Improve System Of Baseline Page Scores For Areas, Mountains, Rocks, Route Pages
Each of these types of pages have default categories/sections during the creation process, such as OVERVIEW, GETTING THERE, CAMPING, RED TAPE, etc. Perhaps a better page score should be given as a baseline starting score for those pages utilizing those each of those categories. Adding images to the page can help that baseline score, too, although number of images or quality of images should not. Then the page votes from that point will help give further distinction to the page.
In example, a Mountain page is created which has an overview but nothing else. It starts with a baseline page score that is fairly low, such as 50%.
In contrast, a Mountain page is created which has Overview, Getting There, Camping, and Red Tape sections, and perhaps five photos. It starts with a baseline page score that is much higher, such as 75%.
This system would also reward those who fill out the major categories/sections. As such, this system would encourage people to provide more information rather than less information, when creating an Area, Mountain, Rock, or Route page. And in the situations where a page creator puts something nonsensical or useless (such as only "blah blah blah") in a section just to get a higher page score, the votes by other SP members will help lower that page score accordingly.
To Josh: Perhaps "none known" is better than "none" (by itself).
To Visentin: Your first statement is certainly true for me, as I first and foremost try to create pages which can be useful resources for future viewers, and I plan to continue to post contributions as such. But I know that is not the case for some SP members (probably more than you realize); some definitely care about page votes because (if nothing else) of the virtual perception of seeing a page with higher vs. lower score/percentage. In example, if a person creates a great page contribution which gets a low score due to few votes, that person might be discouraged from making future contributions (or as much effort into them). There should be more of a balance between content-driven and vote-driven pages.
Should a great page with few views (and, as a result, few page votes) be punished despite being a fairly complete page? I don't think so.
Should a so-so page with many views (and, as a result, many page votes) be rewarded despite being an incomplete page for users? I don't think so.
My idea is to try to even the playing field a little bit. That's all. That would also make SP better in the long run, too, in my opinion. You don't have to agree, and that is OK. It is purely a personal observation and opinion; one which several SP users and I have discussed on more than one occasion.
To be honest I don't know if it is so much necessary. Very few people actually care about pages votes when they submit a mountain. They do it because they love the place and are interested in introducing it to others. Correction and additions are for what you describe.
One variant of what you propose is that a mountain that is not complete is not eligible for the front page.
Josh Lewis commented
If there is no red tape, say "none". This will make it so that folks will not have to go looking around if they think red tape might exist if it doesn't actually.
It would not affect any page votes previously given by SP members. In other words, a "10/10" vote would still be just that. It would only affect the baseline starting vote (%) of the page. Similar to what happened with SPv3, but with actual easy-to-understand across-the-board parameters.
Using similar examples to those I provided earlier:
A Mountain page already exists which has only an Overview. Previously, the "7/10" votes made the page have a 71% score (this is just a guess). However, under the new design, the previous "7/10" votes still exist but the lack of additional sections pushes down the page score to something like 55%. Mathematically: 50% Baseline Page Score + Additional Page Votes (generally 7/10... above average but not fantastic)
In contrast, a Mountain page already exists which has Overview, Getting There, and Camping sections. Previously, the page had several "10/10" votes which made the page have a 85% score. Under the new design of SPv3, overall page scores are lower (which I believe we all realize by now). However, the new design of what I am proposing would have this existing page with something like 84%. Mathematically: 75% Baseline Page Score + Additional Page Votes (generally 10/10)
We could keep it to certain categories or sections, such as OVERVIEW and GETTING THERE. Or we could give a good baseline score to a page that fulfills at least a certain number of suggested sections, whether that be 2, 3, 4, etc.
I am not saying there would not be any kinks in the design. This is just to get the discussion moving along in a open environment. I am open to suggestions or improvements to the current system.
This website should be content-driven, rather than point-driven. By providing a baseline for pages that fulfill certain parameters, then the page creator does not have to worry as much about getting a massive amount of votes to show the page as being a decent page. I believe that will also help pinpoint pages that need a lot more work and/or adoption... for both page creators and general users.
What about pages already voted ?
And what about mountains where for example red tape is odd ?
The intention is good, but I'm not sure about how you want to combine the current vote system with the amount of pre-defined chapters you are describing. You need to describe very precisely how you want to do that from the maths point of view...