"Signs of the Past" is in peer review

[+FamilieFrohne]

Unnoticed probably by the most visitors of this forum a new category proposal for "Signs of the Past" is in peer review now.

 

So cast your votes ...

 

Edit: Before you ask: It is not my category and I'm not involved.

Edited February 5 by FamilieFrohne

[+Bear and Ragged]

Thanks for the 'heads up' sounds an interesting category, but needs some work!

[+Ariberna]

I thought the same.

Some information before would be better.

[+SpeedCore]

I'm sorry that I didn't start a thread in the forum before submitting the category for peer review - I've been a geocacher for a long time (since 2006), but I've only recently become more intensively involved in Waymarking. I wasn't aware that it's customary to first ask for opinions and suggestions for improvement in the forum and I didn't find any hints or instructions about the correct way to submit a category. This was my first attempt and I apologize if I didn't follow the usual procedure.

 

I understand that my description was too vague, that more restrictions are needed for creating new waymarks in this category and differentiation from other categories. I will revise the description and then resubmit it for peer review.

 

I hope for your lenience and look forward to constructive suggestions for improvement.

[+Max and 99]

9 minutes ago, SpeedCore said:

I'm sorry that I didn't start a thread in the forum before submitting the category for peer review

It's tricky to find!

I'll show you where.

____

___

 

[+ScroogieII]

7 hours ago, SpeedCore said:

I'm sorry that I didn't start a thread in the forum before submitting the category for peer review - I've been a geocacher for a long time (since 2006), but I've only recently become more intensively involved in Waymarking. I wasn't aware that it's customary to first ask for opinions and suggestions for improvement in the forum and I didn't find any hints or instructions about the correct way to submit a category. This was my first attempt and I apologize if I didn't follow the usual procedure.

 

I understand that my description was too vague, that more restrictions are needed for creating new waymarks in this category and differentiation from other categories. I will revise the description and then resubmit it for peer review.

 

I hope for your lenience and look forward to constructive suggestions for improvement.

 

No problem, Speedy,

Yours was a mistake made by many in the past, and hopefully will be made by many in the future (that is assuming that Waymarking shall continue into the future and will continue to attract aficionados such as yourself).

 

The most instructive advice I can offer at this time is to look at, and learn from, the construction of other Waymarks' home pages, as well as those of other successful  Waymark proposals, such as the other one in peer review at present, I.E. Bat Boxes.

 

Then, ALWAYS first present your proposals to the community via the forums, even before you've put pen to paper in outlining a proposal, thereby achieving a consensus. Use up your ink here first, THEN, and only then, should you happen to achieve somewhat of a consensus here which you find acceptable, one way or the other, might you decide whether to either drop it or continue on your quest to becoming the proud owner of a Waymarking Category. Should a favourable consensus be achieved, you must continue to present additions or amendments here (those usually, but by no means always, resulting from input from the community) until you, and the community, are in agreement that it has become worthy of presentation at Peer Review.

 

Should the opposite occur, that still doesn't mean that your idea has become dead-in-the water, possibly only that it needs further thought, still further fleshing out, or attack from a different paradigm.

The Scrooge

 

Question, Read and Learn. Nothing of value comes without effort.

The Scrooge

Edited February 10 by ScroogieII

[+Bear and Ragged]

Reading here on the forums- and from emails between category officers- think about the requirements for the Waymark.

Description and photographs.

A GOOD Waymark should not be achievable with a drive-by.

Good quality photos showing different aspects of the 'thing' being Waymarked, and multiple sentences about the Waymark should all be required.

 

Yours sounds a good one, a few tweaks should help it through next time.

[+PISA-caching]

On 2/9/2024 at 9:12 PM, SpeedCore said:

I hope for your lenience and look forward to constructive suggestions for improvement.

 

You can have both from me (and very likely the majority of the waymarkers).

 

One of the reasons why the forums are a good idea is, because waymarkers from around the world have a lot of expertise about local conditions. What is prevelant in which country? Are there special laws that might cause a problem? Etc.

 

Once you have revised the description, let us know in the forums and we will give feedback for the perfection of it.

 

Andreas (Vienna, Austria)