Jump to content

Museums - where do they go?


Recommended Posts

I'm having a little trouble understanding the purpose of Oddball Museums. It seems so many museums that are waymarked in other museum categories (such as History Museum) are also added to Oddball Museums.   Why are History Museums lumped in with museums that honor french fries, cheese, or toilet seats?  I would think the museum is one or the other.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment

The History Of french fries, The History Of cheese, The History Of toilet seats - they're all history museums, are they not? After all, history is history. I do Railroad Museums in History Museums as well, as they recount the history (usually local) of the railway which once passed by the building which usually is now the museum. It's not my place to say one way or the other, but if I put RR Museums in History Museums, then I certainly couldn't complain about a Toilet Seat History Museum being included, as well.

Keith

Link to comment

my take on this - right or wrong, who  knows!

 

I recently waymarked the American Banjo Museum in Oddball Museums. Oddball in that the general public may not be terribly interested in the history of the banjo.I could have also put it in history museums because it does show the history of the banjo. Peanut museum, barbed wire museum, windmill  museum - they would all be oddball as in more like "one-of-a-kind".

Now, the Field Museum in Chicago is a general "history museum". It has halls for the history of Egypt, England, etc. I don't think it is very unusual or oddball to have a general history museum. A Civil War museum is not oddball, as there are ones in about 20 states.

Railroad and military museums would not be oddball as there are whole categories for these. They must be well represented in quite a few places to have a category just for them.

So, I guess what I'm saying is that if it is a museum for a specific item or theme that is not generally of interest to a large number of the population, I think of that as an oddball.

Edited by vulture1957
Link to comment

My favorite things to go to are "Oddball" Museums.  I was disappointed that the Spinach Can Museum in Chester, Illinois was closed when I was out on my recent vacation.  I've been to the Spam Museum in Austin, Minnesota (actually quite good and fascinating) and the Mustard Museum near Madison, Wisconsin (who knew that there were so many different kinds of mustard).  So yeah, they are quirky, they can be corny (Is there a Corn Museum?), but mostly, they are usually just fun!  (Even the Rattlesnake Museum in Albuquerque - it was small, but actually really pretty nice!) 

Edited by iconions
clarity
Link to comment
1 hour ago, iconions said:

My favorite things to go to are "Oddball" Museums.  I was disappointed that the Spinach Can Museum in Chester, Illinois was closed when I was out on my recent vacation.  I've been to the Spam Museum in Austin, Minnesota (actually quite good and fascinating) and the Mustard Museum near Madison, Wisconsin (who knew that there were so many different kinds of mustard).  So yeah, they are quirky, they can be corny (Is there a Corn Museum?), but mostly, they are usually just fun!  (Even the Rattlesnake Museum in Albuquerque - it was small, but actually really pretty nice!) 

You're making me hungry.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, vulture1957 said:

my take on this - right or wrong, who  knows!

 

I recently waymarked the American Banjo Museum in Oddball Museums. Oddball in that the general public may not be terribly interested in the history of the banjo.I could have also put it in history museums because it does show the history of the banjo. Peanut museum, barbed wire museum, windmill  museum - they would all be oddball as in more like "one-of-a-kind".

Now, the Field Museum in Chicago is a general "history museum". It has halls for the history of Egypt, England, etc. I don't think it is very unusual or oddball to have a general history museum. A Civil War museum is not oddball, as there are ones in about 20 states.

Railroad and military museums would not be oddball as there are whole categories for these. They must be well represented in quite a few places to have a category just for them.

So, I guess what I'm saying is that if it is a museum for a specific item or theme that is not generally of interest to a large number of the population, I think of that as an oddball.

 

My experience with that category doesn't quite match with the above. In 2012 I posted the only Globe Museum worldwide to that category. A group vote was started and the waymark was finally declined, because "not odd enough". So, I thought that "odd" was meant like "strange" or "weird". At least the description says "The stranger, the wierder, the more off-beat the better.". 

 

My next try was a Torture Museum and this one was accepted. Maybe their definition of "odd" has changed over the years, but back in 2012 "one-of-a-kind" was no criteria for being accepted.

Edited by PISA-caching
Link to comment
5 hours ago, vulture1957 said:

 

So, I guess what I'm saying is that if it is a museum for a specific item or theme that is not generally of interest to a large number of the population, I think of that as an oddball.

I like this definition. TN has an African American population of almost 20%. That's a lot of people in just one state who would be interested in this museum.  A museum dedicated to the decades long history of African Americans' fight for the same civil rights as others is not oddball or unique. Now include all the other states and you have a very large number of our population who are travelling to see this museum. Oddball seems a little disrespectful to me considering the subject and historical importance.

Edited by Max and 99
Link to comment
58 minutes ago, Max and 99 said:

I like this definition. TN has an African American population of almost 20%. That's a lot of people in just one state who would be interested in this museum.  A museum dedicated to the decades long history of African Americans' fight for the same civil rights as others is not oddball or unique. Now include all the other states and you have a very large number of our population who are travelling to see this museum. Oddball seems a little disrespectful to me considering the subject and historical importance.

Yea - I saw the Civil Rights Museum in that category and kinda shook my head.   That's not the place for that museum.  

Link to comment

Posters and evaluators both need to try to make sure the waymark goes in the appropriate category. Civil Rights museum (once again, my opinion) should have been denied in Oddball and the suggestion to put it in the more appropriate History Museum category.

 

Now, the Globe museum mentioned above I can't figure out why it wouldn't be oddball.

Link to comment
16 hours ago, Alfouine said:

The main problem of Civil rights museum waymark, that it was published by an officer of the category, so, difficult for a new officer member to decline it

A little background on this waymark for reference.

 

The Civil Rights Museum is in Memphis, Tennessee.  It is located in the former Lorraine Motel.  For those who aren't born in the early sixties like myself, the Lorraine Motel was the site where Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated.  This is why the National Civil Rights Museum is where it is.  I was really young (six at the time of 1968) but I remember some of the TV Coverage.  That said, would the Sixth Floor Museum in Dallas also be listed as an Oddball Museum (this is where Lee Harvey Oswald fired his rifle and there is a museum documenting the assassination and the conspiracy theories)?  Or maybe the Ford Theater Museum in Washington, DC where Lincoln was shot?  Lincoln's coat is in the Museum downstairs from where John Wilkes Booth assassinated Lincoln - also, the Peterson House next door also has a small museum where Lincoln died.  All three have not been waymarked into the category, yet.

All I am saying with the above is comparing a quirky museum like a Spam, a Mustard or a Spinach Can Museum to a hallowed place where an American icon was killed - well, I'll let you reach your own conclusions.  For myself, if I get back to Memphis and go to that National Civil Rights Museum, I will not register a visit under "Oddball" Museums the National Civil Rights Museum under my own principles.  No offence meant to the owner of the waymark or to the category officers with my above comments as to the appropriateness.  They thought it was - I don't.  This is strictly my opinion and it differs from theirs and I would have been overruled.

As far to the claim that this is the "only" Civil Rights museum, I would state that this is the only NATIONAL Civil Rights Museum.  Actually, my beloved Sunflower State of Kansas has the Brown vs. The Topeka Board of Education National Historic Site - which education is most assuredly a basic Civil Right.

Edited by iconions
clarity
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment

I 100% agree that Civil rights museum has nothing to do in Oddball museum, and thank you for your history explanation, it's really intersting.

 

My argument was, how is it possible to understand what could fit in this category if even an officer of this category publish a waymark that has nothing to do in the category ?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Just now, Alfouine said:

I 100% agree that Civil rights museum has nothing to do in Oddball museum, and thank you for your history explanation, it's really intersting.

 

My argument was, how is it possible to understand what could fit in this category if even an officer of this category publish a waymark that has nothing to do in the category ?

Yes, and this is why I asked the purpose of the category in my OP. 

Link to comment

This is the usual problem with categories that are somewhat subjective. Wherever you draw the line, there will be someone complaining, usually from both sides. (Just when it's only one side, you can be sure to have done it wrong.)

 

But calling Civil Rights oddball is going too far. This can, and probably will, be read as a political statement. In my opinion there are a lot of recent submissions that would much better fit to other museum categories, history or science. I think about 20% of the last entries I would not have accepted, personally. I know that you can also find arguments against my own submissions, as well as for all others.

 

But the main point is that the category has turned into a catch-all category for museums some people think do not fit anywhere else. This is not a good direction. The category name does not reflect that, and that role is already implicitly covered by the History Museums.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

FI67 resume perfectly what's happened.

 

And i also submit a waymark borderline and approved in that category...

 

As the main concern people are officers of the category, i sent to them this message :

Quote

Hello,
We have an interesting discussion in the forum about : Oddball museum https://forums.geocaching.com/GC/index.php?/topic/348314-museums-where-do-they-go/#comment-5716243
We would like to have your opinion.
As an officer of the category, you can give us your point of vue and answers.
Thank you, Alfouine

 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Alfouine said:

FI67 resume perfectly what's happened.

 

And i also submit a waymark borderline and approved in that category...

 

As the main concern people are officers of the category, i sent to them this message :

 

Again, just to reiterate.  This has nothing to do with the waymarker who posted the waymark.  The waymarker felt that this was a perfectly legitimate place for this waymark and I totally respect, but disagree with the opinion.  My single purpose was to give my humble opinion and some background on the waymark, not to start a flame war.

Link to comment

I do not want to start a flame war and sorry if my reply are clumsy, my english is not tactful.

 

If the Oddball museum becomes a cach-all category, it's not a problem, but the description has to change to explain it's a cach-all category.

Otherwise, some waymarks could be declined and officers explain why.

 

Because officers can changed and new officers could disapproved these waymarks (not oddball) in the future just to respect the description.

That's happened with two categories recently, a lot of waymarks, even old waymarks, were declined and it's not really nice to have waymarks declined few years after only because officers changed.

 

So when we detect a potential problem, the best place to find a solution together is the forum and all actors should be present.

 

We did the same with Figurative and Silhouette categories, everybody gave their arguments and the leader improved the descriptions.

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Alfouine said:

I do not want to start a flame war and sorry if my reply are clumsy, my english is not tactful.

 

If the Oddball museum becomes a cach-all category, it's not a problem, but the description has to change to explain it's a cach-all category.

Otherwise, some waymarks could be declined and officers explain why.

 

Because officers can changed and new officers could disapproved these waymarks (not oddball) in the future just to respect the description.

That's happened with two categories recently, a lot of waymarks, even old waymarks, were declined and it's not really nice to have waymarks declined few years after only because officers changed.

 

So when we detect a potential problem, the best place to find a solution together is the forum and all actors should be present.

 

We did the same with Figurative and Silhouette categories, everybody gave their arguments and the leader improved the descriptions.

Sorry, I wasn't accusing you of anything.  I was just making sure that if the officer opened the thread just to the last reply, the officer read what thought process. It wasn't anything derogatory towards you.  Much better to go ahead make a statement.

Link to comment

When I looked at the waymark, I tried to find what could be strange in this museum. A museum of civil rights, why make a museum on this theme? It is true that there is originality in this theme "the history of the civil rights movement in the United States from the 17th century to the present day".
Generally, history museums are more generalist museums, where several stories merge.
Now I await the opinion of other officers in the category, I'm still a little sad about the forum.

Link to comment
53 minutes ago, pmaupin said:

[...]
Generally, history museums are more generalist museums, where several stories merge.

[...]

 

That is true, when you see a building with "History Museum" written at the front, than you can expect a general history museum. But the Waymarking category History Museums is for all history museums, also specialized ones, no matter how narrow the focus is. And every museum has at least a tiny aspect of history; I mean, they cannot exhibit objects that were not created in the past, so I consider the History Museums category as the catch-all. There is no need for Oddball Museums to take over that role and thus lose its special spirit.

 

If a museum is specialized, but not special a.k.a. oddball, weird, spooky, quirky or whatever similar, then it belongs to History Museums in my opinion.  Also museums with an academic, scientific background are not oddball. A museum of seismic risks is Science, not Oddball. A mining museum is either Science or History, depending on the focus.

 

I am fine with museums of special items, e.g. food like cheese, beer or macaroons, or products like banjos, ice machines or globes. I think they belong here, even when the presentation is serious.

Link to comment
17 minutes ago, fi67 said:

If a museum is specialized, but not special a.k.a. oddball, weird, spooky, quirky or whatever similar, then it belongs to History Museums in my opinion.  Also museums with an academic, scientific background are not oddball.

I agree with you and I will be more vigilant and more attentive to the next ones.

 

One of the problems is solved, after discussion with the owner of the waymark "Civil Rights Museum", it was removed from the category "Oddball Museums".

Link to comment
1 hour ago, pmaupin said:

I agree with you and I will be more vigilant and more attentive to the next ones.

 

One of the problems is solved, after discussion with the owner of the waymark "Civil Rights Museum", it was removed from the category "Oddball Museums".

I hope, though, that the owner did post it into the History Museums category.  It is WAY to important a site and Museum not to be waymarked somewhere.  It DEFINITELY not only is ABOUT history, it IS history and discussed in my previous post.

Link to comment

I think this highlights the issue of trying to fit something (a museum in this case) into every possible category instead of the most appropriate. Totally agree that every museum is about history (or at least 99.9% of them?), but I don't agree with Waymarking every museum to history museums for that reason. Both of the railroad museums I waymarked only to  the railroad museum category. the one oddball museum, only to the Oddball museums category. What would be gained by also Waymarking to history museums, except another point in my score of # of waymarks. Particularly if the two waymarks are simply a copy-and-paste clone.

I see the same thing for some other categories, like churchyard cemeteries vs cemeteries of the world. If I can use the former category, why then would I also do the latter? I wish those highly-overlapping categories would be more restrictive, so that it's one or the other and the player must select the best fit. Similar to the restrictions in place for some other categories like Citizen Memorials (long list of restrictions due to other existing categories). Another example would be the exclusion of religious statues in the Statues of Historic Figures category, despite the fact that many of those religious statues represent Historic Figures.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
11 hours ago, fi67 said:

This is the usual problem with categories that are somewhat subjective. Wherever you draw the line, there will be someone complaining, usually from both sides. (Just when it's only one side, you can be sure to have done it wrong.)

It's the truth

Link to comment
10 hours ago, Bon Echo said:

...What would be gained by also Waymarking to history museums, except another point in my score of # of waymarks. Particularly if the two waymarks are simply a copy-and-paste clone.

I see the same thing for some other categories, like churchyard cemeteries vs cemeteries of the world. If I can use the former category, why then would I also do the latter? ...

 

I'm going to (seemingly) take issue with the above quoted section of Bon Echo's post. Actually, I just want to look at the other side of the coin.

I am notorious for cross posting, partly because I (usually) put more work and time than most into my posts and feel I should get a bit of a reward for the extra time invested. Sure, it helps the numbers, too.

BUT, another reason for cross posts is exposure. That's right, exposure. If we are to consider Waymarking as a resource to be shared with the world at large in their search for interesting places to visit, or even in a search for a specific place, then a site's likelihood of being found, or even stumbled upon, is increased with increased exposure. Exposure is increased with the number of posts a site receives, IE the number of categories in which it can be reasonably expected to be found.

If I submit a churchyard cemetery only to that category and not to Worldwide Cemeteries, its exposure is halved and its likelihood of being missed in a random search by a neophyte is doubled.

 

And there you have my tuppence worth.

Keith

PS - as a test I searched (Googled) on some churchyard cemeteries which were also cross posted into worldwide. Sometimes the churchyard cemetery made the first page, sometimes the worldwide cemetery, sometimes both, and occasionally neither made the first three or more pages, but the church did. This shouldn't happen, but it did.

Edited by BK-Hunters
addition
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
17 hours ago, Bon Echo said:

I think this highlights the issue of trying to fit something (a museum in this case) into every possible category instead of the most appropriate. Totally agree that every museum is about history (or at least 99.9% of them?), but I don't agree with Waymarking every museum to history museums for that reason. Both of the railroad museums I waymarked only to  the railroad museum category. the one oddball museum, only to the Oddball museums category. What would be gained by also Waymarking to history museums, except another point in my score of # of waymarks. Particularly if the two waymarks are simply a copy-and-paste clone.

I see the same thing for some other categories, like churchyard cemeteries vs cemeteries of the world. If I can use the former category, why then would I also do the latter? I wish those highly-overlapping categories would be more restrictive, so that it's one or the other and the player must select the best fit. Similar to the restrictions in place for some other categories like Citizen Memorials (long list of restrictions due to other existing categories). Another example would be the exclusion of religious statues in the Statues of Historic Figures category, despite the fact that many of those religious statues represent Historic Figures.

Ah, there's the rub.  Later categories have specifically addressed the issue of redundancy so that they will be approved by the Waymarking group at large - it is one of the four items that Groundspeak has identified as an item to consider.  Do I have a problem with cross-listing, absolutely not!  Lord knows I have have done my share of it.  A good officer in a category, (I hope that I am one, or at least consistent, which I try to be) will send back, from the category description, the WHY the cross-listing isn't allowed.  If there isn't a reason to deny the cross-listing, the waymark gets approved.  As far as far as the BK-Hunters, I always enjoy seeing their waymarks in the queue. I may not approve them all of the time, but I do appreciate the work and research that went into them! 

As far as the topic at hand, I simply feel that the museum in question was placed into the category because it was an "only" and using that definition; it was an "oddball".  I don't believe it wasn't anything more nefarious than that.  Others like myself, though, used another definition of "oddball" to mean quirky or strange, which would make a serious location like the Lorraine Motel definitely off-putting.  This reminds me of an exercise that was done in a communications class where you had to instruct someone how to make a peanut and butter sandwich.  Just because the person describing how to make the sandwich has the vision on the action doesn't mean the person making the sandwich is getting the same instructions.  Same thing with Category descriptions: sometimes, it's good to step back and look at them with fresh eyes and see why people are making the sandwich wrong!

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
9 minutes ago, iconions said:

This reminds me of an exercise that was done in a communications class where you had to instruct someone how to make a peanut and butter sandwich.  Just because the person describing how to make the sandwich has the vision on the action doesn't mean the person making the sandwich is getting the same instructions.  Same thing with Category descriptions: sometimes, it's good to step back and look at them with fresh eyes and see why people are making the sandwich wrong!

 

And at the next level the person making the sandwich gets the instructions in a foreign language (sometimes with typos, dead links to websites, example Images that don't load etc.). :-)

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
8 hours ago, BK-Hunters said:

partly because I (usually) put more work and time than most into my posts and feel I should get a bit of a reward for the extra time invested

No one can argue about that!

 

Quote

Exposure is increased with the number of posts a site receives, IE the number of categories in which it can be reasonably expected to be found

I read somewhere (and could be wrong) that with website indexing (for search engines like Google), the number of links to a page influences the rank a page is given in terms of importance. So what you need to do is add links between your waymark listings. Here's an example where one waymark listings references (via hyperlink) some others that are at the same location:

http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WMXK0Z_Battle_of_Stoney_Creek_War_of_1812_Stoney_Creek_Ontario

(btw I;m still waiting over 3 weeks for approval on this one, in case wayfrog happens to be listening in :0)

No idea if that actually helps or not (in terms of search indexing, but I thought it was a nice touch).

Anyway, I mentioned a few categories that I though strongly overlapped, but of course it's a lot muddier than that - how about This Old Church vs any of the many denomination-based categories?

 

20 minutes ago, iconions said:

If there isn't a reason to deny the cross-listing, the waymark gets approved.

 

Completely agree, and if a player wants to cross-post they have that right. Sorry if I sounded like I was condemning those that do, wasn't my intent but probably came off that way. I was looking more at the reasons why I (usually) do not cross-post. Truth is, I'm not even a purist on this - part of me wishes the whole system was revamped so you could create a single listing and it could be tagged to multiple categories, instead of being multiple separate listings. that would save work on our end and would save space on Groundspeak servers. But that's a subject for a different thread.

Edited by Bon Echo
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, PISA-caching said:

 

And at the next level the person making the sandwich gets the instructions in a foreign language (sometimes with typos, dead links to websites, example Images that don't load etc.). :-)

Touche!  (...and sent through Google Translate to boot!   This would be both ways to be sure!)

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Bon Echo said:

No one can argue about that!

 

I read somewhere (and could be wrong) that with website indexing (for search engines like Google), the number of links to a page influences the rank a page is given in terms of importance. So what you need to do is add links between your waymark listings. Here's an example where one waymark listings references (via hyperlink) some others that are at the same location:

http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WMXK0Z_Battle_of_Stoney_Creek_War_of_1812_Stoney_Creek_Ontario

(btw I;m still waiting over 3 weeks for approval on this one, in case wayfrog happens to be listening in :0)

No idea if that actually helps or not (in terms of search indexing, but I thought it was a nice touch).

Anyway, I mentioned a few categories that I though strongly overlapped, but of course it's a lot muddier than that - how about This Old Church vs any of the many denomination-based categories?

 

 

Completely agree, and if a player wants to cross-post they have that right. Sorry if I sounded like I was condemning those that do, wasn't my intent but probably came off that way. I was looking more at the reasons why I (usually) do not cross-post. Truth is, I'm not even a purist on this - part of me wishes the whole system was revamped so you could create a single listing and it could be tagged to multiple categories, instead of being multiple separate listings. that would save work on our end and would save space on Groundspeak servers. But that's a subject for a different thread.

You're absolutely fine, it's hard with the written word to show good tone.  I try, but it always seems that I'm taken the wrone way.  I only yell if you're a kid on my lawn!  LOL  Seriously, I was just basically playing Devil's Advocate on my comment - and I agree that it would be MUCH easier if the whole process if the waymark could be posted once and then sent out to the various topics auto-du-magically!   We're kinda stuck with what we got, though...

Link to comment
1 minute ago, iconions said:

Touche!  (...and sent through Google Translate to boot!   This would be both ways to be sure!)

 

:-) True, but seriously spoken I consider myself being lucky, because Google is quite good at translating English to German and vice versa - escpecially it the sentences aren't too complicated. Most of the time I just have to correct a word or two. But when I try to translate Swedish or Czech or ... to English, the result is often not proper English or not making sense at all. That's why my waymarks in Sweden either have Swedish text from Swedish Wikipedia (or other Swedish websites) or English text only.

Link to comment

Another post on cross-posting:

 

I don't normally try to post a waymark in more than one category for a slightly selfish reason -- Someone sees my post of Waymark X in a category and figures out that it could also be in Category Y. Them he'll go take pictures and write up his waymark AND ALSO VISIT MINE!

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
54 minutes ago, PISA-caching said:

 

:-) True, but seriously spoken I consider myself being lucky, because Google is quite good at translating English to German and vice versa - escpecially it the sentences aren't too complicated. Most of the time I just have to correct a word or two. But when I try to translate Swedish or Czech or ... to English, the result is often not proper English or not making sense at all. That's why my waymarks in Sweden either have Swedish text from Swedish Wikipedia (or other Swedish websites) or English text only.

 

Interesting! And I keep complaining how bad Google Translate does German compared to other languages. :o Truth is, it is quite usable, but it has not nearly the quality I would expect. It does French much better, except for tenses and grammatical gender. Maybe my sentences are too complicated. The main problem are special terms that often appear in different fields with different meanings and translations; there it usually takes the wrong ones e.g. from biology instead of architecture. It had reached a certain level, until some months ago they introduced new algorithms with AI, then the quality dropped heavily. My two main issues were, that it just skipped subordinate clauses it could not correctly put into context, and it assumed a typo when it did not know a word, so translating names into something that sounds similar in the original language.

 

But it is learning fast and will soon be better than before. You just have to know what you are doing when you use it, but isn't this always the case?

Link to comment

Well, my knowledge of French is about the same level as my knowledge of Klingon. :-) So, I can't judge the English/French translations. Yes, there are some problems here and there, and over the years I've learned that the results get better, if I split a long sentence to two short ones. And of course I never trust the translation blindly. And from time to time I take the time to suggest better translations which will also improve the quality some day.

Link to comment
28 minutes ago, vulture1957 said:

Another post on cross-posting:

 

I don't normally try to post a waymark in more than one category for a slightly selfish reason -- Someone sees my post of Waymark X in a category and figures out that it could also be in Category Y. Them he'll go take pictures and write up his waymark AND ALSO VISIT MINE!

 

...and there's nothing wrong with that approach.  The cool thing about Waymarking, the only way to play the game "wrong" is to post something that violates the category description.  In that case, hopefully it is an easy fix to the issue! 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, vulture1957 said:

Another post on cross-posting:

 

I don't normally try to post a waymark in more than one category for a slightly selfish reason -- Someone sees my post of Waymark X in a category and figures out that it could also be in Category Y. Them he'll go take pictures and write up his waymark AND ALSO VISIT MINE!

 

 

A good plan. I am more on the counterpart version of it. I am always happy when one of the places I waymarked is cross-posted, so I can log a visit with my old pics, because I do not have a lot of possibilities to visit, I cleared my closer area years ago.

 

On the other hand, I do my fair share of cross-posting, just usually not to close categories like different types of cemeteries, museums or churches. It is fine to do that. It is not only about the numbers, but numbers are nice. I decided to be proud of getting my numbers without excessive cross-posting, well aware that some people would already call my cross-posting habits excessive.

Link to comment
5 hours ago, Bon Echo said:

I read somewhere (and could be wrong) that with website indexing (for search engines like Google), the number of links to a page influences the rank a page is given in terms of importance. So what you need to do is add links between your waymark listings. Here's an example where one waymark listings references (via hyperlink) some others that are at the same location:

http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WMXK0Z_Battle_of_Stoney_Creek_War_of_1812_Stoney_Creek_Ontario

(btw I;m still waiting over 3 weeks for approval on this one, in case wayfrog happens to be listening in :0)

No idea if that actually helps or not (in terms of search indexing, but I thought it was a nice touch).

 

 

I believe I have read the same thing sometime in the distant past. Dunno if it's still the case, but it's certainly something to think about. I believe it may be a tactic worth employing.

BTW that Stoney Creek WM definitely needs to be approved. I like it. :)

Keith

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...