Has anyone had place entries that focused on a more specific detail or history of a place and then had it edited into a more general one?
I’ve only had one case but I have noticed other entries that I think could be examples of this. For me, it was the Fábrica La Aurora entry, which I wrote focusing specifically on the industrial heritage of the mall:
This was a conscious decision since looking at San Miguel de Allende on Tripadvisor, Fábrica La Aurora is in the top 3 “things to do”, with the second-most votes. Making my entry about the industrial machinery and installations, the intention was to make it more Obscura-y, although the editing team then focused it on the mall as a whole (in the title).
I can’t be sure but I suspect that the following entries were written similarly, to then be edited into more general places (at least in their place names/titles). The CN Tower one would seem to have been intended to showcase its metal staircase only (although to be fair, without a picture of the actual staircase to go with it), Mount Eden is almost all about the observation platform and the elephant that helped build it. Sydney Botanical Garden’s text is on the flying foxes, and the Machu Picchu one I think might have been focused on the stonework at some point (this can even be seen in the url for the page).
I have a feeling that this is what leads to a much higher “been here” than “want to go” ratio for many of the places in the link below (ordered by highest number of “been here”):
EDIT: I suspect this one was originally highlighting only the petroglyphs at the site: