visentin wrote:Wikifying is a good idea but must be done with extreme care. The biggest danger is in my opinion... adverts appearing into SP pages.
TLP wrote:What good would having the owner approve changes when the owner hasn't been to the site since February? It's ridiculous one guy owns all the pages to Adirondack High Peaks, and all the pages are outdated and feature old photos. IT'S A DISGRACE. Let him keep the stupid power points, because that is all some people care about, but to not open up those pages to major changes is a discredit to the site. Furthermore it's even doubtful the owner made the summit of all those peaks. It's terrible. I see no reason whatsoever to contribute any new info with those pages being all locked up.
yatsek wrote:FlatheadNative wrote:As a frequent contributor who actually tried to keep pages updated I would support the vision casted by Bob Sihler.
As an infrequent contributor who actually tries to keep pages updated yatsek supports the vision cast by Bob Sihler, too.
Buz Groshong wrote:... I think some of these members are thinking about several different situations and several different mountain types.
Some pages are for mountains that are in the owner's "back yard," which allows the owner to easily keep tabs on it and keep it up to date - this sort of owner might vehemently object to allowing anyone else to edit their work.
Some pages are for the more exotic mountains, like those in South America, Nepal, etc. - the owner may not get there at all often so some means is needed to provide updating. Currently, we rely on posted comments to provide or perhaps initiate updating - allowing some form of editing would allow the changes to be in the words of someone who was actually there.
rgg wrote:...if things are going slow, I post and come back later to see if it's uploaded, but others seem to give up. Therefore, although I appreciate this discussion, Matt's limited time might be better spent on performance issues like these. And, if I could assign priorities, second on my list would be to improve the download speed. That way, more people will use the site and eventually may decide to contribute.
Fletch wrote:rut ro rorge - my comments may have been misconstrued a bit.
I am for partial wiki (in the spirit of Bob's ideas), but I am against full wiki. The owner of the page should be able to decide what is wiki and what is not, with the overview section and photos not having the ability to be wiki (stays the same).
As to the editing, yes, most pages dont need editing. My thought is that if YOU DONT SIGN INTO SP within 90 days, then the pages you own are up for grabs. This eliminates the Adriondacks issue. In my opinion, if you are a contributing member of SP and own and maintain pages, then YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO LOG IN EVERY 90 DAYS. If you cant do that, then someone needs to send SAR to your house.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests