood:

...........Realistic:

..............Animals:

..............Humans:

.................Historical:

....................Events in History:

......................(Donner Party Monument would fit here)

.................Mythical:

......................(here would fit my Viking)

..............Other:

 

(I am sure you didn't need all that written out...)

 

I am absolutely positive that the brains behind all of this are quite capable of making this kind of thing very usable. So all of you please don't think I am trying to flog a dead horse.

 

And yes, I will wait patiently, though grimacing , to see how it all turns out.

 

I can't wait!

 

<edited for my own context and smilies>

Edited January 10, 2006 by Zzyzx Road

[+Backwards Charlie from Austin 0]

I have thought before... <that IS scary!> that if one could choose first, People, Place or Thing, then move on to (alphabetized) a general list of "subjects" and then into specifics (just like listing something on eBay) with a "misc" catagory in each one. Then there could also be a person (or several, many even) that could oversee that Misc catagory and file those things that DO have a home...

 

...

 

I am absolutely positive that the brains behind all of this are quite capable of making this kind of thing very usable. So all of you please don't think I am trying to flog a dead horse.

I agree wholeheartedly with your suggestion that categories should have a Misc subcategory. In several posts on other topics I have suggested that the category schema is incomplete without an Other subcategory to complete the coverage of a category. But since I have heard nothing for or against my suggestion maybe taxonomy is too esoteric for waymarkers to comprehend.

 

Perchance with your example, it will be clearer to others what needs to be done.

[tozainamboku 5]

The people who have posted that a taxonomy is incomplete without an 'other' category are correct in that a taxonomy is a system for classifying everything in the universe (every person, place, or thing that has a geographic location). Waymarking is not attempting to classify every person, place, or thing. It is instead trying to create sets of locations of interest that have something in common. This is not a taxonomy. A particular person, place, or thing at a location may in fact be in several categories (a separate waymark can be created in each category even though it's the same object). Additionally, there are persons, places, or things for which there is no category. That doesn't mean that there might not be a category in the future. But while there is no category, the person, place, or things cannot be a waymark. I suspect that eventually there will be some categories than may be broad enough to capture many waymarks that wouldn't have any other home. For example, you could have a category "Truly unique things" that would be for things that make a claim to there being only of them. Or there may be a "Suprise" category for places where the waymark creator wants you to go to some place and discover whats there without giving it away by putting it into a category.

Edited January 11, 2006 by tozainamboku

[+Zzyzx Road 0]

...For example, you could have a category "Truly unique things" that would be for things that make a claim to there being only of them. Or there may be a "Suprise" category for places where the waymark creator wants you to go to some place and discover whats there without giving it away by putting it into a category...

I hadn't thought of it that way... That Surprise idea will be fun!

 

This is how it sits (SO FAR!):

 

Art/Murals/ enter your item here.... oK...

 

Art/Sculpture/"A three-dimensional work of art made of wood, stone or any other hard material" - but ONLY if it is an insect OR sphinx?

 

Therein lies my frustration. I am not asking for a "Viking" subcatagory, just a "Sculpture" area for sculptures. Of whatever type, not just those two. As it is right now, if you wanted to make a waymark for the Statue of David, it wouldn't fit because it isn't a sphynx or an insect.

 

Make the sub-catagories be either the style (Abstract, realistic etc.) or of the media in which it is made...(Wood, Stone, metal etc.) and then we can request specifics...

 

Would that be a better alternative?

 

<edited for clarity of thinking after a shower and 2nd cup of coffee...>

Edited January 11, 2006 by Zzyzx Road

[+Backwards Charlie from Austin 0]

The people who have posted that a taxonomy is incomplete without an 'other' category are correct in that a taxonomy is a system for classifying everything in the universe (every person, place, or thing that has a geographic location). Waymarking is not attempting to classify every person, place, or thing. It is instead trying to create sets of locations of interest that have something in common. This is not a taxonomy.

I am very disapointed with the statement that Waymarking is not a taxonomy. IMHO if Waymarking is to catch on with non LC types it needs to be a taxonomy. As long as Waymarking limits itself only to odd-ball categories it will only appeal to the LC crowd.

 

Many of us know of statues in our area that may be of interest to others and would like to waymark them. But under the current regime, unless the statue falls in an odd-ball category such as insect statue, it cannot be waymarked. The promise of eventually having broader categories seems to be a bone thrown by the LC crowd to us non LCers to keep us interested in Waymarking.

[+Zzyzx Road 0]

Okay...there is only ONE sphynx in the Art:Statuary:Sphynxes catagory. There are 7 in insects. I am SURE there would be a lot more statuary if it weren't so subdivided already.

 

Here is the guy I am lobbying for: