|Posted by urbexchick07|
I totally get the whole changing locations without good reasoning. BUT - is it frowned upon to add hazards, security measures, required equipment that were not on there before? Is it frowned upon to add your own photo album also?
I never said adding your own photos to a location was frowned upon, in fact its encouraged.
What Im hoping to prevent is members just going in and making corrections that are sometimes, incorrect. Like changing a locations status without verifying it etc.
example: new member looks at inaccurate DB location on Google map, sees no building there and concludes the location must have been demolished!
My advice is don't change stuff without knowing for sure just for the sake of changing stuff.
Did you actually go there and determine there was some additional required equipment needed? or did you just look at some DB entry in another state and decide it would look cool to "require" rappelling gear?
I guess the weakest locations in our DB right now havent any description at all, not even a basic history and a bunch of non descript photos of the inside of some room in a giant factory or hospital. I guess if that's best you can do Ok.
The big frowner is adding a location to the DB that already exist in the DB maybe under another name. Check the DB before adding a location sometimes a location entry might already be listed in the DB under a generic term like "The Tire Plant" http://www.uer.ca/...ow.asp?locid=23755
Instead of the previous 2 or 3 former company names like Continental Tire or General Tire.