This is concerned with the
Banikov page.
The problem is not that the writer originally wrote BS about the origin of the name of the peak (he normally does that, I'm used to it already – this will not do anybody much harm). He hasn't yet discovered (all the time being busy submitting an amazing lot of SP stuff which may soon make him look down on such slow contributors as e.g. Nanuls, not to mention myself – well, it is a bit annoying, but generally I don't mind. And surely I find it funny that he hasn't yet discovered what the distinct subsidiary peak in the primary page is called, but this just makes me smile. It is the "overview" that really gets on my nerves – my "album" gives an outline of what mine could be but I wrote it in a rush, had just one night for it (and it's actually about two peaks/pages).
Now compare the following.
Bob Sihler on
What is a complete page?:
There is route information telling about length, difficulty, and elevation gain. There should be details about exposure, rock quality, tricky or dangerous spots, etc. as appropriate. If the route information is not on the main page, it is on an attached route page.But the owner from July 2008 to mid-October 2010 (see
my comments on another page by the same guy) has this message - in the "overview": "The tourist route goes slightly below, where there is no exposure, but some fixed chains ensure the passage of the walker."
I wouldn't put it like this - please have a look at the introductory paragraph
hereAnd
this exchange between the till-mid-Oct owner and the current owner who – I guess – may not be aware of having become the owner at all (
the current owner has been practically off SP for the past 1.5 years) is the last straw – all this really does look much too funny now.
I believe the page(s) in question should be deleted. I bet if this sort of stuff were a mountain page for, say
Mount Washington, it would be gone within a few days after popping up. No doubt I do disagree with Visentin who thinks that "SP gets poorer each time a page is deleted, or a user deletes himself. That's the situation." (quote from
his post on the forum)