Nickname of the Revierwer at declined Waymarks

[+kaschper69]

Hello community,

 

I would like to address a topic, which I noticed now in my active time in Waymarking this year.

 

Yesterday 8 Waymarks were declined because they did not comply with the regulations of the category. 6 Waymarks alone had been approved one day before. Since the given reference text did not explain to me what was wrong, I would have gladly directly contacted him.

 

And here we come to my request: In my opinion, it should be self-evident that you write your nickname to an "approve" or "declined" waymark. Then you could regulate the questions directly among the two affected persons.

 

So I had to write a well-known reviewer of this category and ask for help. The other possibility would have been that I would have asked at the re-submit in general, where the error lies. But then there is again the question, which reviewer I got, maybe not the one, which declined my waymark.

 

Perhaps it would be possible that in every category the leader asks his "coworkers", that they write there nicknames at least in "declined WMs", so that the contact can be established directly.

 

Thank you very much.

 

greets

kaschper69

[+Benchmark Blasterz]

If you are a regular member of a category, you can see who declined your waymark.

 

Sometimes you can also figure it out by looking at who was on the site on the day your WMs were declined.

 

I agree with you on 2 aspects of declines: (1) It is helpful when a reviewer signs the decline so the submitter knows who to reach out to if necessary and (2) decline messages with specific suggestions on what to fix are always appreciated.

 

Suggestions on fixes are especially important for "after-the-fact" declines of previously-approved WMs. A "doesn't meet category criteria" message is not helpful, because one reviewer already thought it did. The SPECIFIC reason for the decline-after-acceptance should be shared with the submitter.

 

I had one long-term approved WM declined with this message: "This should never have been approved." Well, why not? I write it well, provided evidence, cited sources, uploaded 7+ photos - why was this effort so clearly insufficient to be declined 2 years after approval? I thought I had met all requirements, and an officer had agreed, so what changed? In fairness, this was part of a category purge where a few dozens or more of approved WMs were suddenly declined years later. I was able to engage POLITELY with the declining officer (whose identity I figured out from the last-log-in info) and get my WM reapproved. Others could not fix theirs.

 

I am am officer in a category that is NOT about every single little thing along a road, but IS about the collection of things that create, support, and reflect the specific culture and mythology of that road. A perfectly-acceptable WM written for a National Register property or church along the road will always get a decline from me without discussion of how that building contributes to road culture. If it's just there, it doesn't belong. And if it's road culture off the road, it doesn't belong. It can be tough to thread that needle, but I try to make it plain for WM submitters, and I appreciate having it made plain for me in declined waymarks I have submitted.

 

I decline my share of waymarks, and when I do I always sign my declines and offer advice, even if it's to submit in a more appropriate category because the proposed WM will never be able to fit into this one. Usually it is a matter of the focus of the write-up, or a technical error that is easily fixed.

 

I know some WMers are offended at declines, but I never am, even when I disagree strongly with the decline. I find that I learn more from my declined WMs than my accepted ones, and that an initial decline can make that WM better when it is finally approved.

 

One more thing: In writing this, I realized I always sign my declines as "MB" (Mama Blaster) - not as BB, our family caching and Waymarking name. The Benchmark Blasterz are 4 people: Mama Blaster, Daddy Blaster, Older Sister Blaster and Younger Sister Blaster. Some folks who pick up that decline from me may not know that, or they may think MB is a real name or initials, so I will try and pay more attention to how I sign my declines in the future.

Edited November 23, 2016 by Benchmark Blasterz

[+kaschper69]

Hello Benchmark Blasterz,

 

thanks for your very detailed response. This has already helped me very much.

[razalas]

Hello community,

 

I would like to address a topic, which I noticed now in my active time in Waymarking this year.

 

Yesterday 8 Waymarks were declined because they did not comply with the regulations of the category. 6 Waymarks alone had been approved one day before. Since the given reference text did not explain to me what was wrong, I would have gladly directly contacted him.

 

And here we come to my request: In my opinion, it should be self-evident that you write your nickname to an "approve" or "declined" waymark. Then you could regulate the questions directly among the two affected persons.

 

So I had to write a well-known reviewer of this category and ask for help. The other possibility would have been that I would have asked at the re-submit in general, where the error lies. But then there is again the question, which reviewer I got, maybe not the one, which declined my waymark.

 

Perhaps it would be possible that in every category the leader asks his "coworkers", that they write there nicknames at least in "declined WMs", so that the contact can be established directly.

 

Thank you very much.

 

greets

kaschper69

 

I have decline two of them and I have explain in the decline message what was rong and asked to fix it and resubmit.

 

As it is written in the category description "Any sources used, referenced, reviewed or otherwise utilized in the creation of a Wikipedia waymark shall be cited in the Long Description. ..." please fix it and resubmit. thank you.

 

I thought the explanation of what was needed was enough, but what we think is enough is not always the case for those who are in the onthe side

 

As Benchmark Blasterz explain if you join the group as regular member you can see who aprove or declined what waymark.

 

I have jut revewed some of the resubmited waymrks, I'm glad that everything has been resolved for the better

[+iconions]

Hello community,

 

I would like to address a topic, which I noticed now in my active time in Waymarking this year.

 

Yesterday 8 Waymarks were declined because they did not comply with the regulations of the category. 6 Waymarks alone had been approved one day before. Since the given reference text did not explain to me what was wrong, I would have gladly directly contacted him.

 

And here we come to my request: In my opinion, it should be self-evident that you write your nickname to an "approve" or "declined" waymark. Then you could regulate the questions directly among the two affected persons.

 

So I had to write a well-known reviewer of this category and ask for help. The other possibility would have been that I would have asked at the re-submit in general, where the error lies. But then there is again the question, which reviewer I got, maybe not the one, which declined my waymark.

 

Perhaps it would be possible that in every category the leader asks his "coworkers", that they write there nicknames at least in "declined WMs", so that the contact can be established directly.

 

Thank you very much.

 

greets

kaschper69

 

...or there is the REALLY pi$$ed off person who decides that the reviewer is on a personal vendetta against the submitter when the reviewer has the audacity to decline one of the submitter's waymarks because it goes against what is in the category description. I REALLY like those replies because I get to be called all sorts of names, told the category is garbage, and lots of other great stuff (just got one of those today! - YIPPEE!!!! - NOT!). Nah, those I won't sign, thanks, however, if I know you, and I have a suggestion either to improve your listing OR a suggestion to add the waymark to another category, then I'll write up the message and I'll sign it. Remember, reviewers are volunteers and waymarkers - we don't get anything out of reviewing EXCEPT the personal satisfaction of seeing great and proper waymarks added to the respective categories. </stepping off soapbox>

[+Benchmark Blasterz]

Hello community,

 

I would like to address a topic, which I noticed now in my active time in Waymarking this year.

 

Yesterday 8 Waymarks were declined because they did not comply with the regulations of the category. 6 Waymarks alone had been approved one day before. Since the given reference text did not explain to me what was wrong, I would have gladly directly contacted him.

 

And here we come to my request: In my opinion, it should be self-evident that you write your nickname to an "approve" or "declined" waymark. Then you could regulate the questions directly among the two affected persons.

 

So I had to write a well-known reviewer of this category and ask for help. The other possibility would have been that I would have asked at the re-submit in general, where the error lies. But then there is again the question, which reviewer I got, maybe not the one, which declined my waymark.

 

Perhaps it would be possible that in every category the leader asks his "coworkers", that they write there nicknames at least in "declined WMs", so that the contact can be established directly.

 

Thank you very much.

 

greets

kaschper69

 

...or there is the REALLY pi$$ed off person who decides that the reviewer is on a personal vendetta against the submitter when the reviewer has the audacity to decline one of the submitter's waymarks because it goes against what is in the category description. I REALLY like those replies because I get to be called all sorts of names, told the category is garbage, and lots of other great stuff (just got one of those today! - YIPPEE!!!! - NOT!). Nah, those I won't sign, thanks, however, if I know you, and I have a suggestion either to improve your listing OR a suggestion to add the waymark to another category, then I'll write up the message and I'll sign it. Remember, reviewers are volunteers and waymarkers - we don't get anything out of reviewing EXCEPT the personal satisfaction of seeing great and proper waymarks added to the respective categories. </stepping off soapbox>

 

YES! No one should be abused or villified simply for declining a submitters waymark.

 

We must be mindful that this game does not exist without submitters AND reviewers, and BOTH sides deserve respect.

 

In those cases where I know my decline will be received with anger and abuse, then I totally would remain nameless too. (speaking as someone who has had many waymarks declined (and approved) by you, Tom -- I appreciate your decline notes, suggestions, and comments. Thank you.)

 

For submitters, if we want signed declines to become the norm, then we have to consistently show ourselves to be reasonable people who will not lash out abusively at volunteer officers who reviewed our work and found it lacking, even when we disagree. For reviewers, if there's a fix we need to make, give us a clue. Encouragement goes a long way, too

Edited November 29, 2016 by Benchmark Blasterz

[+iconions]

Hello community,

 

I would like to address a topic, which I noticed now in my active time in Waymarking this year.

 

Yesterday 8 Waymarks were declined because they did not comply with the regulations of the category. 6 Waymarks alone had been approved one day before. Since the given reference text did not explain to me what was wrong, I would have gladly directly contacted him.

 

And here we come to my request: In my opinion, it should be self-evident that you write your nickname to an "approve" or "declined" waymark. Then you could regulate the questions directly among the two affected persons.

 

So I had to write a well-known reviewer of this category and ask for help. The other possibility would have been that I would have asked at the re-submit in general, where the error lies. But then there is again the question, which reviewer I got, maybe not the one, which declined my waymark.

 

Perhaps it would be possible that in every category the leader asks his "coworkers", that they write there nicknames at least in "declined WMs", so that the contact can be established directly.

 

Thank you very much.

 

greets

kaschper69

 

...or there is the REALLY pi$$ed off person who decides that the reviewer is on a personal vendetta against the submitter when the reviewer has the audacity to decline one of the submitter's waymarks because it goes against what is in the category description. I REALLY like those replies because I get to be called all sorts of names, told the category is garbage, and lots of other great stuff (just got one of those today! - YIPPEE!!!! - NOT!). Nah, those I won't sign, thanks, however, if I know you, and I have a suggestion either to improve your listing OR a suggestion to add the waymark to another category, then I'll write up the message and I'll sign it. Remember, reviewers are volunteers and waymarkers - we don't get anything out of reviewing EXCEPT the personal satisfaction of seeing great and proper waymarks added to the respective categories. </stepping off soapbox>

 

YES! No one should be abused or villified simply for declining a submitters waymark.

 

We must be mindful that this game does not exist without submitters AND reviewers, and BOTH sides deserve respect.

 

In those cases where I know my decline will be received with anger and abuse, then I totally would remain nameless too. (speaking as someone who has had many waymarks declined (and approved) by you, Tom -- I appreciate your decline notes, suggestions, and comments. Thank you.)

 

For submitters, if we want signed declines to become the norm, then we have to consistently show ourselves to be reasonable people who will not lash out abusively at volunteer officers who reviewed our work and found it lacking, even when we disagree. For reviewers, if there's a fix we need to make, give us a clue. Encouragement goes a long way, too

 

Thanks for that - I appreciate it - ALOT!!! Again, I was trained by two of the finest reviewers there are out there - BruceS and SilverQuill. I try to do my best on each and every one of my waymarks I submit, and those I review. Part of the problem is that reviewing by note is very impersonal and words will be taken by the reviewee wrong, as they will be on the defensive.

[+elyob]

I, too, had a bad week being called out as a nasty reviewer...and I didn't even do the denial. I thought if I made a helpful suggestion to the poster, it would lessen the impact of the denial. I guess that backfired.

[+fi67]

Very true, some people can be very abusive. There are a lot good reasons to not sign a denial.

 

But I still do it, and I have not been in too many aggressive conflicts yet. Not none, but very few.

 

Maybe this has two reasons. First, you have to think more about your wording and how it is perceived, when you sign it. Second, some people can better accept a denial from a person than from an anonymous group member who does not even have the courage to show his name.

 

I may be wrong and just happened to be on the lucky side until now, but I can only recommend to at least try it.

[+kaschper69]

I have now read the answers of the past days. My concern was that the reviewer, who declined the Waymark, would be able to get in touch more quickly. My English is unfortunately not so good that I can understand everything straight away and the translation of Google makes synonymous with the translation unfortunately not always meaning. The same is true for the translation of a German text into your home language.

So far, I was not aware that as a reviewer you must be afraid to decline a Waymark because you have to fear the revenge of the advertiser.

 

I always thought Waymarking was a GAME!

 

If you then decline a waymark by means of the rules set by the category, you have done everything right and need not have a guilty conscience or even fear !? And even if we have made a mistake in reviewing: We are all human beings! And people make mistakes!

 

In any case, I thought it would be an easier communication by placing his nickname under the declined Waymark. I will continue to do so in the categories where I review. However, through the one or the other answer i found now a way, how to find the name. Then I have to choose this way.

[+iconions]

I, too, had a bad week being called out as a nasty reviewer...and I didn't even do the denial. I thought if I made a helpful suggestion to the poster, it would lessen the impact of the denial. I guess that backfired.

 

Sometimes, no good deed goes unpunished! The real problem is that people forget that it is a GAME - it's not a competition to see who can post the most waymarks, really, no one cares. What we do care about is that these waymarks are documented per the category descriptions. The best piece of advise I ever got was from Silverquill way back when I really got started doing this in '09 - SELL your waymark. Give someone a reason to visit it. Breathe life into it.

 

Again, the written word has no emotion. As someone who does Customer Service everyday, I would much prefer working over the phone or face-to-face as I can use proper inflection and tone to my words - you cannot do that with the written word. People who are being denied will be defensive and will take the worse possible meaning and tone to those denials when they are written. Just my two cents...

[+*Team Krombaer*]

My personally opinion in that case is:

 

It is a game, especially in Germany.

 

We give us reasontly our hands and shake them as well... We are few waymarkers, but we understand what everyone makes the next day And that is good enough. In that way ( a better way ?) it will be easier to win new players..

 

*Team Krombaer*

 

Abtl. *SportBaer*