Groundspeak Portal

HI Everyone!

My first category is in Peer Review right now (until May 16). I would appreciate your support in getting it successfully through this step!

 

Thanks!

Brenda (aka brendah)

brendah:

HI Everyone!

My first category is in Peer Review right now (until May 16). I would appreciate your support in getting it successfully through this step!

 

Thanks!

Brenda (aka brendah)

Sorry, but this would be redundant with the Signs of History category which is a catch-all category for any history signs that are not accepted in other categories.  There really isn't a need for a separate one just for Ontario.

A friendly word of advice - try running category ideas on the forum before submitting them to peer review.

Thanks for the input but my category " other monuments or plaques" does not just include subjects of history... there are many subjects... it could be an enviromental significant areas that has no reference to history.

It is also nice to have a category that is more specific to an area then just a catch-all that would cover any where in the world.

Thanks again,

brenda

 

brendah:

Thanks for the input but my category " other monuments or plaques" does not just include subjects of history... there are many subjects... it could be an enviromental significant areas that has no reference to history.

It is also nice to have a category that is more specific to an area then just a catch-all that would cover any where in the world.

Thanks again,

brenda

 

Is there really a need for one for a more specific area than worldwide.  The site does very well filtering by country and region.  Do we really want another complete set of categories for every state and province?

I understand the some people would like to limit the number of categories that are available but there are many that are more specific than mine that pertains to a large province... there are categories that are for just Springfield, Missouri (2 that I saw on a quick glance), there is one for historical markers for just the state of Alaska, I could list more.

I would like to mention again that this category that I developed is not just for historical markers so it does not appropriately fit the previously mentioned category for historical markers world-wide.

I do appreciate the comments though. It is good to ask the questions.

b

brendah:

I understand the some people would like to limit the number of categories that are available but there are many that are more specific than mine that pertains to a large province... there are categories that are for just Springfield, Missouri (2 that I saw on a quick glance), there is one for historical markers for just the state of Alaska, I could list more.

I would like to mention again that this category that I developed is not just for historical markers so it does not appropriately fit the previously mentioned category for historical markers world-wide.

I do appreciate the comments though. It is good to ask the questions.

b

Both the Springfield categories were declined as they should have been for being just for Springfield.  (the fact that they can be accessed is a bug) And they are not listed in the list of categories.   There is a category for every state's historical markers,  Alaska just happens to be the biggest state.  There is a category also for Ontario Provincial Plaques.... as there is for three other provinces.  (If you wanted to start a category for Quebec Provincial Plaques, there would be no resistance)  There is also a category for Ontario Heritage Properties which is fine... but do we really need another category for every state and every province just because some of the categories have decided to be restricted to a certain type of plaque.  To alleviate the need for this multitude of categories the Signs of History was created.

Thanks for the explanation but the "other monuments and plaques" category is not just for signs of history... as I have said before, and as the category explains, it can include education, significant natural areas, conservation, etc. The category itself is pretty broad. And the waymarks do not fit into the two other Ontario categories that you have mentioned (of which I am already an officer).

Thanks.

 

 

brendah:

Thanks for the explanation but the "other monuments and plaques" category is not just for signs of history... as I have said before, and as the category explains, it can include education, significant natural areas, conservation, etc. The category itself is pretty broad. And the waymarks do not fit into the two other Ontario categories that you have mentioned (of which I am already an officer).

Thanks.

Put it to peer review, as soon as you feel it's ready.

brendah:

Thanks for the input but my category " other monuments or plaques" does not just include subjects of history... there are many subjects... it could be an enviromental significant areas that has no reference to history.

It is also nice to have a category that is more specific to an area then just a catch-all that would cover any where in the world.

Thanks again,

brenda

 

My apologies for not reading the category closer in regards to thinking these would be covered under the signs of history category.  The category is no longer in peer review, so I cannot go back and reread it.

I'm torn on the geographic sizing issue.  Based on many other State/Provincial categories, restricting it to just Ontario makes sense, however, I think it would be a much better category if it was for all of Canada (or possibly the entire world, but that's a VERY ambitious undertaking).

One thing that it is difficult for people new to waymarking to understand is that just because there are already categories that are set up a particular way does not mean that is the best way to do things.  Often those of us who object to a category even though it is similar to existing categories, do so because we learned from the existing categories and do not want to repeat past problems.  Also please realize that because waymarking is a community of people, the community has changed over the years and what might have been acceptable 2 years ago when a comparable category was approved may not be acceptable to the community today.  We are not bound to precedents the same way a court of law is.

Some (Many?) people would love to roll all the state/province historical maker categories into one category.  Others would like to start categories for individual cities and universities.  This tension is what makes creating new categories that are restricted to particular geographic locations tricky.

Good luck!  If your category was declined, I hope you will not give up.  Most of us have had our first category rejected and have had to work through the process.  Please do not let any of the negative comments you may get discourage you.  Unfortunately some people forget the process is supposed to be for constructive criticism.

My category was denied in peer review. I understand it being denied due to it being to specific an area, not a problem.

But the other reason given most often was because they think it would fit into the Sign of History.... which, if they actually had read the description they would have seen it would not fit that category since it is for more than history. That is frustrating... but I will get over it. :)  It was a learning experience that is for sure!

brendah:

My category was denied in peer review. I understand it being denied due to it being to specific an area, not a problem.

But the other reason given most often was because they think it would fit into the Sign of History.... which, if they actually had read the description they would have seen it would not fit that category since it is for more than history. That is frustrating... but I will get over it. :)  It was a learning experience that is for sure!

Brenda,

The way you have it written up, it is way too broad a category. "Monuments" and "plaques"?? You might have had better luck with apples & oranges. I've been giving it some thought and think you might have better luck with one or the other.

The only problem with going with just signs though would be the "Signs of History" category would probably be best for most of what might be found in Ontario (those that don't already fit into the two other Ontario categories). Also, there's the possibility of being placed into other sign categories such as, Unintentionally Funny Signs, Unusual Signs, or even Your Name Here (I'm not about to list all the signs categories). Anyway, the chance of a third sign category just for Ontario is unlikely, I'm sorry to say.

Yes, there are a lot of sign categories, but at least there is only one per state (US). Maybe it would be easier to try just Ontario Monuments. I'm almost positive however, most could be cross-posted into categories like Occupational, Megalithic, World War II, or perhaps even Statues of Historic Figures (once again this list of potential cross-posting possibilities is rather lengthy). Not that cross-posting is frowned upon, it's not, in fact it is encouraged. Most would probably agree it's interesting to see how many different categories one thing or place can fit.

If you were to go with just the monument aspect I think you would avoid the problem with redundancy. Play up the rich history Ontario has to offer and you just might avoid complaints that it isn't "global enough". That precedent is dead & buried as far as I'm concerned. 

With around 900 categories for everyone to be running around and finding stuff for, the biggest hurdle these days is definitely the redundancy issue. Anyway, you'll figure it out, one way or another. Meanwhile get out there and find some new waymarks. The more you get under your belt, the more of a feel you'll get for it, and you just might find something else that will lead to the creation of a category that will thrill us all (we here at Farkle HQ have managed to pull a few out of thin air, one of which has managed to climb to the #8 spot in the largest categories).

Anyway, if you manage to create an Ontario based category, TF7 usually gets to Toronto about once a year (still have yet to meet Rick Mercer) and would be thrilled to get a waymark in it. That, and cover the Blue Quasar in cheese curds and brown gravy...

One of the other basic concepts for a category is that it should stand on its own, without reference to any other category or categories.

Actually, that is one of the weaknesses of the Signs of History category, which essentially says, "If a site can be placed in any other category, then it will not be accepted here."   There have been several others like this, lately, that were defined by an everything-else-but description.

I understand the urge.  I created one of these way back when, but at least tried to broaden it.  And, in some cases exclusion of sites covered by another category may be necessary.  Still, the concept of a self-justifying category is a good guiding principle.

One thing that can be problematic is the creation of new categories that may include something previously accepted in the catch-all category.  What happens then - add a new exclusion?

The fact that not ALL sites included in this new category would fit in an existing category does not mean that the redundancy test is satisfied, because the converse is true - that all of the waymarks in the existing category would fit into the new one.

Just how much overlap there should be among categories is up for discussion.  We all know and accept these overlapping categories, and may even enjoy that overlap.  So, when does it become redundant?  Another thing that is happening is pulling out a small subset of a larger existing category to form a smaller, more narrowly defined category.  I think that is redundancy and should be rejected - in most cases, at least.  I can think of a few cases where this might be justified.  Cemeteries comes to mind, but that's another saga.

So, keep the thinking cap on, and see if you can come up with a category with a clear, well-defined focus that will cover some of the sites you're interested in.

And, I think that we have to accept that there just won't be categories for everything.    I just had a waymark like that - too well known for one, and not well enough known for another, so it is in limbo between two worlds . . . . 

If it's any consolation to 'brendah' I would say that if my 2 exclusive Categories of Ontario Provincial and Hawaiian Historical Plaques were proposed in to-days atmosphere they would most likely not be accepted either.
-- On the other hand, I joined her Category as I saw lots of possibilities being my 'Ontario Officers' turned down the inclusion of a wider range of "Ontario Historical Markers" when I solicited their opinion. The Hawaiian Cat., which is also restricted to a particular historical plaque has also been challenged as being to restrictive and I know if we were to vote on another general 'Historical Category' it would probably also be rejected.

The one complaint I have is that a lot of  Categories are  strictly for our American Waymarkers (50  State+ Benchmarks, Jimmy Buffet,  Route 66, Seattle Art, various stores and food chains etc. etc.) although  we in the rest of the world are only represented marginally due to the abundance of duplicates and not global either,   that we have passed in the beginning but are now no longer acceptable.
( German-American Heritage Sites accepts only U.S. Waymarks but not Canadian Waymarks) [Not part of America?] So do we propose  separate Canadian/French/German/Italian/Polish/Ukrainian/ Cat?

What's wrong with having other Categories that are not "Global" but have a strong regional appeal?

Route 66 goes from St. Louis down through Missouri... San Bernardino

All kidding aside, that is a long ribbon and spanning a fair number of states. Don't forget Jake, we Canadians did get Tim Horton's added to the directory despite being very much only found here until recently. Canadian National Historic Sites was the very first Group managed category, and our American friends supported us then too.

As much as we may love Ontario, it simply isn't enough to allow there to be another plaque/marker category based solely on the premise of what is not accepted in the original Ontario plaques will be accepted there.

I will agree with you that if German-American does not accept Canadian entries, it is an error in judgment. Isn't the idea to show how the German culture has been introduced outside of Germany by those that immigrated? I seem to remember voting that way, because non-US was being left out.

Getting back on track, this has everything to do with the fact that the premise of the category was not inline with what most categories are created to provide. Would you support a category of "Not listed on the National Register of Historic Places"? Of course not.

BQ