New Category Proposal

[+BearsFan11]

Hello all. I was hoping that I could get some feedback on a new category proposal. The category I want to create is for public spray fountains. Spray fountains are the fountains that shoot water into the air and kids play in them. This category would be for only public spray fountains that are free for kids to play in them. Would this make a good category? Any feedback appreciated.

[+Max and 99]

BearsFan11,

I've seen splash pads/spray fountains in several different Waymarking categories: Municipal Parks, Fountains, Public Playgrounds, etc. A google search will show you many examples. (Waymarking/splash pad)

 

This would be a good category, except for the fact that so many of the spray fountains are already waymarked into other categories. But, maybe that doesn't really matter, and others will still vote Yes for a new category. I like the idea of only including FREE ones!

[+BearsFan11]

I'm looking for members to join this group if anyone is interested. Group name is "Cheap Summer Entertainment"

Edited September 3, 2014 by BearsFan11

[+fi67]

I do not see the need for a category that is already completely covered by another one. All spray fountains I have seen yet, can go to the Fountains category.

[+Benchmark Blasterz]

Hi BearsFan11! I am glad to see a new waymarker come into our little pastime here -- and I hope you will stick around even if your category idea does not come to pass. Usually if a new category can fit completely within another existing category it will not be added, BUT you can still waymark happily around the workd without having created a category You can see our stats for inspiration - we have not created a single category, but we have earned over 930 icons

 

Welcome to Waymarking and see you out there

Edited September 3, 2014 by Benchmark Blasterz

[+MountainWoods]

I don't know if this have ever happened before (perhaps before my time), but you might consider contacting an officer in the group that manages Fountains and ask if they'd be willing to put in an optional variable for whether the fountain is such a fountain as you describe (you pick the words!):

 

• Yes
  
• No
  
• Unanswered (or whatever it is)
  

 

Existing waymarks would have this new variable set to "not answered" (or whatever it is), but future waymarks could have the variable set to Yes or No.

 

Visitors to existing fountain waymarks would be able to set this variable to the correct value (that's already available in Waymarking, not a new feature). Or anyone could use the Edit feature to suggest an edit to the waymark owner to set the variable one way or t'other.

 

Yes, there is no easy way to search for such a variable with Yes value, except maybe in GSAK. But it would eliminate the aforementioned issue with trying to introduce a new category that is completely covered by an existing category. Just ask that the existing category recognize a new attribute (variable).

 

Old timers: has this ever been done? Or am I off my nut? (Or both...)

Edited September 3, 2014 by MountainWoods

[+silverquill]

My initial reaction is that this would be redundant because the Fountains category already includes them -- and every other fountain in the world.

 

Nonetheless, a category such as this does have merit, and there are precedents. The most obvious example is the omnibus category for Cemeteries of the World. (There is a mysterious story about how this category was created, approved and managed by shadow puppets.) We have several smaller, specialized categories for different types of cemeteries such as Churchyard Cemeteries and Veteran Cemeteries.

 

Other subjects have multiple categories to cover particular niches. Sculptures come readily to mind, and include categories such as Abstract Sculptures, Figurative Sculptures, Realistic Object Sculptures, Silhouette Sculptures, Car Part Sculptures, and even Insect Sculptures and Lion Sculptures, one for bears too.

 

The value of a category such as you suggest is to draw attention to a particular niche which gets lost in the all-encompassing category and gives a place for people to display and search for these particular type of fountains. I think this is a worthy undertaking and would support it, even though I usually am not in favor of redundancy.

 

Welcome to Waymarking.com! Let me know if I can help in any way.

[+Torgut]

Well, if this is not redundant, I think there can be no redundancy in the Waymarking. I don't think it has a chance to pass the poll if members are not distracted. Those, are simply put, fountains, and there is a category called Fountains.

[+jhuoni]

 

The value of a category such as you suggest is to draw attention to a particular niche which gets lost in the all-encompassing category and gives a place for people to display and search for these particular type of fountains. I think this is a worthy undertaking and would support it, even though I usually am not in favor of redundancy.

 

 

It's a bit off topic but....

 

Once again, Silverquill, you have hit the Spirit of Waymarking spot on.

 

The value of Waymarking is defined in your words above, not just the value of a category.

 

We all are in this for different reasons, but with every waymark we post it gives another place in the world a face and a voice.

[+Benchmark Blasterz]

 

The value of a category such as you suggest is to draw attention to a particular niche which gets lost in the all-encompassing category and gives a place for people to display and search for these particular type of fountains. I think this is a worthy undertaking and would support it, even though I usually am not in favor of redundancy.

 

 

It's a bit off topic but....

 

Once again, Silverquill, you have hit the Spirit of Waymarking spot on.

 

The value of Waymarking is defined in your words above, not just the value of a category.

 

We all are in this for different reasons, but with every waymark we post it gives another place in the world a face and a voice.

 

YES!! EXACTLY!!!

[Bon Echo]

Hi, I see this proposed category is in peer review and I am so happy to see this category created as I think it is one deserving of it's own category. The fact that splash pads / spray pads are allowed under some other categories is on my mind too bad, they really don't fit there. A splash pad and a playground are two very different things; and a fountain and a spray pad again are so very different.

Here in Ontario spray pads are common, and easily out-number fountains. I'd guess that there is roughly one spray pad per 10,000 residents in most communities. And they are not always associated with public playgrounds although commonly they are found in municipal parks which also typically have play structures as well. They are also becoming common at "paid admission" locations, for example there is one at the Toronto Zoo and one at the African Lion safari. Personally I think those should also be allowed into the category and use a variable for paid or free admission.

Finally, I would like to say something about a common concern being raised in the peer review - that is, about suitability for taking photographs. Besides that fact that the same concern might be raised for many other waymarks where children might be present (amusement parks, McDonalds, etc), the most comparable category would be the Public Playgrounds category and there are over 3000 waymarks in that category. My experience is that it many times of the year these locations (especially true for spray pads) see very little use. So while there will be times when it might be inappropriate to take photos, there will likely be even more time when it is not an issue. My opinion is that this is not sufficient grounds to deny a category.

Here are a few images to further demonstrate how variable these spray pads might appear:

[+Benchmark Blasterz]

Did it pass?

[+Max and 99]

It was denied. Sorry to hear that!

[+silverquill]

Read the comments from peer review and make some of the changes. Post the revisions here for more suggestions and see if we can come up with something that is acceptable. Overall, I think it is still a viable category.

[+Benchmark Blasterz]

Read the comments from peer review and make some of the changes. Post the revisions here for more suggestions and see if we can come up with something that is acceptable. Overall, I think it is still a viable category.

 

I agree -- just needs some tweaking

[+NW_history_buff]

I think Splash Pads are an excellent idea as a 'niche' category, since they are a type of fountain but a separate one in function in their own right. As I stated in my Peer Review comment, I went through ALL approved waymarks in the Fountains category for the past year and didn't see ONE Splash Pad waymark. Hmm....

 

The reason the category was denied in Peer Review was because it wasn't well-written enough to convince the reviewers that it deserved its own category in the Waymarking community. The key here is to convey clear and concise arguments in the long description. Providing accompanying pictures of splash pads into the category description just add icing to the cake.

 

I've joined your group and if you need assistance with improving the category writeup, just let me know. I think this potential category will pass Peer Review once this is accomplished.

 

[+DougK]

I think Splash Pads are an excellent idea as a 'niche' category, since they are a type of fountain but a separate one in function in their own right.

 

You’re looking in the wrong place. These are not fountains, but playgrounds. Spray parks are already being accepted into parks and playgrounds. I’m not in favor of splitting off subsets of existing categories for overlap reasons.

Examples:

WME8QD - Green River Spray Park

WM7EWZ - Lincoln Park Playground

WM9JJK - Elmwood/Roy Lynch Park

[+NW_history_buff]

There you have it. It appears there already is a home for these spray parks. I don't see any reason to pursue this as another 'sub' category.

[+T0SHEA]

Whoa!! Hold on here!! Does no one here remember the "Spray Parks" category? It only lasted for a short while and was done away with. We had done several waymarks in the category, in 2013, I believe. Though we don't know, we suspect that there was a good reason for its demise.

 

If I were a pedophile and I were to search online for places to reliably find young children, I would consider the "Spray Parks" category a gold mine, complete with directions and coordinates. We suspect that this may well be the reason that the category suddenly disappeared. Many may not be aware of this, but, in at least the US, and possibly other countries, as well, it is illegal to take pictures of children that are not your own without permission. Serious problems could arise here.

 

This really needs a rethink.

 

EDIT: This could actually apply to playgrounds, as well. We all know that there is no "Schools" category and that caches can't be placed within a certain distance of schools. The reasoning is the same as it is for spray parks. We wouldn't be all that surprised to see "Children's Playgrounds" disappear one day, as well.

Edited October 3, 2014 by BK-Hunters

[+The A-Team]

Whoa!! Hold on here!! Does no one here remember the "Spray Parks" category?

Apparently not, because it hasn't been mentioned in this discussion nor in the many Peer Review comments. Do you recall how short-lived it was? Maybe it was so short that most never noticed it (and it somehow passed PR without many noticing...).

[+T0SHEA]

Apparently not, because it hasn't been mentioned in this discussion nor in the many Peer Review comments. Do you recall how short-lived it was? Maybe it was so short that most never noticed it (and it somehow passed PR without many noticing...).

 

I wish I could answer that question, as all our waymarks in the category, and the category itself, are gone. I do remember that it didn't have a lot of posts, less than 100, I think. Can't really remember when we did the ones that we did do. Probably through a few months (or less) of 2013. Maybe some in the summer and a few in the fall. I doubt that we did many more than 6 or 8 before it disappeared. One day we went to post another and could no longer find the category...

[+fi67]

Apparently not, because it hasn't been mentioned in this discussion nor in the many Peer Review comments. Do you recall how short-lived it was? Maybe it was so short that most never noticed it (and it somehow passed PR without many noticing...).

 

I wish I could answer that question, as all our waymarks in the category, and the category itself, are gone. I do remember that it didn't have a lot of posts, less than 100, I think. Can't really remember when we did the ones that we did do. Probably through a few months (or less) of 2013. Maybe some in the summer and a few in the fall. I doubt that we did many more than 6 or 8 before it disappeared. One day we went to post another and could no longer find the category...

This is puzzling. I have never heard of a category like this, and I am quite sure that no category that has been approved once, has EVER gone away. This is one of the reasons experienced waymarkers are sometimes overcautious in peer review, because it cannot be corrected later if it appears to have been a bad idea.

[+T0SHEA]

 

This is puzzling. I have never heard of a category like this, and I am quite sure that no category that has been approved once, has EVER gone away. This is one of the reasons experienced waymarkers are sometimes overcautious in peer review, because it cannot be corrected later if it appears to have been a bad idea.

 

Maybe I need to start a new thread asking if anyone else remembers it. I know weren't the only ones to post there.

[+Rikitan]

 

This is puzzling. I have never heard of a category like this, and I am quite sure that no category that has been approved once, has EVER gone away. This is one of the reasons experienced waymarkers are sometimes overcautious in peer review, because it cannot be corrected later if it appears to have been a bad idea.

 

Maybe I need to start a new thread asking if anyone else remembers it. I know weren't the only ones to post there.

 

It should have been earlier than in 2013. Last year I was following Waymarking.com almost daily and don't remember such category in peer review at all.

[+T0SHEA]

Found it!!!

 

The group was called "Splish Splash Fun", it was created on 8/9/2009 by Saopaulo1 and the category was called "Water Parks", not Spray Parks, as I thought.

 

"Category Status: The Water Parks category has been created (with variables)."

 

Check it out here: http://www.Waymarking.com/groups/details.aspx?f=1&guid=8d0690b2-2439-4987-b2f2-ac72afbe936b

[+saopaulo1]

It's not illegal to take photos in public in the United States of anyone. As for pedophile using Waymarking as a tool, they could also use a city's park department website, that usually list the parks in the municipality. The water parks was supposed to be for the big ones like Ragin Waters etc, but since they went into the amusement park category, I decided the category would be redundant.

Edited October 5, 2014 by saopaulo1

[+T0SHEA]

It's not illegal to take photos in public in the United States of anyone. As for pedophile using Waymarking as a tool, they could also use a city's park department website, that usually list the parks in the municipality. The water parks was supposed to be for the big ones like Ragin Waters etc, but since they went into the amusement park category, I decided the category would be redundant.

 

Having looked it up just now, I see that we were misinformed vis-a-vis the photographing of children issue. Thank you for setting us straight. Need to verify my sources more carefully in the future.

 

It seems that your "Water Parks" category was NOT the one we're trying to nail down. Do you remember another similar one, possibly named "Spray Parks"?

Edited October 6, 2014 by BK-Hunters