New Feature: Improve This Page
|
Mountain Project has long suffered from a serious problem:
A new feature called Improve This Page is now available for all Areas and Routes. Heres how it works:
This feature is intended to help add and correct factual information. It is not the place for controversial opinions or ethical debates. The original submitter retains full editing control of the area/route - this feature does not allow random MP users to rewrite text! This feature may change often as we see how it goes, and suggestions are welcome as usual! [Update 5/29/14: Feature is released for all Routes and Areas] |
|
YES!!! Awesome. I've been waiting on this for a long while now. Thanks! |
|
Great idea! This is definitely a much needed feature for some submissions. As a suggestion for another area that could really use some help, the MP page for the Cascade Crag also in Boulder Canyon is certainly confusing and lacking in it's current state. |
|
This feature is now available for all Routes and Areas. The original post has been updated with the latest details. |
|
Cool |
|
First, thanks for all the work you're doing in continuing to add new features to MountainProject. |
|
Martin le Roux wrote:it would be easier if I could have direct access to a copy of the page and make the edits myself. The revised page would still need to be handed off to a local admin for review and maybe some further edits before it's released, but at least there wouldn't be any ambiguity about the changes I'm proposing. Could something like this be implemented?Thanks for using the new system Martin! We definitely expect to improve it as we gain experience with it. In this case, I'm wondering if you can copy the entire existing block of code you want to edit, put it in the form, and then edit it there, exactly as you want it. Then the admin can just copy/paste. Would that work? Also, feel free to respond to the admin that makes the change. I've found them to be nice, helpful people. :) |
|
|
|
Nick Wilder wrote:I'm wondering if you can copy the entire existing block of code you want to edit, put it in the form, and then edit it there, exactly as you want it. Then the admin can just copy/paste. Would that work?Thanks. Actually that's what I tried the first time, but even so there was a misunderstanding and it took another go-around to get things straightened out. I was just wondering if there was a way to minimize the potential for this kind of mix-up. |
|
|
|
Doh... why there it is! Thanks Nick. |
|
Hi! |
|
Rajko Radovanovic wrote:Hi! Is there any way to actually just assume editorship of an area? There is an area for a beautiful gorge near Beijing, but it was worked on in 2008 and really, really, has a lot that could be updated. This area has over 11 decent individual crags and has really been developing and is a great opportunity for anyone visiting Beijing to go climb, but on the MP page there are only 6 crags and at least three or four of them are lacking almost any substantial information, while the main page has little and outdated info posted in 2008. It is really to the point that it would be very troublesome to go through a middle-man to try and update or re-do the whole thing... The original submitter, I believe, hasn't lived in Beijing since 2008-ish anyways, so it just doesn't make sense for every new change to this area to need to go through them. Anyhow, I understand everything is a work in progress and greatly value the work you guys put in! MP is awesome! Best, RajkoThe only way to edit an entire area is to become an Admin for it. Rajko, you're a bit new to MP to become an Admin already (6 weeks), so please use the Improve Page feature a bit, and try adding new areas and routes yourself. After you contribute some areas and routes, and if you want to become an Admin, let me know and we'll take a look. Thanks for the feedback! |
|
Rajko Radovanovic wrote:Hi! Is there any way to actually just assume editorship of an area? There is an area for a beautiful gorge near Beijing, but it was worked on in 2008 and really, really, has a lot that could be updated. This area has over 11 decent individual crags and has really been developing and is a great opportunity for anyone visiting Beijing to go climb, but on the MP page there are only 6 crags and at least three or four of them are lacking almost any substantial information, while the main page has little and outdated info posted in 2008. It is really to the point that it would be very troublesome to go through a middle-man to try and update or re-do the whole thing... The original submitter, I believe, hasn't lived in Beijing since 2008-ish anyways, so it just doesn't make sense for every new change to this area to need to go through them. Anyhow, I understand everything is a work in progress and greatly value the work you guys put in! MP is awesome! Best, RajkoI'll second this suggestion for certain cases. It can work. And adding this relatively new step adds a layer of overhead that the inactive originator did not have anyway - and so the new step increases the likelihood that pages just won't be updated with the latest / best information. This in turn can result in epics or worse. I'm aware of an area which originally had a single rap descent from a large summit. Someone else put in a new rap descent which started very close to the first one but went off in a different direction. The second way had different rope-length needs compared to the original. But the new rap descent was the first one that climbers came across and many would assume the rope-length needs of the other rap descent. This resulted in at least two epics, a stuck rope that had to be cut, and one subsequent rap on a tag line because the rope was cut. And then the current non-responsive holder of the page was replaced with someone motivated to get it right. And the page was revised with accurate information about the rap descents, receiving an appreciative comment by a local. That same area eventually had a bolted belay anchor at the top of a new climb in the area. This had the potential for creating even further confusion except that the new page "holder" kept on top of the developments. And so, there is value in having someone active on MP.com and with a vested interest in an area (e.g., someone local) keeping on top of the page's content without anymore overhead than if they had originated the page in the first place. I would suggest completely reassigning the route or page in the case that the original author is not updating the page, especially when the original author has put very little into the current page's content. |
|
Bill Lawry wrote:I would suggest completely reassigning the route or page in the case that the original author is not updating the page, especially when the original author has put very little into the current page's content.We are toying with the idea of Area / Route adoption, but it won't happen for a while. In the mean time, the "Improve This Page" system handles your worries: if the original submitter is no longer active on MP, or chooses not to take action on a suggestion, the regional admins are asked to handle it. If they don't get to it within a certain time limit, I handle it myself. |
|
Adoption! Good word choice . |
|
Great improvement! |
|
rogerk wrote:Question: What if a large area has a bunch of problems/climbs that really need to be divided into sub-areas/boulders for the sake of navigation? The current feature seems to only be geared to making changes directly to a page, while there is definitely a need for some areas to be organized by sub-areas.This type of reorganization is quite tricky (you have to make a temporary area, move routes there, then make your new areas and move routes again to the right place, then delete the temp area). Better left for an Admin... which you can reach with the "Improve This Page" feature. |