RailPictures.Net Forums

RailPictures.Net Forums (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/index.php)
-   Railroad Photography Forum (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   Changing Photo Information? (http://www.railpictures.net/forums/showthread.php?t=17468)

RobJor 04-30-2015 06:08 PM

Changing Photo Information?
 
Ok, tell me if I am wrong but there seems to be someone(s), changing information and it is annoying. I don't think it is nitpicking to not like your posts changed on someones opinion.

Example 1:
http://www.railpictures.net/photo/529096

I listed this as Metra River Grove Station and it was changed to:
CP Elgin Subdivision. I am not sure if the timetable in effect is CP Elgin Subdivision but that is not a location and to the best I know Metra owns the line, not CP.

From RP Instructions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enter the rail location where this photo was taken above. Common examples include bridge, tunnel, interlocking, tower, and yard names, as well as geographic locations along a particular line, such as 'Horseshoe Curve' or 'Donner Pass.'
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Example 2:
http://www.railpictures.net/photo/522698

was Changed from Hammond-Whiting Amtrak Station to NS Chicago Line
And there are others. My view is whether I am right or wrong, I post information, then my name is on it and people can judge my mistake if there is one.

As a database person I don't think it is a good idea for anyone to be able to go changing info and I don't see how someone screening changes can judge correctness. I mean if you got something to post, do it, but leave mine alone??????????

Bob Jordan

KevinM 04-30-2015 07:06 PM

While I can't say that I've had anyone go changing information on my photos, I believe that the capability does exist for RP Members to make changes to the photos of others and that bothers me. To me, the information/captions on our photos is our responsibility. If someone believes it is incorrect, they can send us a PM and let us make the judgment as to whether or not a correction is warranted. If we choose not to correct it, or believe the PM to be in error, then that's it. The PM'er will just have to get over it.

Obviously, Admin should be able to make such changes. After all, it is their site and they are entitled to be able to control what is displayed.

Flowing 04-30-2015 08:10 PM

Bob, did you receive any notifications or e-mail about these changes? Or did you just happen to notice they had occurred after the fact? Since the member notifications began a few years ago, I've only ever gotten one about someone changing info on one of my photos (changing a subdivision to a specific control point - which was not necessarily wrong, just not how I like to enter my info, for standardization purposes).

This topic has been touched on before, but I really wish that other users' 'corrections' to my photos were run by me first before they were accepted. But like I said, it's been years since I got a notification about it. So it may not be happening to me at all.

RobJor 04-30-2015 08:54 PM

I get a notification the same as a "like". It seems to specific to certain areas around Chicago. It was just a few to start and I thought "what ever". I didn't want to bring it up because of unintended consequences. If I thought I was totally wrong then I would have no problem.

Bob

wds 04-30-2015 10:54 PM

Just change it back - that's what I've done a few times in the past when someone did it to me. And you're right, a subdivision is <b>not</b> a location. A subdivision can have a multitude of locations on it, and listing the location as such is many times too vague to be useful. On the other hand a junction with another subdivision would be acceptable. I used to think that people who listed subs as locations were just trying to disguise the actual location to keep it to themselves, but now I figure it's just because they are "language-challenged"! ;)

JimThias 05-01-2015 03:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinM (Post 184931)
If someone believes it is incorrect, they can send us a PM and let us make the judgment as to whether or not a correction is warranted. If we choose not to correct it, or believe the PM to be in error, then that's it. The PM'er will just have to get over it.

If only it were that easy. It's hard for butt hurt foamers to simply "get over it." :lol:

CSX1702 05-01-2015 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimThias (Post 184935)
It's hard for butt hurt foamers to simply "get over it." :lol:

"No! I told you, my picture's level and you're wrong. So suck on a K5LA!"





:twisted:

JimThias 05-02-2015 03:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSX1702 (Post 184936)
"No! I told you, my picture's level and you're wrong. So suck on a K5LA!"

I was a bit nicer when I appealed my last unlevel rejection. :)

CSX1702 05-02-2015 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimThias (Post 184940)
I was a bit nicer when I appealed my last unlevel rejection. :)

Whoever gave you that rejection must not have seen your name. That rejection box shouldn't even be available to your photos. Lol.

mersenne6 05-02-2015 01:44 PM

I too used to think along the lines of wds - listing subdivisions as a way to hide where the actual picture was taken. I've only had one instance of this kind of correction and rather than delete and rewrite I took advantage of the additional information and rewrote the caption to include it. It appears to me that you could do the same. Change the caption to highlight the location and add the subdivision information as an additional thought.

Craig Walker 05-03-2015 02:35 AM

Several years ago, someone had the location changed - incorrectly, buy about 30 miles! - on two of my photos. At that time, I didn't realize I could change it back, so I griped to the two Chris's and one of them changed it back.

I'll admit I have asked for incorrect models to be changed by the admins in the past (it is amazing how many cannot tell an SD40 from an SD40-2, for example, and some were even worse). So, maybe I'll take the advice given here and allow the submitter to change the model in the future.

JimThias 05-03-2015 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craig Walker (Post 184945)
(it is amazing how many cannot tell an SD40 from an SD40-2, for example, and some were even worse).

I can't. They all look the same to me. What is the difference?

CSX1702 05-04-2015 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimThias (Post 184947)
I can't. They all look the same to me. What is the difference?

-2's have an elongated riding platform on the rear.

Damn, I am a foamer. *facepalm*

JimThias 05-04-2015 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSX1702 (Post 184950)
-2's have an elongated riding platform on the rear.

Damn, I am a foamer. *facepalm*

Just on the rear? What about the ones with the long platform on the nose?

Freericks 05-04-2015 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimThias (Post 184947)
I can't. They all look the same to me. What is the difference?

Longer porch, front and back (they're built on a shared frame with the SD45-2), sight glass on the long hood, double set of places to cut out for marker lights on the end of the long hood, dampening bar on the truck.

Of course rebuilds have made much of this not matter that much anymore as Frankenstein versions of everything roll around out there, but those were the basic ID factors we all used in the late 1970s when all SD40s and SD40-2s were un-altered.

Here's a question I don't know the answer to, are there any non Dash 2 SD40s still running today, anywhere? (At least unrebuilt, un altered ones)?

jnohallman 05-04-2015 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freericks (Post 184952)
Here's a question I don't know the answer to, are there any non Dash 2 SD40s still running today, anywhere?

Nah!
[photoid=521212]
:lol:

Jon

Freericks 05-05-2015 03:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jnohallman (Post 184954)
Nah!
[photoid=521212]
:lol:

Jon

D'oh - my bad...

JimThias 05-06-2015 01:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freericks (Post 184952)
Longer porch, front and back (they're built on a shared frame with the SD45-2), sight glass on the long hood, double set of places to cut out for marker lights on the end of the long hood, dampening bar on the truck.

Of course rebuilds have made much of this not matter that much anymore as Frankenstein versions of everything roll around out there, but those were the basic ID factors we all used in the late 1970s when all SD40s and SD40-2s were un-altered.

And then there are the different SD40-2 units that have short noses and long noses. It's all so confusing to me.

Mgoldman 05-06-2015 03:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimThias (Post 184947)
I can't. They all look the same to me. What is the difference?

If it doesn't have a smoke stack on it, does it really even matter?

/Mitch

Freericks 05-06-2015 03:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimThias (Post 184959)
And then there are the different SD40-2 units that have short noses and long noses. It's all so confusing to me.

Snoots, yes...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/1416517...lpid=82&chn=ps

Mgoldman 05-06-2015 04:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craig Walker (Post 184945)
...it is amazing how many cannot tell an SD40 from an SD40-2, for example.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimThias (Post 184947)
I can't. They all look the same to me.

I did not know the difference, though I'm sure someone working for Athearn would!

Here's a fine example of both a Berkshire and a Berkshire-2:

[photoid=295834]

[photoid=296778]

/Mitch

jnohallman 05-06-2015 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mgoldman (Post 184964)
Here's a fine example of both a Berkshire and a Berkshire-2:

/Mitch

Shouldn't that be a Berkshire x2?

Jon

JimThias 05-08-2015 05:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mgoldman (Post 184964)
Here's a fine example of both a Berkshire and a Berkshire-2:

Definitely some good looking units.

Freericks 05-08-2015 05:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimThias (Post 184978)
Definitely some good looking units.

Please, please, please tell me you did that as a joke. Right?

To the young children, a steam locomotive is not a unit. A diesel is a unit and can work in tandem with other diesel units, the consist being a whole run from a single control stand.

A steam locomotive cannot be a unit.

CSX1702 05-08-2015 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freericks (Post 184979)
Please, please, please tell me you did that as a joke. Right?

To the young children, a steam locomotive is not a unit. A diesel is a unit and can work in tandem with other diesel units, the consist being a whole run from a single control stand.

A steam locomotive cannot be a unit.

You should be a screener with that kind of nitpicking.....Kidding. ;)

The ACE 3000 could've been called a steam unit had it been created.

http://locomotive.wikia.com/wiki/ACE...eam_Locomotive


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:37 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.