Well I just adopted a neglected page that had a fail score of 11.5 It had been around in that condition since 2005.

Bob suggested I nuke it and start over but I didn't want to detach all the photos. So now I have re-engineered and sent p.m.'s to those who voted 5 or less and asked them to revisit the page and reconsider. I don't even know why I bothered. But at least the page isn't an eyesore any longer.

johnm wrote:Well I just adopted a neglected page that had a fail score of 11.5 It had been around in that condition since 2005.

Bob suggested I nuke it and start over but I didn't want to detach all the photos. So now I have re-engineered and sent p.m.'s to those who voted 5 or less and asked them to revisit the page and reconsider. I don't even know why I bothered. But at least the page isn't an eyesore any longer.

I used Elf magic to erase the low votes from before you adopted the page.

Thanks for stepping up and putting in the effort.

If anyone else reworks a page and doesn't want to see the page saddled with the low score, I can erase the low votes.

Bob Sihler wrote:Please see Moni's reply. You're going to have to work this out with Fred and Moni; they are top contributors here and very knowledgeable, and I am in no position to make a call on this particular issue; I just don't know the terrain at all.

I respect what they wrote, I just mentionned that this topic is subject to a debate. Geographic definitions sometimes differ between countries and that's sometimes problematic when you start writting (however I agree you nay not have too often this problem in USA... ). In my opinion SP is meant to go beyond administrative borders and make people collaborate "openmindedly". Some pages are a very good example of that, some not (which you usually notice by the topographic names only in one language...)
I'm a bit sad when reading all these issues of page owners who do not want to improve page neither share them with others. I hope Piatra Craiuli and others will soon find a solution and I'm quite confident that thanks to your involvement it will.
As for Sächsische Schweiz, in no case I'm trying to get over someone else's work. I just don't like to see "orphane" peaks or interesting objects, so that's why I try to improve the taxonomy to make them more visible and attached to something.

Bob Sihler wrote:If anyone else reworks a page and doesn't want to see the page saddled with the low score, I can erase the low votes.

I'll remember that Well, I risk myself... you could do the same on Swinica and Rozsutec which I adopted and rewrote ?

Bob Sihler wrote:Kamil, Proterra, and Yatsek,

Let me know exactly who wants what. Better yet, how about I transfer all the pages to one of you and then you guys sort it out?

First, though, let me send an email to the page owner who has been active recently and see if he wants to improve his pages. I'll tell him that there are others willing to adopt and improve the pages. I believe it's only fair to notify an active member first and give him a choice.

Bob, that's a fair thing to do. If the page owner agrees I'll surely take Zamarla Turnia. Czerwone Wierchy - possibly, when I'm through with Zamarla, but let's ask around whether someone can do them better.

kamil wrote:Bob, that's a fair thing to do. If the page owner agrees I'll surely take Zamarla Turnia. Czerwone Wierchy - possibly, when I'm through with Zamarla, but let's ask around whether someone can do them better.

I was wondering if you might like to be so kind as to let Kamil have some fun/bring up to standard your ZT/CW page you hold so dear you haven't ever dared to have a look at for the past six years. Yep, that's a fair thing to do.

Jacek, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs could employ you as an official writer of diplomatic notes.

kamil wrote:Jacek, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs could employ you as an official writer of diplomatic notes.

I rather see Yatsek as a member of the jury of "Taniec z gwiazdami" or "Szansa na sukses", because he doen't always give 10's
(sorry, joke unserstandable only by people watching polish TV )

kamil wrote:

Bob Sihler wrote:Kamil, Proterra, and Yatsek,

Let me know exactly who wants what. Better yet, how about I transfer all the pages to one of you and then you guys sort it out?

First, though, let me send an email to the page owner who has been active recently and see if he wants to improve his pages. I'll tell him that there are others willing to adopt and improve the pages. I believe it's only fair to notify an active member first and give him a choice.

Bob, that's a fair thing to do. If the page owner agrees I'll surely take Zamarla Turnia. Czerwone Wierchy - possibly, when I'm through with Zamarla, but let's ask around whether someone can do them better.

Both are now yours. The owner has not been active in over a year, so I am not going to bother contacting him. Do with them as you will. You might just want to delete and resubmit the pages. But if you keep them and revise them, let me know when you finish so I can cancel the old low votes.

Alright, thanks!

Not that it would have too much weight now, but the very first vote on this page was cast much before the new team took it over and raised its quality, and that member (mcc) isn't active any more:

http://www.summitpost.org/object_discus ... by=&page=3

This page and its route page have been around since 2005 and the owner has never signed in to SP2.

Page score is 1.09%

http://www.summitpost.org/mountain/rock ... berge.html

Route page score is 6.01%

http://www.summitpost.org/route/165056/east-ridge.html

No other info posted by others, but there are some photos that would be orphaned.

A couple of active members have climbed it – perhaps one of them would want it…

Under construction since 2005 – score is 2.12%

http://www.summitpost.org/mountain/rock ... -peak.html


This one is a good page – looks like it was adopted by some good contributors and a couple of 0/10 votes make it look bad

http://www.summitpost.org/mountain/rock ... -peak.html

Fred Spicker wrote:This page and its route page have been around since 2005 and the owner has never signed in to SP2.

Page score is 1.09%

http://www.summitpost.org/mountain/rock ... berge.html

Route page score is 6.01%

http://www.summitpost.org/route/165056/east-ridge.html

No other info posted by others, but there are some photos that would be orphaned.

A couple of active members have climbed it – perhaps one of them would want it…

Under construction since 2005 – score is 2.12%

http://www.summitpost.org/mountain/rock ... -peak.html


This one is a good page – looks like it was adopted by some good contributors and a couple of 0/10 votes make it look bad

http://www.summitpost.org/mountain/rock ... -peak.html

First two are gone.

Third-- what a shame, as Absaroka peaks are so dear to my heart. But I have not climbed that one. Maybe someone will step up.

Fourth-- votes fixed.

This one is has always bugged me:

www.summitpost.org/area/range/297350/hi ... intas.html

In theory, it should have been a route page, but the owner does not seem to be coming back and it isn't great to begin with. I think one of the Uinta contributors ought to start over and make a bang up page for the trail.

Bob Sihler wrote:

johnm wrote:Well I just adopted a neglected page that had a fail score of 11.5 It had been around in that condition since 2005.

Bob suggested I nuke it and start over but I didn't want to detach all the photos. So now I have re-engineered and sent p.m.'s to those who voted 5 or less and asked them to revisit the page and reconsider. I don't even know why I bothered. But at least the page isn't an eyesore any longer.

I used Elf magic to erase the low votes from before you adopted the page.

Thanks for stepping up and putting in the effort.

If anyone else reworks a page and doesn't want to see the page saddled with the low score, I can erase the low votes.

I took over a batch of AZ/NM pages from a member who has left SP (with his permission). The two NM pages below (first two) were at the very bottom of the NM heap.

http://www.summitpost.org/mountain/rock ... -Peak.html

http://www.summitpost.org/mountain/rock ... tains.html

http://www.summitpost.org/mountain/rock ... ntain.html

http://www.summitpost.org/mountain/rock ... ntain.html

andreeacorodeanu wrote:

Bob Sihler wrote:

Bob Sihler wrote:

andreeacorodeanu wrote:http://www.summitpost.org/mountain/rock/151358/piatra-craiului.html

When pages aren't loading as slowly as they have been, I will take a look. Thanks.

Okay, I went in and changed it to an Area/Range page as some members had said should be done. I also took out the incorrect photo credits. And I deleted all other page histories so he can't restore the incorrect versions.

Now, are you saying information is copied from a book? How much? What parts?

Almost everything is from the book "Piatra Craiului by Emilian Cristea" just in romanian. Also the romanian site carpati.org copied from the same book but at least they mention this, check here: http://www.carpati.org/ghid_montan/munt ... rezentare/

Its is not a problem if you have sources books, of course is hard to do an area page of a mountain from your head if you are not a specialist. I used books also but I mention when I done this and also I wrote about from my experience too, cause you know sometimes things changed and the books are old .

Another thing is that he copied too many things that are too boring, too much writing about not interesting things and in my opinion and not just mine in the same time incomplete.

Before I approach this member, I need to be clear: is the copying word for word or almost so, or is it just obvious that the user relied heavily on the book and not his own knowledge?

I think you mean the first, but I want to be sure.