Difference between revisions of "Talk:Reverse regional achievement"

Revision as of 21:40, 7 September 2022

Good one. -Robyn 04:12, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Would these visits all have to be in this grat? OR would others in the same region count? -- UnwiseOwl 04:17, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

I think they all have to be in the same grat. So you need to wait for the right coords. --joannac 04:20, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Dang, that would rule out my entire state. Stupid sensible borders. Looks like I'm coming to visit you in the ACT to get this one, Joannac, get the red cordial ready-- UnwiseOwl 04:30, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't suppose a centicule counts as a "region"? Sure, they're completely imaginary (but then again, so are legal borders?)--PacoBell 20:03, 10 February 2012 (EST)

I'd say, they don't. Regions here are political/administrational regions, which exist without the geohasher defining them. If you really successfully hashed in every centicule of a graticule, that might be impressing enough to be an achievement of its own anyway ;) --Ekorren 03:12, 11 February 2012 (EST)

I think I have already done it, or close to it. [1] But, I would say no too. --NWoodruff 07:55, 11 February 2012 (EST)

Honorable mention proposal

Yesterday on the Discord channel, Kripakko introduced a useful tool to identify which regions of a given administrative level are part of a given graticule. Leidenfrost then noticed that the current top two of the reverse regional geohash achievement are not complete yet.

NWoodruff has reached geohashes in 21 out of 23 counties in Atlanta, Georgia, missing Newton County (0.23% of the graticule) and Upson County (0.0014%) so far. The other case is Pedalpusher reaching coordinates in 7 out of 8 counties in Buffalo, New York, not reaching Potter County (0.0010%) so far.

Instead of removing the two from the page, I am proposing a section for honorable mentions for cases like Pedalpusher's where the regions that were not reached cover less than a certain threshhold, e.g. 0.1%. Full disclosure though: I am in a similar situation in Hannover, Germany, with Peine County covering 0.0036% of the graticule.

In NWoodruff's case, I'd say it should be an honorable mention too if Upson County was the only missing one. However, Newton County's area is not negligable, so I am proposing a third section for candidates, where anyone who is close to winning this achievement or getting an honorable mention may put their list.

Thoughts? --Fippe (talk) 16:55, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes to the honourable mentions (since very small regions may never come up within a reasonable time scale), no to candidates (that's what user page progress tracking is for). Although perhaps it could be done like the Globetrotters Geohash achievement, counting up or down to completion. Arlo (talk) 02:42, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

I am generally in favour of an Honourable Mention, however, implementation is a bit tricky. 0.1% amounts to approximately once every three years, and while a bit forgiving, I think the number is nicer, so let's work with that.

Implementation: Firstly, I believe it to be prudent to clarify that the combined area of the region(s) must not exceed 0.1%

Secondly, can I now claim tiny island regions that combined don't exceed 0.1% as an HM? I've reached everything (nothing) except those excerpts. This clearly is faulty. But it's also not fair to change it to 0.1% of the land-area, since the algorithm doesn't care about land-area. 42,15 comprises of three different regions: Isole Tremiti: 0.034%, Biševo: 0.0025%, and Termoli: 0.0012%; Biševo and Termoli make up nearly 10% of the combined area, still someone can claim all three as an HM visiting Isole Tremiti only, this seems silly. --Leidenfrost (talk) 02:45, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

I agree that the combined area should not exceed 0.1%.

Regarding the tiny island situations: The original achievement requires one to reach at least two regions, I think that should be kept for the HM. So in 42,15 one would have to visit Isole Tremini and one other region to get the HM. Or another example, in 54,14 one would have to visit Poland and Germany to get the HM, plus Denmark for the full achievement. --Fippe (talk) 21:40, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 :Implementation: Firstly, I believe it to be prudent to clarify that the '''combined''' area of the region(s) must not exceed 0.1%
 :Secondly, can I now claim tiny island regions that combined don't exceed 0.1% as an HM? I've reached everything (''nothing'') except those excerpts. This clearly is faulty. But it's also not fair to change it to 0.1% of the land-area, since the algorithm doesn't care about land-area. 42,15 comprises of three different regions: Isole Tremiti: 0.034%, Biševo: 0.0025%, and Termoli: 0.0012%; Biševo and Termoli make up nearly 10% of the combined area, still someone can claim all three as an HM visiting Isole Tremiti only, this seems silly. --[[User:Leidenfrost|Leidenfrost]] ([[User talk:Leidenfrost|talk]]) 02:45, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
+::I agree that the combined area should not exceed 0.1%.
+::Regarding the tiny island situations: The original achievement requires one to reach at least two regions, I think that should be kept for the HM. So in [[42,15]] one would have to visit Isole Tremini and one other region to get the HM. Or another example, in [[54,14]] one would have to visit Poland and Germany to get the HM, plus Denmark for the full achievement. --[[User:Fippe|Fippe]] ([[User talk:Fippe|talk]]) 21:40, 7 September 2022 (UTC)