To be fair, I think most of the people who are interested in some sort of opt-in wiki variant are significant, recent contributors. Anyway, mvs certainly is.
Mvs certainly is (mvs is a good example of someone who is a great contributer), but many others are not.
One advantage of going wiki though, if it happened, the first thing I would do is delete everything that ******** (insert your own appropriate word) sjarelkwint has submitted.
last week deleted some unnecessary route pages and incorporated the information on the main pages.
Bob, I don't know if that's a good idea (unless the route needs no description), but as long as all of the information is present on the front page I guess it is OK. To me, a route page should have all the information needed for a climb (regardless of difficulty). It should
be good enough that you can print it off just like a guidebook page, put it in your pocket and use as your primary
source of information.
Adding (good) route information should not be discouraged. Here are some examples of some high scoring pages (due to ignorant voters) in my local area which are lacking in good route info (but which have great potential-no offense is meant to the submitters of this pages-this is constructive critisism and meant for the voters too):http://www.summitpost.org/shingle-peak/248852
The only route information reads as follows:You can either park on your right or continue up a steep section to park at the trailhead. In winter you will have to park at the lower section. A well developed trail will take you to Turret Meadows and eventually Shingle Peak. Be sure to follow the foot trail and not the horse trail. Be advised Sweetwater Resort does a lot of pack trips, so the trail may split off randomly to hunting camps.
The information is inadequate. It needs a route page (or at least detailed information on the mountain page).
1. There is no distance, time needed, difficulty, etc.
2. The information is wrong. There is no trail to Shingle Peak. There is a trail to the base of Shingle Peak and it's a good scramble from there.
What good is the above page when the only route information (such as it is) is wrong?
Besides the cut and paste information at the bottom, the entire page consisted of the following words:Although not one of the ten highest peaks in the Flat Tops, Big Marvine Peak is assuredly one of the top ten most picturesque. The peak lies on the western edge of Colorado's second largest Wilderness Area--the Flat Tops Wilderness--at the head of East Marvine and Marvine Creek drainages. The peak rises beautifully from the Flat Top plateau providing outstanding views over Meeker, CO and points west as well as views of most of the major Flat Tops peaks to the east including Flat Top Mountain, Derby, Trappers Peak, and W Mountain.
Big Marvine Peak is primarily reached from the trailheads on the west side of the Flat Tops Wilderness outside Meeker, CO. The easiest way to get to this area is to travel to Meeker, CO and then just north of Meeker take CR8 east towards the signs pointing to Buford and Trappers Lake. Alternatively, one can reach this area by driving over Dunkley and Ripple Creek Passes from either the towns Yampa or Oak Creek. This route involves driving on graded dirt roads, with some washboard, but the views are ridiculous.
Once on County Road 8, numerous trailheads lead towards Big Marvine Peak. These trails include Big Fish Creek, East Marvine Creek, Marvine Creek and others.
That's it. The above was the entire mountain page
. Later (after I said something in a nice manner), a (very few) few details were added which (finally) mentioned length of route, etc. I voted 5/10 on the page, but my vote is worthless and not even counted because everyone else voted 10/10.
IMHO, route information is the most important part of any mountain/route page.
Personally, I try to add accurate information on a route, regardless of difficulty (although no one's pages are perfect and most probably have a mistake or two).
Maybe having editing rights to some pages could help other members fix pages such as the above, but it's going to create more problems than it solves.
Interesting. I've never had this problem and have not heard about it much from others, but last week Buz Groshong mentioned it.
When a post get's a certain length, it does this to me on other forums. It must have to do with internet setting themselves since it happens on one computer I use, but not the other. I could vbe wrong, but I think it has to do with the internet setting/program itself rather than SP.