Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Tante.Hossi

Old Wells

53 posts in this topic

After the basic cleaning of the Artesian Well Category, now the question arises whether we should not create a new category for old wells.

These old wells are very interesting and I think they deserve their own category.

 

What do you think?

0

Share this post


Link to post

That would be great.

There are here some nice ones to Waymark.

Not holy and not for the Artesian Well Category :lol:

Mine was declined to, no problem we can make a group with real old beautiful wells.

We can make a good start with 10 beautiful Old Wells from you and a couple from me.

And it's Global.

Edited by dreamhummie
0

Share this post


Link to post

"Old Well" is not very specific. Do you think about draw wells? Or just any historic man-made water supply structure that does not fit into an existing category?

0

Share this post


Link to post

I think Tante.Hossi has a plan already worked out. :laughing:

 

Do you think about draw wells?

As long it isn't Holy or Artesian ;)

0

Share this post


Link to post

After the basic cleaning of the Artesian Well Category, now the question arises whether we should not create a new category for old wells.

These old wells are very interesting and I think they deserve their own category.

 

What do you think?

 

If they are not allowed in the other two categories, maybe there is a case for a new cateory for them...

0

Share this post


Link to post

Would I be able to post the well right outside my window here? So far I only see "old wells". This one is over 30 years old and is over 300 feet deep. That "sounds" old to me. It isn't Artesian nor holy. Sounds like it qualifies so far. Unless you have something else in mind.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Would I be able to post the well right outside my window here? So far I only see "old wells". This one is over 30 years old and is over 300 feet deep. That "sounds" old to me. It isn't Artesian nor holy. Sounds like it qualifies so far. Unless you have something else in mind.

 

I was thinking an old well would be more like the ones on old homesteads that were hand dug or drilled and lined with stone or brick, not the common ones still in use in modern homes.

0

Share this post


Link to post

OK. That makes sense, but I hadn't seen that in so many words. Getting a little closer to a category description. Sounds good.

0

Share this post


Link to post

That's the first question: What qualifies as "old"? Do we need an age, at all? Are newer ones so common (or boring or anything else to justify an exclusion)? In my area these wells are all great, but you will not find any newer than 300 years, so I would like to hear the opinion of people from places where wells are still in common use.

 

Intact and preserved wells are fine, but what about ruins? How much needs to be left or visible? I know a well from the 1st century AD that has been excavated, but all that is accessible and visible to the public is a large round bronze plaque, that marks its original surface location. Would this be valid?

 

Finally (for the moment): I know several examples of structures that exactly look like old wells, but strictly speaking, they were not wells but cisterns. Do they qualify, too?

0

Share this post


Link to post

I have owned three homes (the first not far from Wheaton, Illinois!), and all of them had their own individual well. (And septic systems.) They were not served by any city utilities. In the rural US, wells are still very extremely common. I can drive down the road and see dozens of well heads in front yards. There are several well companies serving my area (the south half of our county).

 

Unless you want me to flood (no pun intended) this category with a lot of really boring entries, I would suggest that you use the kind of qualifiers that MPH gave: "hand dug or drilled and lined with stone or brick" with, perhaps, any other additions that you might want to add to that (though I can't think of anything myself).

 

Should there be a minimal depth? What if someone simply dug a 5 foot well by hand in an area close to the aquifer? Is that good enough?

 

Think about it a bit and come up with some reasonable qualifiers.

 

Then, after proposing the category, please do not do the "bate and switch" thing of changing the category description significantly after it has been approved. It's one thing to change it when you realize that the description accidentally left a door open to some boring stuff. But it should never switch directions entirely. That is dirty pool.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I have still found no history concerning my well-waymark on a deserted island in the Atlantic (rejected after being a waymark for 4 years). The well might actually be a faux-well, elaborately designed to look like a well but actually just keeping hikers from falling in a hole. It will be a challenge to consider wells when no history is available.

0

Share this post


Link to post

So it seems it's time for some example pictures of the well I have on my mind.

I did not think that there might be confusion about what I speak.

 

I hope this might make it more clear.

 

c0813dfd-0c73-4f20-8d1f-e963896f63e2.jpgba739600-d7ce-4d31-9933-7e8d36e2b376.jpga6631dd1-60eb-4cca-b427-5eeb60014290.jpg3d67293c-eb68-4793-bc6e-52b7690e8278.JPG

0

Share this post


Link to post

So do you only want wells that have an above-ground presence?

 

Like I mentioned before, there are more wells around where I live than you could Waymark in a lifetime. But none of them has an above-ground presence, other than a simple well head (cap).

 

Just to make sure we understand what you're looking for, are you aware that a well is not primarily the thing sticking up above the ground, but is rather the long shaft that goes below ground. Primarily. The above ground portion is important, of course. But it typically only represents the tip of the iceberg.

 

So are you looking only for wells that stick up like that?

0

Share this post


Link to post

So do you only want wells that have an above-ground presence?

...

So are you looking only for wells that stick up like that?

 

I would say: Yes. Only wells where you can see something more than a hole in the ground.

 

Another question is the term 'old'. They do not have to be old (what is old?). But most of them will be.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I've seen many interesting old wells in the ruins of the castles. On the other hand, I've seen many old, unused wells in rural regions. They are simple stone rural wells, that are no longer used. And there are myriads of such wells that are still used, like that:

 

220px-Bia%C5%82owie%C5%BCa_studnia_01.jpg

 

10 years before, every household in the village my family comes from had such a well. And there are many villages that still base on them.

 

What would qualify to post such a well?

0

Share this post


Link to post

Looking forward to see this category coming :-)

0

Share this post


Link to post

So do you only want wells that have an above-ground presence?

...

So are you looking only for wells that stick up like that?

 

I would say: Yes. Only wells where you can see something more than a hole in the ground.

 

Another question is the term 'old'. They do not have to be old (what is old?). But most of them will be.

 

Some of the more intersting ones I have photographed are just holes in the ground that are lined with rock. The old well houses and home sites are long gone.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I see the group exists, but there's no category and no recruiting. What is the status of that proposal?

0

Share this post


Link to post

To bring this idea back on topic.

 

I would say we're looking for

  • digged or drilled handoperated wells
  • wells with some kind of structure above the ground.
  • historical wells even with the ground only if there is any marker or sign with some background informations
  • wells still in use or not. It doesn't matter if it is dry now.
  • old and new wells - the age does not matter if they fit the criterias
  • nighter artesian nor holy wells - they have their own categories

Is there anything else we sholud consider?

Is someone interested to become an officer?

0

Share this post


Link to post

I am interested.

 

In my opinion the criteria should be clearer to avoid confusion. I think there's basically a language problem; the English term "well" is broader than the equivalents in other languages.

0

Share this post


Link to post

In my opinion the criteria should be clearer to avoid confusion. I think there's basically a language problem; the English term "well" is broader than the equivalents in other languages.

Maybe we should use the term 'Draw Wells' enstead?

Is there any native speaker who could give us a clear term?

0

Share this post


Link to post

In my opinion the criteria should be clearer to avoid confusion. I think there's basically a language problem; the English term "well" is broader than the equivalents in other languages.

Maybe we should use the term 'Draw Wells' enstead?

Is there any native speaker who could give us a clear term?

I've never heard "Draw Well". I think we could go with "Unique Wells" :antenna:

0

Share this post


Link to post

In my opinion the criteria should be clearer to avoid confusion. I think there's basically a language problem; the English term "well" is broader than the equivalents in other languages.

Maybe we should use the term 'Draw Wells' enstead?

Is there any native speaker who could give us a clear term?

I've never heard "Draw Well". I think we could go with "Unique Wells" :antenna:

I neither have ever heard the term "draw well" in real life. Nevertheless, it looks like this is the correct wording, according to Merriam-Webster and the Oxford Dictionary. So I am in favor to go with it.

 

I was neither familiar with terms like "anamorphous", "petrosomatoglyph" or "inukshuk" before I knew Waymarking. It's better to use something uncommon than unclear and misleading. On the other hand, "unique" is something so subjective, that I would prefer to avoid it whenever possible.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I neither have ever heard the term "draw well" in real life. Nevertheless, it looks like this is the correct wording, according to Merriam-Webster and the Oxford Dictionary. So I am in favor to go with it.

 

I was neither familiar with terms like "anamorphous", "petrosomatoglyph" or "inukshuk" before I knew Waymarking. It's better to use something uncommon than unclear and misleading. On the other hand, "unique" is something so subjective, that I would prefer to avoid it whenever possible.

This matches 100% what I think!

0

Share this post


Link to post

To bring this idea back on topic.

 

I would say we're looking for

  • digged or drilled handoperated wells
  • wells with some kind of structure above the ground.
  • historical wells even with the ground only if there is any marker or sign with some background informations
  • wells still in use or not. It doesn't matter if it is dry now.
  • old and new wells - the age does not matter if they fit the criterias
  • nighter artesian nor holy wells - they have their own categories

Is there anything else we sholud consider?

Is someone interested to become an officer?

 

All sounds good. Bring it one. I am interested in being an officer. Although I haven't been much active in the last months, my categories never have a waiting period for submitted waymarks. I specially like this category as my country has plenty of interesting wells all around.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks Tante.Hossi, the category description looks good!

 

"This category will not accept Artesian Wells nor Holy Wells. They both have their own categories."

 

I've never heared about the "Holy Wells" category, I know one, perfect for this afternoon. :grin: Super!

0

Share this post


Link to post

This idea is on the way. We changed the title to Drew Wells.

 

A group with some officers has been built.

A category description was created. You can take a look at the description here.

Please tell us if you have any concerns, if something is not clearly written or if there is any mistake.

Do you miss anything?

0

Share this post


Link to post

We worked hard in this category idea.

It's now in peer review.

Please vote!

0

Share this post


Link to post

If it goes on like this, it's going to be one of the best results I have seen in the recent past.

 

As an officer, I am looking forward to some great submissions, but as an active waymarker I could kick myself for all those wells I have passed and did not take a picture. It is not just a few, there are dozens of locations I might have to revisit.

0

Share this post


Link to post

If it goes on like this, it's going to be one of the best results I have seen in the recent past.

 

I was just thinking the same thing.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Peer Review has ended. I think the category has passed with nearly 100%. :anicute:

Thanks for your votes! We will update the category with the comments from Peer Review.

 

Now we have to wait until GS sets the category active.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Peer Review has ended. I think the category has passed with nearly 100%. :anicute:

Thanks for your votes! We will update the category with the comments from Peer Review.

 

Now we have to wait until GS sets the category active.

 

Go! :grin:

0

Share this post


Link to post

The category has passed Peer Review with 100% (when did this happen the last time?). :anibad:

Thanks for your support!

 

It is active now. First waymarks have been subitted and the first ones have already been approved.

So let the Draw Wells of the world come!

0

Share this post


Link to post

Hi,

 

Just had a waymark rejected in this category because it didn't have a long description. I noticed in the category write-up that there is no requirement indicated for a long description. I think it wouldn't take much to add this indication to the category description and would save waymarkers some time in case they see a nice well but can't find much information about it.

 

How about it?

 

Just my two cents.

 

RitC

0

Share this post


Link to post

Hi,

 

Just had a waymark rejected in this category because it didn't have a long description. I noticed in the category write-up that there is no requirement indicated for a long description. I think it wouldn't take much to add this indication to the category description and would save waymarkers some time in case they see a nice well but can't find much information about it.

 

How about it?

 

Just my two cents.

 

RitC

 

Would you post a link to the category, I'm having difficulty finding it. :anicute:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Would you post a link to the category, I'm having difficulty finding it. :anicute:

Draw Wells

 

Thank you. Here is one issue that I have, "If it is a historical well with no remains above the ground, it will only be accepted if there is any marker or sign with some background informations."

 

I have a few photos of some old wells that are hand dug and lined with rock, but no remains above ground. Maybe we still need another category for old wells. I would have voted against this category knowing how it turned out. It's just not what I thought. Maybe it just needs better management.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Instructions for Posting a Draw Wells Waymark:

You have to post at least two pictures of the Draw Well. One close-up and one more general view. More pictures are always welcome. If there is an information board at the Draw Well, please post one picture of it, as well.

Please tell us: Is there still water? Or is it dry now? Or don't you know because it is covered?

 

Please add any information about the Draw Well you know. When was it built? What materials are used? Why is it located at this position?

 

It was put to a vote, seems most said 'No long description' in their comments...

 

What is it made from?

Is it old, or a recent well?

Location.

Is there water and still used, or is it dry?

0

Share this post


Link to post

When first brought to the fourms, this is what I had in mind as an old well. I guess it may fit the remains of a settlement or old homesteads, but I thought the category was for old wells, and not old well houses.

As for a long discription, I have no problem with supplying detail to my waymarks, even if it is not a requirement. I want visitors to know a little about the subject. This well in the pictures is from one of the first settlements in the County, and I have quite a bit of information on the settler and their familys.

 

20857539739_1e26ef469b_z.jpg

 

21044349055_9fea65db30_z.jpg

0

Share this post


Link to post

Hi,

 

Just had a waymark rejected in this category because it didn't have a long description. I noticed in the category write-up that there is no requirement indicated for a long description. I think it wouldn't take much to add this indication to the category description and would save waymarkers some time in case they see a nice well but can't find much information about it.

 

How about it?

 

Just my two cents.

 

RitC

You are right. This needs to be added as soon as possible. For me, a long description is so obvious, that I did not even notice the absence of this requirement yet.

 

And for your denied waymark: it was not denied because of the long description in the first place. From the pictures, it could be a real old well, but it might also be a modern non-functional replica only created as decoration. Only because of this the absence of any documentation became a problem.

0

Share this post


Link to post

When first brought to the fourms, this is what I had in mind as an old well. I guess it may fit the remains of a settlement or old homesteads, but I thought the category was for old wells, and not old well houses.

As for a long discription, I have no problem with supplying detail to my waymarks, even if it is not a requirement. I want visitors to know a little about the subject. This well in the pictures is from one of the first settlements in the County, and I have quite a bit of information on the settler and their familys.

 

20857539739_1e26ef469b_z.jpg

 

21044349055_9fea65db30_z.jpg

It is not about well houses, your example fits perfectly. We need to reword this requirement.

 

The wells I know, are usually from the 12th to 15th century. So your example is not very old from my perspective, it is brand new. Imagine how it will look in 600 years! "No remains above ground" does mean no visible evidence.

 

This marker requirement was not meant to exclude anything, but to additionally allow places long gone without remains, but well known and documented.

Edited by fi67
0

Share this post


Link to post

I would love to go Waymarking in Europe. This old well dates between 1821-1823. It is all that is left of the home site/homestead.

 

I already have the family cemetery Waymarked, and a geocache near the historic marker along the highway.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Funny, yesterday I stumbled over this well:

 

21ba556549bdefb84a507e7ddc54a96a.jpg

 

0a9205a41c7ed74f71d9928beb5ebbb6.jpg

 

Should I submit it?

0

Share this post


Link to post

Should I submit it?

Absolutly! Please submit!

This is a perfect example of those historical wells we want to be posted into our category.

There are no remains above the ground. But there's a great 'information board' with some details about the well.

0

Share this post


Link to post

BTW, was that just an off-the-cuff comment, or are you really looking only for wells that have been around since before the western hemisphere was settled by European descendants? The category would still meet the international scope (all of the eastern hemisphere), but I'm not sure why the exclusion. Wouldn't 150 years be enough?

0

Share this post


Link to post

Funny, yesterday I stumbled over this well:

 

21ba556549bdefb84a507e7ddc54a96a.jpg

 

0a9205a41c7ed74f71d9928beb5ebbb6.jpg

 

Should I submit it?

 

Care to translate it?

0

Share this post


Link to post

BTW, was that just an off-the-cuff comment, or are you really looking only for wells that have been around since before the western hemisphere was settled by European descendants? The category would still meet the international scope (all of the eastern hemisphere), but I'm not sure why the exclusion. Wouldn't 150 years be enough?

What exclusion? There is no age exclusion anywhere.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Someone had mentioned that they were looking for wells from the 12th to the 15th century. Now the Incas might have made some wells, I guess; but I doubt that Native Americans made wells -- they used the pure water from creeks and rivers. Thus, allowing only wells from the 12th to the 15th century excludes North America.

 

And why the 12th century? Why have a starting limit at all? I can see an ending limit to make the category more interesting, though personally I'd think that the 19th century would be good enough.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1