microcord
Maximum Pace
- Aug 28, 2012
- 1,650
- 1,193
Thank you for setting this up, and I thank the contributors for adding to it.
I'm grateful to @Half-Fast Mike for elaborating on the river routes and linking to an informative map for Tamagawa.
Um, well, I have to admit that I'm also slightly annoyed with HFM for thereby rendering (almost?) totally redundant a text version of the same which I'd been drafting in free moments over the last couple of days. Damn. Though he and I don't disagree by much, and his map is much easier to follow than my 20th-century-style series of names and links.
Wikipedia itself allows (and more often than not actually has) a talk/discussion page for each article. Once their "archives" are added, some of these have a lot more bulk than the articles themselves, and show more heat than light. However, the great majority of articles are about uncontroversial subjects, and their talk pages have constructive questions and comments, and are amicable and lead to improvements.
I wonder if it would be possible to add (or provide for) a talk page for each wiki page that's here. So to continue with the river routes example, I'd ask Mike (or anyone else) whether the green section along the right bank was advisable. (I've taken it several times, and each time didn't enjoy the experience -- following Half-Fast Ira, I instead take the side streets here.) Responses could be "no, you must have had unusually bad luck", or "if you can be bothered to make a new map that shows the slightly more complex route, then go ahead", or whatever.
If talk pages don't seem to be a good idea (and maybe they do invite talk for the sake of talk), or if they simply aren't possible, then could/should one start (constructive!) discussions in this area of the forum?
I'm grateful to @Half-Fast Mike for elaborating on the river routes and linking to an informative map for Tamagawa.
Um, well, I have to admit that I'm also slightly annoyed with HFM for thereby rendering (almost?) totally redundant a text version of the same which I'd been drafting in free moments over the last couple of days. Damn. Though he and I don't disagree by much, and his map is much easier to follow than my 20th-century-style series of names and links.
Wikipedia itself allows (and more often than not actually has) a talk/discussion page for each article. Once their "archives" are added, some of these have a lot more bulk than the articles themselves, and show more heat than light. However, the great majority of articles are about uncontroversial subjects, and their talk pages have constructive questions and comments, and are amicable and lead to improvements.
I wonder if it would be possible to add (or provide for) a talk page for each wiki page that's here. So to continue with the river routes example, I'd ask Mike (or anyone else) whether the green section along the right bank was advisable. (I've taken it several times, and each time didn't enjoy the experience -- following Half-Fast Ira, I instead take the side streets here.) Responses could be "no, you must have had unusually bad luck", or "if you can be bothered to make a new map that shows the slightly more complex route, then go ahead", or whatever.
If talk pages don't seem to be a good idea (and maybe they do invite talk for the sake of talk), or if they simply aren't possible, then could/should one start (constructive!) discussions in this area of the forum?