| Welcome to SP! - Sign-In | Register | ||
| | |
| MbPost.com -- It's SP for Mountain Biking! | ||
Alps - Western Part > Massif des Ecrins > Comments
|
| om | Double emploi ? Still Exists ? | |
Voted 10/10 | Une page du même style existe depuis 3 ans: high-dauphiné-groups Pourquoi ne pas la compléter ? This page has been created 3 years ago: high-dauphiné-groups Why not proceed to add something to the existing page ? | |
| Posted Sep 14, 2006 12:47 pm | ||
| Andino | :-o | |
Hasn't voted | ARGH... I looked around to make sure there was nothing on Les Ecrins before creating the page. I didn't think about looking for "Dauphiné" :o( And the summit pages you have created had no parent link, so I didn't look further for a general "area" page. We can cross links between the two pages, this way people will have everything they look for. Anyway your page on Haut-Dauphiné is packed with information, great job. Thanks for mentioning it to me. | |
| Posted Sep 14, 2006 3:11 pm | ||
| Mathias Zehring | double page | |
Voted 1/10 | this is a nice page but as you have recognized a duplicate to the existing page of Om. So I hope you two French can get along, delete this page and improve the other. Sharing Ownership is surely an option. Leaving two pages and just crossing links is no good option. | |
| Posted Sep 15, 2006 4:42 pm | ||
 | ||
| Andino | Re: double page | |
Hasn't voted | The two of us are fine with each other, no worries. As you probably read, I created the page not knowing than a similar one was existing. But when you look at them they have different approaches, so I guess they can both exist. They complete each other without competing with each other. OM is fine with it, and even told me he's happy about having someone else writing about French Alps. I spent half a day on the page, to make sure it is worth it, and I don't think it's worth 1/10 even though there is a page with similar content. People can get information from both pages and enjoy both of them I'm sure. When you travel, you can refer to two differ handbooks... why not having the same approach on SP in that matter. If I get feedback from many people saying it's useless, it would become obvious to delete it, but so far people seemed happy about it, as they gave 10/10. That said, do you think you may reconsider your vote ? | |
| Posted Sep 15, 2006 9:00 pm | ||
| ||
| Mathias Zehring | Re: double page | |
Voted 1/10 | No, more pages about the same will bring the SP structure to a mess. My vote is of course not because of the content of the page (that is fine) but because of the doubleness. I noticed that now you have your page as a "child" to Om's page. But that is not enough. What's the main content of your page? It's a list of recommendations. IMHO the following has to be done: - attaching all mountain pages only as a child to Om's page - changing your page to a list (like this one) and renaming is as "the best climbs of the Ecrins" or what you like" It's also Om's fault, because the mountain pages of the group haven't been attached to his page yet (I pointed this out to him already in May 2006). To the content: You should give at least the rating of the climbs you list. | |
| Posted Sep 17, 2006 7:22 am | ||
| Andino | Next version to come | |
Hasn't voted | Thanks for your comments. I will improve my page to give it a new shine (the link you've given me is indeed useful to reorganise the content of my page). I've put Om's moutain pages as "related" rather than "child", to separate them clearly. I will keep you posted on the next version ;o) | |
| Posted Sep 18, 2006 7:22 am | ||
|
