Documented headstone now gone

[+Max and 99]

It's not uncommon for something you waymark to be moved (historical marker), or replaced (a business). But today was the first time a cemetery marker I waymarked has disappeared. The marker for a centenarian, and her sister or mother's marker next to it. Either gone or so far under the grass that there's no sign of it. I waymarked it 5 1/2 years ago. I'm really glad now that I waymarked and documented this centenarian's final resting place. 

[+elyob]

This is proof positive why waymarks in some categories should never be archived or deleted.

[+PISA-caching]

A few weeks ago I noticed that this headstone was removed. I've seen some waymarks where the word "REMOVED" was added at the beginning or the end of the waymark title. Other users use other words like "Disappeared", "Missing", "Gone" etc. Sometimes there's just the word, sometimes it's in brackets, between *s or other special characters. 

 

Is there any rule for how one should add that information and if not, shouldn't we have such a rule? The best solution would be to add a "removed" checkbox for all waymarks. that can be activated, if a waymark is no longer to be found. This way, the word "REMOVED" or whatever could be added by the software and all would look the same, but of course that's only dreaming. :-)

Edited August 3, 2018 by PISA-caching

[+Lynx Humble]

4 hours ago, PISA-caching said:

A few weeks ago I noticed that this headstone was removed. I've seen some waymarks where the word "REMOVED" was added at the beginning or the end of the waymark title. Other users use other words like "Disappeared", "Missing", "Gone" etc. Sometimes there's just the word, sometimes it's in brackets, between *s or other special characters. 

 

Is there any rule for how one should add that information and if not, shouldn't we have such a rule? The best solution would be to add a "removed" checkbox for all waymarks. that can be activated, if a waymark is no longer to be found. This way, the word "REMOVED" or whatever could be added by the software and all would look the same, but of course that's only dreaming. :-)

 

I have also seen the word LEGACY for those.

 

Is there any rule about visiting those waymark after they are gone ?

 

[+fi67]

5 hours ago, PISA-caching said:

A few weeks ago I noticed that this headstone was removed. I've seen some waymarks where the word "REMOVED" was added at the beginning or the end of the waymark title. Other users use other words like "Disappeared", "Missing", "Gone" etc. Sometimes there's just the word, sometimes it's in brackets, between *s or other special characters. 

 

Is there any rule for how one should add that information and if not, shouldn't we have such a rule? The best solution would be to add a "removed" checkbox for all waymarks. that can be activated, if a waymark is no longer to be found. This way, the word "REMOVED" or whatever could be added by the software and all would look the same, but of course that's only dreaming. :-)

This checkbox could also be added to the search form, preferably with a default value to exclude them.

 

This question was already discussed years ago. In my opinion, a uniform appearance is not very important, but it must be obvious that is not a normal part of the title, but a later modification note.

 

I add the "{LEGACY}" (all caps and with curly brackets) in front of the title. I know, this word is not very accurate, but that is exactly why I decided to use it. Gone, removed, destroyed, closed are better choices for individual waymarks, but then you have to execute four or more searches to get them all.

 

And it is also important to document this change in the short and long description. I add a short and explicit edit note to both, in the short description at the end, in the long description at the very beginning. As an example:

"EDIT: This object was reported missing in autumn 2017. I have not yet found out what happened to it."

[+Max and 99]

1 hour ago, Lynx Humble said:

 

I have also seen the word LEGACY for those.

 

Is there any rule about visiting those waymark after they are gone ?

 

Unless the waymark is archived, it'll still show up in scavenger hunts and needs to be visited.

[+PISA-caching]

3 hours ago, fi67 said:

This checkbox could also be added to the search form, preferably with a default value to exclude them.

 

This question was already discussed years ago. In my opinion, a uniform appearance is not very important, but it must be obvious that is not a normal part of the title, but a later modification note.

 

I add the "{LEGACY}" (all caps and with curly brackets) in front of the title. I know, this word is not very accurate, but that is exactly why I decided to use it. Gone, removed, destroyed, closed are better choices for individual waymarks, but then you have to execute four or more searches to get them all.

 

And it is also important to document this change in the short and long description. I add a short and explicit edit note to both, in the short description at the end, in the long description at the very beginning. As an example:

"EDIT: This object was reported missing in autumn 2017. I have not yet found out what happened to it."

 

The problem (in my opinion) is, that without a uniform appearance, some users might see waymarks and don't recognize at first sight, whether the waymark can still be found or not. Sometimes I use the Waymarking Mobile Website on my cell phone to see, which waymarks are around my location and the first list just shows part of the title, if the title is too long (most of the time I use the portrait display to see more waymarks at once). So, whatever word is used, IF the word is added at the END of the title (see example), one might only see it, when the landscape display is used. And I've also found some waymarks that only had the "Gone" word in the short description, that you don't see on the initial list. And even if the word is at the beginning you have to look closely to see if there is something to find or not. Example 1 (still there), example 2 (still there), example 3 (also still there), example 4 (not there).

 

It might be not a big problem today, but we have to consider that the number of gone waymarks will increase over the years.

[+fi67]

You are right. But your examples do not fail, because they are not uniform, they fail because they are not obvious.

I think, we can agree of some minimum requirements for these cases. My proposal is: Put these modifiers in front of the title and (this is important) make it typographically very distinct from the rest of the title. Just normal brackets or a dash are not good enough.

[+PISA-caching]

11 hours ago, fi67 said:

... some minimum requirements ...

 

Three simple word to say what I was trying to say with many more words. :-) I agree that it has to be at the beginning of the title. Maybe UPPERCASE letters (and regular letters for the rest of the title) would help and definitely some separaters like { } or [ ] or * *. Anything will do, as long as it is clear, that it doesn't belong to the rest of the title.

 

One idea I had about the "Removed" checkbox: Instead of creating an additional checkbox, can't we just archive those waymarks and implement an opportunity to include archived waymarks in the search. It's just an idea and maybe not a good one, because some technical problems that I don't see from the outside would make it more difficult than the checkbox solution.

Edited August 5, 2018 by PISA-caching

[+elyob]

It would be great to be able to search for archived waymarks.

[+T0SHEA]

[LEGACY]  --  [REMOVED]  --  {LEGACY}  --  {REMOVED}  --  [-LEGACY-]  --  {-REMOVED-}

Just testing - I prefer square brackets - they seem to me to be more easily distinguished from parentheses. I agree, on the front is the sanest place for them.

I like square bracket dash, even more noticeable.

Keith

[vulture1957]

I just went thru my waymarks and changed all the names for these to include [-Legacy-] as the first word in the ones that are missing/moved/gone.

 

Lee