Compromise on incomplete pages?

by **mrchad9** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 3:15 pm

Go for it Bob. Thanks for taking this on. It is about time someone started to do something so that better pages are submitted, rather than the site only focusing on quantity. Looking for unanimous consensus would be a way to accomplish nothing- criteria should be if the new process generally better than the old one or not. Not does every single person agree. And your ideas fit this (and it seems everyone here who submits pages even agrees with this). Don't worry about feedback from those without pages.

I wouldn't even wait 2 days though- but up to you. Hell, 'What's New' sometimes has only two days of materials (such as on days when one member puts up a half dozen or more very simple pages).

As far as if it results in one location getting two pages- I think that is a good thing. Likely one page will be reasonably better than the other, and the poorer one can be deleted.

by **Proterra** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 3:40 pm

Bob Sihler wrote:
Lolli wrote:There has gone plenty of work into this page for instance, which isn't done yet.

It's subjective, of course, but I see that as more of a work in progress than an incomplete page even if it is, strictly speaking, incomplete. Personally, I think they should remove the Under Construction picture and let the page stand as it is while they work on it. But I have to point out that since the last work on it was done almost three years ago, there's reason to doubt much more will be done.

Last work on that one was done by me when I completed the Netherlands section. I only have first hand experience in NL, Scotland and a bit of DE, so I didn't touch the other sections that much. I could of course take the UC tag away, and finish the sections in the countries where I have no first-hand experience with generic info, but I prefer not to put anything on SP where I don't have first hand experience myself.

by **Dave K** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 3:45 pm

My $.02: I wouldn't bother sending an PM to someone who has posted a page with the mountain name and little more. I just nuke those and move on. If they are truly serious about creating a page they can start over easily enough.

by **SoCalHiker** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 4:07 pm

Dave K wrote:My $.02: I wouldn't bother sending an PM to someone who has posted a page with the mountain name and little more. I just nuke those and move on. If they are truly serious about creating a page they can start over easily enough.

Generally speaking, if someone deleted my started page, it would be the last time I logged into SP.

by **Dave K** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 4:17 pm

I'm not saying nuke it after 10 minutes. But after a day or two there is nothing, then zap.

If someone gets that worked up about deleting a blank page...oh well.

by **Alpinist** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 4:29 pm

Question: If Bob converts an empty page to a Custom Object, then the owner improves it 2 weeks later and converts it back to a mountain/route page, will it then appear in the What's New section?

by **yatsek** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 4:36 pm

Alpinist wrote:If the page is converted to a custom object, no one will find it if they search for it under the category of mountain or route page. That may lead to someone else submitting a duplicate mountain/route page.

I guess that's the point, isn’t it? If the page's (still) not good enough, why bother others with it?
If another SP'er is quicker than you are and creates a decent page before you do - it's theirs that should stay, and yours should be gone.

by **Bob Sihler** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 7:54 pm

Alpinist wrote:Question: If Bob converts an empty page to a Custom Object, then the owner improves it 2 weeks later and converts it back to a mountain/route page, will it then appear in the What's New section?

No, it won't. But that's why the person can resubmit the finished page, which is easy to do; it's how I do all of my pages now.

by **Lolli** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 7:56 pm

Bob Sihler wrote:
Lolli wrote:There has gone plenty of work into this page for instance, which isn't done yet.

It's subjective, of course, but I see that as more of a work in progress than an incomplete page even if it is, strictly speaking, incomplete. Personally, I think they should remove the Under Construction picture and let the page stand as it is while they work on it. But I have to point out that since the last work on it was done almost three years ago, there's reason to doubt much more will be done.

I think the other two, who were enthusiastic in the start, forgot all about it. I have been eyeing the page, wondering if it isn't best to ask to ask some other people who also know the places to help out instead. I gave away all those pages, I believe Proterra is the owner, so he has to ask somebody. There's plenty of members who knows both Wales and England.

by **Proterra** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 8:04 pm

Lolli wrote:
Bob Sihler wrote:
Lolli wrote:There has gone plenty of work into this page for instance, which isn't done yet.

It's subjective, of course, but I see that as more of a work in progress than an incomplete page even if it is, strictly speaking, incomplete. Personally, I think they should remove the Under Construction picture and let the page stand as it is while they work on it. But I have to point out that since the last work on it was done almost three years ago, there's reason to doubt much more will be done.

I think the other two, who were enthusiastic in the start, forgot all about it. I have been eyeing the page, wondering if it isn't best to ask to ask some other people who also know the places to help out instead. I gave away all those pages, I believe Proterra is the owner, so he has to ask somebody. There's plenty of members who knows both Wales and England.

I'll jump on it, sooner or later. Gotta go home and walk puppy soon. Still at work...

by **Husker** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 11:15 pm

Bob Sihler wrote:
Alpinist wrote:I think your suggestion is a good compromise Bob. However, consider the following potential road bumps.

-What is the criteria for converting a page to a custom object? It sounds very subjective, which could be messy. Though I guess the same is true for deleting a page.

- If the page is converted to a custom object, no one will find it if they search for it under the category of mountain or route page. That may lead to someone else submitting a duplicate mountain/route page. What will you do then, assuming you even remember that there is a custom object for essentially the same purpose?

Good questions, and no perfect answers.

1. The main focus of the custom object idea would be the new pages. Incomplete pages hogging up space and knocking others' completed work off the What's New page is a sore spot for many people. Many people routinely check the new pages just to see what fellow members are up to, and they get very frustrated seeing incomplete pages there. With older pages, I'm inclined to delete incomplete ones and let mediocre ones stand.

2. It's true about the mountain/route search, but it would still come up under a search of all objects. Plus, do we want a searcher finding an incomplete page? That person might not come back to SP. And if someone else submits a complete page in the meantime, I'd say that's the chance you take when you don't submit finished work.

So I think I'll give this a try and see how it works.

I'll wait two full calendar days-- if you submit September 13, nothing happens until September 16. Then it becomes a custom object with a message like this sent to the owner:

Thank you for showing your willingness to share your knowledge with the SP community by submitting this page. Because this page was posted three days ago and still is not complete, it has been changed to a custom object so that you can continue working on it but it will not appear along with the completed new pages of its type. When you are finished with the page, please change it back to the desired page type or resubmit it as an entirely new page. Changing it back before that will result in the page's being deleted. If you need any help with this process, I or another staff member will be happy to do so.

This is a great idea! When I was creating pages (with your help I might add) I was wishing there was holding pattern or limbo area it could go into, like a draft site, as I knew it wasn't ready and didn't want some dingusling to come along and vote on it yet.

by **Lolli** » Mon Sep 13, 2010 11:51 pm

You'd have eternal time before the vote.

by **MoapaPk** » Tue Sep 14, 2010 12:16 am

truchas wrote:I think it would be a good idea to ban anyone that has left the site in the past in a hissy fit from creating or owning pages.

I don't follow the reasoning there (other than poking people with a sharp stick), but you can always protest a vote.

by **Husker** » Tue Sep 14, 2010 1:01 am

Sorry Truchas, I can't support this idea. I feel that anyone that is cunning enough to mooch off other people to come to the USA on the cheap and avoid hotel prices should be able to have their own page.

by **MoapaPk** » Tue Sep 14, 2010 1:32 am

truchas wrote:
MoapaPk wrote:
truchas wrote:I think it would be a good idea to ban anyone that has left the site in the past in a hissy fit from creating or owning pages.

I don't follow the reasoning there (other than poking people with a sharp stick), but you can always protest a vote.

Why should someone who has a history of abandoning SP have a page that someone else could have that won't leave in a hissy fit?

I can think of a better question: should a person's pages automatically disappear when that person leaves?

Alas, the way SP recognizes contributions, the pages are the intellectual "property" of the creators. There is nothing in the guidelines to give criteria for "denying" people a right to start pages, based on past behavior.

If it were not for the forums -- which are supposed to be a minor part of SP-- we would probably have little to judge "bad behavior" other than outright plagiarism or incorrect information. And the forums are unrepresentative; many people who are very active in the forums make few formal contributions (though they may give very good beta or equipment info).

I would argue that if a person decides to leave, there should be a "cooling off" period where his/her mountain, route or range pages must be offered up for adoption. That condition would have to be explicitly stated in the agreements for joining SP.

Compromise on incomplete pages?

Who is online