Wikivoyage:Travellers' pub

From Wikivoyage
(Redirected from Pub)
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to the Pub

The Travellers' Pub is the place to ask questions when you're confused, lost, afraid, tired, annoyed, thoughtful, or helpful. To start a new topic, click the "Add topic" tab, so that it gets added at the bottom of the page, and sign your post by appending four tildes (~~~~)

Before asking a question or making a comment:

  • If you have a question or suggestion about a particular article, use the article's talk page to keep the discussion associated with that article.
  • If you'd like to draw attention to a comment to get feedback from other Wikivoyagers, try Requests for comment
  • If you want to celebrate a significant contribution to Wikivoyage by yourself or others, hold a party at Celebrate a contribution.
  • Discuss issues related to more than one language version of Wikivoyage in the Wikivoyage Lounge on Meta.

Pull up a chair and join in the conversation!

Experienced users: Please sweep the pub

Keeping the pub clean is a group effort. If we have too many conversations on this page, it gets too noisy and hard to read. If you see an old conversation (i.e. a month dormant) that could be moved to a talk page, please do so, and add "{{swept}}" there, to note that it has been swept in from the pub. Try to place it on the discussion page roughly in chronological order.
  • A question regarding a destination article should be swept to the article discussion page.
  • A discussion regarding a policy or the subject of an expedition can be swept to the policy or expedition discussion page.
  • A simple question asked by a user can be swept to that user's talk page, but consider if the documentation needs a quick update to make it clearer for the next user with the same question.
  • A pointer to a discussion going on elsewhere, such as a notice of a star nomination or a request to comment on another talk page, can be removed when it is old. Any discussion that occurred in the pub can be swept to where the main discussion took place.
Any discussions that do not fall into any of these categories, and are not of any special importance for posterity, should be archived to Project:Travellers' pub/Archives and removed from here. If you are not sure where to put a discussion, let it be—better to spend your efforts on those that you do know where to place.
QA icon clr.svg

Main-subject travel topics should match our article section headings[edit]

We currently have a dichotomy in place in the naming of our main-subject travel topics.

On the one hand, we have:

On the other hand, we have:

This is inconsistent. The short, imperative format section headers were selected to make our guides distinctive in a crowded marketplace. There's no reason our travel topics can't match.

We've discussed this before; see Talk:Sleep#Move back?. Objections include search engine optimization (which should be obviated by the redirects) and the unintuitiveness of the titles (again, obviated by redirects, as well as by our established use of the short terms in our guides).

So my proposal is to make all of those main-subject articles' titles match our section headers (at least where possible; it may not be desirable to have a single Drink article, for instance).

-- Powers (talk) 14:41, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

I truly don't see the point. PrinceGloria (talk) 14:54, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Splitting Transportation (presumably, to Get in and Get around) makes little sense as many of the same modes of transport exist in both sections. Crawford (Texas)#By Bush plane is probably "Get in", but Nunavut#By plane might be needed both to get in and to get around between individual remote Arctic villages with no intercity road network. K7L (talk) 15:29, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
I agree that we should rename where possible. As to the transportation issue: All transport is getting around. The only time you ever "get in" to any destination covered here from a point we don't (and shouldn't) cover (as per our sex tourism policy ;-) ) is birth. Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:47, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Birth tourism, while controversial, is an entirely different issue from sex tourism. It basically involves visiting w:jus soli countries to give birth, allowing the baby to claim that country's citizenship. The "get in" section usually infers arriving from a point outside the scope of the current article, so the Toronto Transit Commission might be "get in" to get to Toronto/Etobicoke from some other district of the same city, but "get around" in an article about Ontario. K7L (talk) 17:48, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but it appears to me that you don't understand what I was trying to say. As this here wiki covers or intends to cover every destination on earth and even the moon and space, the only time you "get in" the area this wiki covers from a place this wiki doesn't cover (that being a woman's womb and vagina, unless artificial birth has been developed without my knowledge) is birth. Therefore all transportation on a global scale is getting around. Be that a transpacific flight or a one stop right on a local bus. And sorry for the bad joke ;-) Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:57, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
So we have Get in#By stork and Get in#By UFO? This might be a couple weeks too late for April 1? K7L (talk) 18:51, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
How about Get out#Of my dreams, Get in#to my car... Texugo (talk) 19:00, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
An article on Billy Ocean would violate our Wikivoyage:Bodies of water policy. K7L (talk) 19:30, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Seriously, though, Transportation is something we might want to leave as it is. "Move", maybe would be a good alternative? ;)
As for the others, I don't think it's a fantastic idea but as half of those travel topics already are named in the imperative form like the article headings I guess we rename the rest too for the sake of consistency. ϒpsilon (talk) 19:22, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
I did not notice originally that the first links are to top-level travel topics. I'd retract those changes or rename if they have been so all along - "Sleep" should be "Accommodation" etc. We don't name the guide to Paris the guide to the "City of Lights", as this is more "out of the box". The name of the guide must say what is in the box clearly, and be easily searchable. How we structure the articles and put headings on them is another thing, we do it in a playful way that makes the guide easy to digest. But for article names such "playfulness" does travellers no favours. PrinceGloria (talk) 19:27, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
I have no strong opinion about the names themselves, but I think naming the travel topics like the sections (Get in and around, See, Sleep, Buy etc.) would make keeping some consistency more automatic (as we know where to stick it).
Now the page names and headings, the breadcrumb tree, links to the pages etc. all use different names, at least in many cases. The travel topics are very hard to navigate because of this inconsistency – which also extends to the hierarchy itself and the substance of topic articles. I think both readers and editors would be able to navigate them much more easily if the hierarchy would match headings and possible subheadings of a long star article.
--LPfi (talk) 06:01, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Gloria, I don't understand why these headings are fine for section headings but not for article titles. Can you elaborate? Powers (talk) 15:27, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

I will try to rephrase what I said above - section headings are a great way to make our guides different, a bit playful and, most importantly, easy to digest. When you are already reading a guide about Paris, "get in", "get around", "sleep", "eat" etc. are quite unambigious ("Drink" is a bit ambigious, but that's not the point here). But when you are searching for information about transportation, accommodation etc. you are searching for just that. Our articles should unambigiously say what's inside, not via a series of redirects and an unnecessary explanation. I absolutely do not see any benefit in making the name of some (but not all - see "transportation") names same as headings, as not many people would even notice or understand when faced with it. This is only our internal view of Wikivoyage that makes it somehow logical to have it named the same way - for people coming from outside, "accommodation" is "accommodation", not "sleep" (and accommodation is about more than just sleeping). We should focus on great content, not constant discussing about formalities. It's fine as it is. PrinceGloria (talk) 16:28, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I still don't see the distinction. When you're reading a guide about Paris, "sleep" is unambiguous; I agree. But when you're on a travel guide web site, "Sleep" should be equally unambiguous, shouldn't it? It seems that the context of "travel guide" is sufficient in both cases.
My problem with "Accommodations" is the same as it would be within our articles: It's stuffy, boring, and undistinctive.
-- Powers (talk) 01:15, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
My problem with "Sleep" is that I expect it to contain information (only) about sleeping, such as tips for sleeping on an airplane or what type of bed to request in a Japanese hotel (a mat on the floor isn't going to work for some travelers, especially elderly people). Instead, Sleep doesn't talk about sleeping at all, but instead covers types of buildings you can temporarily stay in/live in. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:09, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
It is worth making the titles of articles easy for the casual reader to find. It doesn't matter much what we call the sleep section in a city articles: "Sleep", "Bed for the night", "Accommodation" or something more obscure would all work because readers will always get to the section by reading to the bottom of the page. But readers will get to topics by using the site search facility, so the title should match the mostly likely term. And I think an article about how to sleep in difficult situations - noisy, hot or uncomfortable locations would be useful. AlasdairW (talk) 23:21, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Now that would just be confusing, if Sleep (the section in our articles about accommodations) didn't at least redirect to Accommodations. As for ease of searching, redirects make that a moot point. Powers (talk) 21:16, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Alastair raises a very valid point - Sleep and Accommodation ar two differrent things. An article on sleeping during travelling, including sleeping on the plane, train or even when no proper accommodation is available, as well as effects of sleeping on the human body with relation to travelling, would be reasonably worthwhile and very fitting for the title, and just like the playful title suggests, interesting to read just for the sake of it. It absolutely should also contain a prominent link to accommodation at the top for those who look for specific, and infinitely less exciting, info on that. Readers who might be under the impression that one = other could be thus easily directed where they should go, while the fact that sleep is not equivalent to accommodation (e.g. a big part of the accommodation business is catering) would be reflected in both guides being separate. PrinceGloria (talk) 21:27, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but this approach is too encyclopedic. The staid Accommodations title is completely contrary to our house tone. Powers (talk) 23:45, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I think that article titles need to verge on the encyclopedic. Otherwise move New York to The Big Apple, Chicago to The Windy City, Edinburgh to Auld Reekie, Perth to The Fair City, and Denver to The Mile-High City. This would fit our tone, but would a traveller find anywhere? AlasdairW (talk) 22:16, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Using slang or nicknames is hardly the same thing. (And probably all of those redlinks should be redirects or disambiguation pages.) Powers (talk) 14:25, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
I know that you think that "Accomodations" is too stuffy to be the title of a page that is actually about accomodations. Here's my question for you: What should the title of the page about actually sleeping be? I'd put it at the obvious title Sleep, but we can't do that, because you've insisted that the content at Sleep be something other than information about actually sleeping. So where would you put this important, missing article? WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:27, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Actually, why don't we start writing an article on Sleep, so that something productive and constructive results from all that? PrinceGloria (talk) 18:09, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
It would never occur to me that we would need separate articles on sleeping and on places to sleep. Powers (talk) 19:13, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Jet lag affects sleep, but isn't a place to sleep. K7L (talk) 01:32, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
You get jet lag after long flights, so having it at Flying would be natural (now it is an article of its own, which is also OK). Sleeping in non-accommodation places fits well in Sleep, even if the article is mostly about accommodation. Coping with nightly noise also fits there. Do we have a real problem? --LPfi (talk) 05:40, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Travel often requires non-standard sleep patterns, not only because of jet lag. Some advice on how sleep patterns my affect your travel experience would be very much in order. PrinceGloria (talk) 07:33, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Sleep disruptions, Sleeping while travelling, or Getting a good night's sleep. You guys are really grasping at straws here, with the only apparent goal being to elide any sort of continuity between our section headings and our article titles. Powers (talk) 13:13, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
I don't know what my opinion is on this issue (maybe I just haven't cared enough to formulate one), but I do think we should all assume good faith on both sides of the argument, which means assuming that the goal on all sides is to serve the traveler well. Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:11, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, of course. I should have said that there seems to be a lack of understanding about how consistency between our section headings and our article titles helps the traveler. Powers (talk) 00:18, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Much better. :-) Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:24, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Installing Gather on Wikivoyage[edit]

My team has been working on a feature which we think would be highly useful on Wikivoyage and we'd really like to install it on your project as we think you are a community who can really help us grow it into what we think will be an amazing feature for all Wikimedia projects. It's called "Gather" and it allows users to collect personal lists of pages. We hope this will lead to increased engagement in our project, drawing attention to articles and then hopefully leading to more readers/editors.

In future we want this to do so much more, for example to support collaborative list editing, provide different views on lists e.g. watch edits on lists (a la Watchlist)... (feel free to check out our backlog.

As a travel addict, I can see lots of uses for your projects - here are some travel themed lists I have written for example:

If installed it could be available on mobile and via desktop via a beta feature. Thoughts? Questions? Jon (WMF) (talk) 19:56, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

cc. User:Melamrawy (WMF) User:Diablanco User:jdlrobson

There's no downside to installing this extension, right? It's just another bit of functionality for users who might want to use it, and is invisible to everyone else? If so I'd say go ahead and install it so that those who want this type of functionality have it available, although personally I'm not sure that it would be something I would be likely to use. -- Ryan • (talk) • 20:35, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
I'll second that. I might not use it personally but it couldn't hurt as a beta feature, so I'd also say go ahead. Texugo (talk) 20:43, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Fine by me. It'd be nice to be able to tie it into the books extension, to make it easy to print books using a Gathered list of articles. Powers (talk) 19:18, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Sounds very useful, when preparing a trip I usually have a collection of relevant articles open in browser tabs. Any tool would be more convenient, especially if the same list is accessible on mobile. Cheers! Syced (talk) 08:22, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Ryan, it's not entirely invisible to everyone else. Jon just gave you links that let you see his lists, so someone could share a list on Facebook or something. But it doesn't change anything in the articles or anything like that. It's just a list of links and has no effect on the mainspace (except possibly increase page views). WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:22, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Ryan, Texugo, Powers, Syced, I wanted to give you guys a heads-up on this. The downside is that these are publicly viewable, it is directly targeted for use and public sharing by non-editors, it has a text field and people can and do create abusive Collections (such as attacking people they hate), they need to be patrolled for legal violations or abuses. It has no real use-case for editors because it's simpler and more flexible to just link article titles in wikitext. It has been heatedly rejected at Wikipedia Wikipedia Administrators'_noticeboard#Moderation_of_Collections and other scattered discussions. WMF staff don't even respond to requests for WMF-Community discussion on whether it should be turned off. I have no edits on Voyage, so I'll leave it to you guys here. I just wanted you guys to know that this isn't "invisible". Alsee (talk) 11:54, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Usage of the word "travel(l)er"[edit]

One of this site's heritages (is this a word?) from its time at that other place is the frequent use of the word traveler, often in the idiosyncratic spelling traveller. Now I know we don't have anything against our history or against that other site per se, but maybe we could distinguish ourselves some way or another. Our section headings are not what you would find in "any other old guidebook" and the spelling "traveller" was made to distinguish us to begin with, so maybe we could or should replace it with the word "voyager" or else use turns of phrase like "bon voyage" where appropriate? I know that the name was not a 100% free choice, but just as moon handbooks put moons all over their stuff, we might get ourselves a unique selling point out of something that started off as a second choice. And please don't let this descend into a flamewar, I am merely thinking out loud and will gladly retract the idea if consensus is that we should keep "travelling". Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:29, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

I'd prefer our trademark to be exceptionally well-written travel guides rather than some contrived gimmick. As for the tradition of spelling "traveller" with two L's, I have no strong feelings about it either way but would note that the status quo does no harm and would take a monumental effort to undo (as we would want to preserve the double-L spelling in articles that take Commonwealth English, it would be difficult to assign this task to a bot). -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 22:36, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
I know that tampering with spelling or policies related to spelling is a touchy subject indeed and don't think changing the spelling (unless we do it globally for all articles, which would make it idiosyncratic again) would do much good. However I have seen, that in some places we use the word "traveler" instead of "visitor", "tourist" or other words for the apparent reason of the former name of this site. And as to contrived gimmicks versus good content: Why not both? maybe a contrived gimmick gets us an article in a newspaper or a mention on the interwebz and if we only gain one contributor through that, we have already won a little, haven't we? Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:45, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Actually, if I'm not mistaken, we have traditionally avoided using the word "tourist", both because of its somewhat negative connotations in English as well as to be inclusive of other types of travellers i.e. business travellers, etc. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 22:51, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
As Andre has noted I don't think there is any value in tampering with article content, but if the suggestion is to do a bit of branding by making some project changes such as renaming "Travellers' pub" to "Voyagers' pub" then I don't see any harm. -- Ryan • (talk) • 22:58, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Makes sense.. we are 'Wikivoyagers' after all. Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:21, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Another word for "gimmickry" is "marketing". Let's please keep that in mind. And for those of you who don't know the show "Gypsy", make sure you listen to "You Gotta Have a Gimmick". Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:00, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Travellers are fine. How about writing articles that benefit them? PrinceGloria (talk) 05:35, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
I don't believe the "traveller" in "Travellers' pub" was intended to refer to "wikitravellers" specifically, just to travellers in general. "Voyagers" is a much less euphonious and familiar word in English, though "voyageurs" is lovely and evocative in French. =) Powers (talk) 14:23, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Hobbitschuster's idea is a good and necessary one IF it's necessary to distinguish this series of guides from the Wikitravel ones AND we had a physical presence (in book stores, for example).

Since both are not true, the more important job to be done here is to boost our search engine (read Google in most markets) visibility.

What's being done to persuade Google that this isn't an inferior mirror site to be placed on the second and subsequent pages of search results?

Why have you preserved the inferior naming scheme and weird section headings you inherited? 118.101.139.200 01:15, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

In terms of why certain things about our article organization are the same, it might be more helpful to think of it as that other site being a inherited copy we had to leave behind when most of the editors came here to get away from the corporate dictators. "Inferior" and "weird" might be your opinion about the headers, but we are the ones who came up with the scheme, not those keeping the other site on life support, and a lot of us are rather fond of it. Texugo (talk) 01:29, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
It's understandable that you feel proud of your history and miffed that you were booted out, but you need to move on just as Canada did with its new and distinctive flag (and now even the naysayers concede that was a great move). It's no good having better articles (and maps!!!) if readers can't find you because Google is entirely blind to the quality and accuracy of your writings and just carries on thinking you're an inferior Johnny-come-lately copy, is it? 118.101.139.200 01:54, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
The Other Site maintains an outright hostile relationship towards Wikivoyage. Users who barely mention Wikivoyage somewhere at the site, are blocked indefinitely. We should, anyway, try synonyms for travel and traveller where appropriate; today, they are overused. As said, tourist is not always a good replacement, except in context such as Film and TV series tourism, where the intent is clearly travelling for pleasure. /Yvwv (talk) 01:50, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Use traveller, traveler, tourist, visitor, trip, excursion, expedition and any other word you can think of as relevant; and vary the use through articles. Do not just remove the word from articles, replace it with another relevant phrase. We cannot predict which word someone will use in a search engine. Using a single word too often in a page will actually reduce the search engine rating. --Traveler100 (talk) 04:44, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
On the sub-headings, they may be a little odd but I think they are short and to the point. However I do think each section should have an introductory sentence or two, not just with specifics for the location but to use other key words such as accommodation and restaurants. How about building a thesaurus to help people vary what words are used throughout the site. --Traveler100 (talk) 06:16, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
I have just stumbled upon this page, and after a few minutes of shocked incredulity am now given to respond to the earlier comment "traveler, often in the idiosyncratic spelling traveller." Idiosyncratic?!? TraveLLer is the spelling as stated by the OED, which is the accepted reference for the definitions and spellings of English. It's up to other's foibles should they wish to use a different spelling, but to then claim preeminence and denigrate convention is, at best, laughable. —The preceding comment was added by 179.43.141.169 (talkcontribs)
The OED, whatever its merits and faults can not and in fact does not claim jurisdiction over American English. As this page claims to have a slight preference for American English as a "default" where other spellings wouldn't be self-evident (such as in an article on England), the spelling "traveller" is indeed idiosyncratic when it appears in the same text as "flavor" or "center". I hope that clears that up. Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:07, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Dealing with pages like xyz "travel"[edit]

We have a lot of pages with names such as historical travel. If we want to reduce our use of said word(s) maybe we could or should find alternatives? What are your thoughts? Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:31, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Why do you think we should reduce the use of words like "Historical" in article titles? Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:26, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
I think Hobbitschuster was critizing the use of "travel", not "historical". As in X travel, Y travel, Z travel, etc. Texugo (talk) 00:17, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Exactly. Hobbitschuster (talk) 11:26, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
How would you propose to retitle such articles, in that case? Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:29, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
It would seem that in some cases the word tourism is not entirely inappropriate... Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:53, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm not really seeing a problem that needs fixing here. Texugo (talk) 23:02, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
I think the problem is one of distinguishing us from that other site, and thus maybe gaining recognition and/or search engine benefits... Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:10, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Dead Weblinks[edit]

I know that over at WP there is a bot that tests whether a weblink still works and posts on the article's talk page if it doesn't. What is the procedure over here at WV? Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:14, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

I guess that does not exist, since there are many dead link (mostly listings websites). It would be great to have a tool like the one you describe. Syced (talk) 04:53, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Could we contact the user who created the bot over at WP and ask her/him whether (s)he would be willing to help us get one here at this page? Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:36, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
The obvious people to ask at en.wp are User:Anomie, User:Legoktm, and User:ThaddeusB. Each of them has written bots that do at least something like this at en.wp. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:13, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Well maybe we should contact one of them...?Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:18, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
If we do this, it needs to put such pages in a maintenance category so we can find and work on them systematically. Texugo (talk) 15:03, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
You're right. I hadn't thought of that. Is that difficult technologically speaking? Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:26, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

!!! EUROVISION ALERT !!![edit]

After bidding farewell to James Last (who is one of the few with a reasonable explanation as to why list last "Last Tournee" was not really the last), the Viennesse are growing out their beards in anticipation of the Eurovision Song Contest due to take place there in 3 weeks. And we're about to feature Vienna on our front page tomorrow.

Content to have seen it selected for the front page and awarded the guide status, I was comfortable about presenting it to the world out there, but now I discovered in horror it is anything but one of our prime articles. Even the main article contains outdated info, awful formatting, questionable advice and fragmented, barely legible passages. And I didn't even check all the districts. It would be good to do an emergency brush-up! PrinceGloria (talk) 05:03, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

I have raised the issue before about nominated cites with old district but was overruled as not being important! Agree does not look good. --Traveler100 (talk) 07:40, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Suspect entries[edit]

Cleaning up a number of articles I have found, so far, two articles that include eat and sleep listing that look real but I do not believe they are. They are real names of restaurants and hotels with usually real sounding street names but do not match locations in that city. See Dortmund and Darmstadt edit history and talk pages. I am however finding it difficult to identify who made the entries; appear to be old as they are on Wikitavel and other language Wikivoayge pages too. Any way of identifying the source so can identify other such pages with the same problem? --Traveler100 (talk) 20:00, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

When I want to identify the source of a suspect text for a given page:
  • I do the full history export of this page. NB: it only works with the page having a limited history. For example, for fr:Japon it only retrieves the oldest versions (100Mo export file)! The alternative is to retrieve the full DB dump of Wikivoyage and extract the history of the page (ex: with this script).
  • Then search the suspect text (from the beginning or the end, I cannot remember). I have written a script that searches the author and date for a text given a export file.
This way I was able to find users that entered dozens of accommodations in batch in the French Wikivoyage in the Wikitravel era (and to remove all their contributions). - Fabimaru (talk) 20:18, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
There's w:Wikipedia:WikiBlame at http://www.wikipedia.ramselehof.de/wikiblame.php which allows the user to select any of the Wikimedia projects and search the history of one page. K7L (talk) 01:10, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Table of contents[edit]

Having just landed at Penang International, I thought I'd look at your George Town article. Huge and informative but lacking a table of contents like Wikipedia or Wikitravel. Since you seem to use the same software is there a good reason for this omission - or is it just an oversight? 218.208.95.130 00:58, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Georgetown (Malaysia) does in fact have a table of contents embedded in the banner. Are you not able to see it?
Also what device / browser combination are you using? Thanks, --Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:08, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
It's rather counterproductive to embed it there since it spoils the hero image and means that many folks will miss it. Your minimalist (but still intrusive) ToC also seems sadly lacking in functionality since, unlike the usual Wikipedia style contents list, I can find no way to expand it to H3 and H4 level headings. If I'm interested in a Splurge level hotel, I don't wish to wade through all the Budget listings to get there. And, of course, it's totally lacking in the mobile view...
I originally used the Chrome browser on an Android LG phone and then, when I eventually got to my hotel, a laptop running Firefox under Windows 8.1 (Ugh!).
Incidentally, this article is named wrongly. Officially (central and local government and UNESCO) it's always been two words George (and) Town since the very first maps were created in the English language. Just because many folks have struggled to use English when their native language was Hokkien, Arabic, Malay or Tamil doesn't mean we should perpetuate the heterodox. 118.101.139.200 01:04, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, moving it is easy. I used to live in Malaysia in the 70s and remember seeing it as one word most often. I did a Google search and found that the two-word version is used a bit more often than the single-word version, so I'll go ahead and move the article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:06, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, (fish soup?). Google often gets things wrong. It's particularly bad on the correct physical location of Spanish cathedrals, for example... 118.101.139.200 01:26, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Fish soup is sup ikan. Ikan kekek is a particular type of fish. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:34, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, WV's table of contents implementation has been badly broken for quite some time. There has been a lot of discussion; see Wikivoyage_talk:Banner_Expedition#Renew_TOC_discussion and elsewhere on that page, but no solution implemented. I'm not sure what it would take to get this fixed. Pashley (talk) 11:33, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
The Wikimedia Foundation's technical staff has expanded greatly in numbers and competence in recent months. You might try asking for technical assistance to implement a horizontal, hierarchical and expandable table of contents at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/tag/phabricator/
For people in locations with slow and/or expensive metered connections a good ToC may be thought important. On that topic, you might also ask them to ensure that text is loaded very first and before any resource hungry resources such as images and maps. 175.138.97.134 11:42, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello Wikivoyagers. I have been experiencing the same problems as the original IP user for a couple of weeks now on all articles. The banners are there but there are no tables of contents on any of the articles I view or edit. Since this doesn't appear to be an issue for many / any other users (I haven't come across any other discussions on the matter) it is presumably an issue with my browser, which is just bog-standard Chrome. Any ideas or suggestions? Warmest regards, --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 14:41, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Apparently they don't work without Javascript? K7L (talk) 15:15, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the suggestion, though I do have Javascript enabled. :-) --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 22:35, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Funds Dissemination Committee elections 2015[edit]

Wikimedia Foundation RGB logo with text.svg

This is a message from the 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee. Translations are available.

Voting has begun for eligible voters in the 2015 elections for the Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) and FDC Ombudsperson. Questions and discussion with the candidates for the Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) and FDC Ombudsperson will continue during the voting. Nominations for the Board of Trustees will be accepted until 23:59 UTC May 5.

The Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) makes recommendations about how to allocate Wikimedia movement funds to eligible entities. There are five positions on the committee being filled.

The FDC Ombudsperson receives complaints and feedback about the FDC process, investigates complaints at the request of the Board of Trustees, and summarizes the investigations and feedback for the Board of Trustees on an annual basis. One position is being filled.

The voting phase lasts from 00:00 UTC May 3 to 23:59 UTC May 10. Click here to vote. Questions and discussion with the candidates will continue during that time. Click here to ask the FDC candidates a question. Click here to ask the FDC Ombudsperson candidates a question. More information on the candidates and the elections can be found on the 2015 FDC election page, the 2015 FDC Ombudsperson election page, and the 2015 Board election page on Meta-Wiki.

On behalf of the Elections Committee,
-Gregory Varnum (User:Varnent)
Volunteer Coordinator, 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery 03:45, 4 May 2015 (UTC) • TranslateGet help

Allow some links to Wikipedia[edit]

This probably belongs on Wikivoyage talk:Links to Wikipedia, but I'm posting it here for better visibility.

User:Ikan Kekek made a change removing a link I'd added to Wikipedia in an infobox, citing Wikivoyage:Links to Wikipedia#In-line links.

While I don't disagree with the policy generally, I wonder if some exceptions can/should be made, particularly for infoboxes that are specifically there to give extra information someone might like to read up on. For example, Hawaii has infoboxes with Wikipedia links to reef triggerfish, forceps butterflyfish, and Father Damien de Veuster. United States of America now has an infobox about the date of Labor Day which mentions the Haymarket affair, which I had never heard of before that info was added; it's not currently linked to Wikipedia, but it seems like a good candidate for such a link.

I completely agree with the stated goal that "Wikivoyage articles should be as complete as possible in and of themselves. Essential information about a topic should be included in the Wikivoyage article, rather than relying on a link to Wikipedia." But I'd like to suggest allowing exceptions in cases such as these, where the subject in question is specifically mentioned for the purpose of providing extra information just for the sake of curiosity, rather than essential travel information. --Bigpeteb (talk) 19:04, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Although a suggestion that off-topic WP links be limited to appear only from within infoboxes may perhaps be a slightly new twist, before bringing this all up again, I would encourage anyone tempted to join the discussion to thoroughly read the previous discussions here, here, here and elsewhere on those three pages before getting too excited. We have have been through this discussion many times, so if you really want to make another proposal for this, you'll need to be able to have an answer for all those previously expressed objections, offering very clear criteria for how we could patrollably identify and allow only a small number of such links without opening the floodgates and without relying on arbitrary rules which seem to defy common sense in allowing some sorta-useful links here but denying some perceptibly super-useful ones over there, and doing all that in a way that identifies to the user when they would be leaving us for a WP page, but keeping the numbers of links low enough that such markers don't stand out like a visibly distracting shotgun blast of wormholes throughout the text. Texugo (talk) 19:32, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, indeed. I favour loosening the policy, as some of my comments at the links above show, but I've given up advocating the idea because I cannot come up with clear nough criteria for when it is a good idea. Pashley (talk) 20:37, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
While it may be indeed useful in some cases it is very hard indeed to come up with a good way to draw the line. Also, if you want to know what the Haymarket affair was, you may just type it into WP or open the WP app if you are using a mobile device. Disallowing WP links also somewhat reduces the risk of this here website becoming too encyclopedic.. Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:14, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
That directly contradicts the repeated refrain of "we don't want WP links because we want the info here" that comes up every time this is discussed... by that logic, "Short description. (See X on Wikipedia for more info)" becomes "Long description, which carries on with a mass of encyclopaedic detail because we don't want a concise summary with the encyclopaedia-level detail left to WP". K7L (talk) 13:08, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Hobbitschuster, I'd like to respond to this comment: "if you want to know what the Haymarket affair was, you may just type it into WP or open the WP app if you are using a mobile device."
The entire point of hyperlinking things is so that you click a link and get taken to other content, which might in some cases be on a different web site.
If we followed the logic you describe, then WV is not leveraging one of its major advantages over print guide books. In a print guidebook, sure: they don't have room to explain everything, particularly when it's not directly relevant to the issue at hand, so if I see mention of the Haymarket affair I have to grab an encyclopedia (either print or online) and look it up myself. But WV is an online guide, which is why we have fewer limitations on length or amount of content. Why shouldn't WV have hyperlinks for this kind of thing? I don't buy that "it's easy enough to find the relevant content by yourself" as a valid reason. --Bigpeteb (talk) 23:55, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
I think all of us understand the arguments for and against more links per article to Wikipedia, since the argument has been made exhaustively on long discussion threads. I consider the pro and con arguments both to be sound. However, it's been clear for quite a long time that it is impossible to attain a consensus in favor of change on this question. I would say that things are unlikely to change unless we get a very large number of editors from Wikipedia who establish themselves and then form an overwhelming majority in favor of new policies. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:08, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the inflexible "we do it this way because WT always did this" attitude is hurting our chances of attracting Wikipedians. We're already at a disadvantage as "sibling project" on WP tends to mean "poor cousin" (Can you name all the siblings off the top of your head? I can't, although I can name a few - some of which I've never looked at.) We also have to deal with the perception that WV is either (a) merely an un-sourced, non-neutral version of info already in WP or (b) a yellow page directory of restaurants and hotels. A policy that states that can link to the restaurant's own promotional website but
The Louvre. a famous museum
can't link to the WP page specifically about that museum is *not* helping matters. K7L (talk) 00:42, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
Are you making a new argument? Why do you think making this argument again will increase the chance of a consensus? We've debated this ad nauseam without advancing the discussion. Without any disrespect for your points or viewpoint, I would suggest that continuing to go over the same arguments over and over is a waste of time. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:32, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
Wikivoyage will benefit moreso if there are links coming from the "big sibling" going to the "poor cousin" than the other way around. There are many destinations and travel topics on Wikipedia that still don't have a Wikivoyage link in the "External links" section. We haven't yet exhausted all our interwiki advertizing opportunities. See wikipedia:Wikipedia:Wikimedia_sister_projects for a guide on how and when to link. Gizza (t)(c) 11:13, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm sure that Wikipedians will love you using (or abusing) their project as an "interwiki advertising opportunity". Interwiki links to us from WP should only be placed where they are beneficial to WP and its readers. Interwiki links to WP from us should only be placed where they are beneficial to WV and the traveller. Anything more is spam. K7L (talk) 12:12, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
Obviously there should be only links when it makes sense and is beneficial to the readers or either WP or WV but my point was that these useful links are missing in many places. And adding these links will create a greater awareness of Wikivoyage. Anyway, I'm more of a Wikipedian than a Wikivoyager, having been an active contributor at the former for about nine years more than latter. I know what's allowed and not allowed over there. :) Gizza (t)(c) 10:24, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
K7L, I spent a while last year adding links to some of our best articles here, and exactly zero of them were reverted. If we've got a good page, the community at en.wp seems to be pretty tolerant of the links. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:11, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

(starting at the left again) Well I said what I meant precisely because I know my own browsing behavior.... Sometimes I see a link and think "oh, that might be interesting" click on it and two hours later I have opened three hundred elevnty tabs and my browser crashes, while totally forgetting the original subject. IF people who came to read a travel guide on the USA really care all that much about a subject entirely unrelated to travel such as the Haymarket affair, they can still look it up on their own. There is a reason, why some other sites call excessive links "potholes", because the potential to "fall" in them and get distracted rises by their density... Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:01, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Allow a link at the top of a section?[edit]

See also X, Y and Z on Wikipedia

X, Y and Z are the best-known attractions of this region, which...

In other words, allow a "see also" link from a section header to a WP page wherever we allow a "see also" from a section header to a WV page. This would seem narrow enough? K7L (talk) 02:36, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

That would solve the issues of number and of warning the user they're going off-site, but I'm not sure how I'd feel about allowing a large percentage of our article sections to start off with hatnotes inviting the reader to leave and read non-travel-focused material elsewhere. It would seem odd to pick up a travel guide where every section starts by encouraging you to read a non-travel guide. Moreover, given that you can't really use it to list more than three or so links without it turning into a paragraph of its own, I also imagine it would pretty quickly come to be seen as an arbitrary rule that would do senseless things like:
There are lots and lots of situations where no matter which 3 things we choose, it would still just look like an arbitrary sampling of what WP has to offer. This system would also be arbitrary in that it would either a) allow WP links in prose sections only, disallowing WP links for listing items, which many seem to feel is more useful; or b) allow them in listings sections too, but force us to debate which 3 listings in each section to highlight and which to leave out, in the many cases where a WP article exists for more than 3 items. Texugo (talk) 12:42, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Paris#History should hatnote w:History of Paris (the same topic), because that article already has the others as its subtopics on WP. One could also link to a WP category or a WP list article, which then links to the individual subtopics. We want more than "I stayed in a Holiday Inn express last night *yawn*" as the description to "Understand" a city or destination, but let's leave the encyclopaedia-level of detail to the encyclopaedia. K7L (talk) 13:08, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
The point is that there are many different situations and most of them are not cut and dried as to what and how many links we would allow. If your answer for Paris is just w:History of Paris because it's an umbrella, then my answer is that we already have w:Paris in the sidebar, a more comprehensive umbrella and already undoubtedly links to the others. Texugo (talk) 15:48, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Bottom of the section would be better than the top, but otherwise I agree with Texugo's objections. Powers (talk) 23:29, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Unfortunately, we do often need more than one link. A region which consists of multiple incorporated municipalities usually gets an article for each on WP, while it's likely to be treated as a single community here (unless it's huge, or at least MSP-sized). There's also the problem that one has to click through multiple levels of "umbrella" to get from Paris to w:Paris to w:History of Paris to the individual subarticle about one historical era. That's awkward, and users either won't bother or will stay on WP after they've done all that searching. K7L (talk) 00:54, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

No matter what website I find myself on, if I want to learn more about a specific person/place/thing mentioned, I always know how to find Wikipedia. We still need to attract more readers TO our site, so I don't see any great use in trying to place as many links as we can to flush people out to a site that they probably are already quite capable of finding and navigating. It's only a slight inconvenience to bring up a new window and type (or copy and paste) the desired search term. How much of an issue is that really? ChubbyWimbus (talk) 13:43, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. ChubbyWimbus just perfectly summed it up for me. Wikipedia is already my de facto source for information like this, and I think we can take it as a given that most people know how to use Google. I just don't see any real benefit to adding more direct links to Wikipedia here. PerryPlanet (talk) 17:16, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
By that standard, why do we bother creating wikis at all if (in many browsers) a search engine is just a right-click away and all the info is already available elsewhere? K7L (talk) 17:22, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm not sure how in the world you would draw that conclusion from my statement. Much of the time all the info isn't already available elsewhere, or as neatly summarized as it is on Wikipedia. PerryPlanet (talk) 17:39, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Mobile usability[edit]

Hi. There is currently a discussion at de-WV about implementing banners and one of the argument against them was that banners as used on en-WV don't look good on mobile devices and make the page less usable. One of the arguments over there was that in light of rising numbers of smartphones in use globally, WV should aim to include only those innovations that work on mobile devices as well. What are your thoughts on that? How should we deal with mobile devices? And what about our banners? (I think they're fine). Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:17, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be relatively simple to disable the pagebanner template for mobile pages? Texugo (talk) 22:18, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Presumably the effort underway to turn the banners into a proper MediaWiki extension will address mobile use. But I should think disabling them on mobile devices would be a useful interim solution. Powers (talk) 23:42, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
How would that affect the table of contents that is currently included in the banner if I am not mistaken? Hobbitschuster (talk) 23:50, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
If it banner template disabled itself on mobile, I presume the TOC would display the same way as a non-bannered page does. Texugo (talk) 01:10, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
When the banner were first introduced, I believe they were turned off on mobile because they didn't work well. At some point they came back -- I've always assumed its because the mobile team turned banners back on because it behaves differently on mobile than desktop, but I don't know for sure.
As to the TOC, it doesn't appear in mobile view. The banner appears but the TOC is the traditional vertical Wikemedia style... at least on my Android phone and tablet. -172.218.40.145 06:05, 8 May 2015 (UTC) (Shaundd)
Actually there is a known feature where Banners for high definition displays (such as MacBook Retinas) produce a larger image for the Banner than a standard display. This becomes problematic for mobile phones, since even mid-range models now also have high definition displays as well. This is a download performance problem rather than a style issue.
We also have a problem that some other language wiki's have an irrational belief that banners download the original size of the image hosted on WikiMedia (this is false - images are scaled before downloading)
Can you link to the German Wikivoyage discussion on this? "Banners don't look good" on mobile doesn't match my experience. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 10:47, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Well the discussion in de-WV is spread over several areas... let's see.... my talk page, Their pub, and here. I have not been following the debate all that intensely lately as some of the objections appear to make little sense to me or rather I am not knowledgeable enough to say anything of substance regarding them. Hobbitschuster (talk) 11:30, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
One night in Bangkok makes the hard man humble
Based on your talk page it seems they have a point. Looking at the Bangkok article on my iPhone 6 in Desktop mode the banner looks OK (not perfect)
However in Mobile mode it does look something like that screenshot. We need to separate the strange transparent edit overlay from the Banner in Mobile view and then it should be fine again.
Some people like DerFussi do concern mobile roaming charges a lot, although I don't agree that should be the base and overriding concern for our content --Andrewssi2 (talk) 12:05, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
"Some other language wiki's have an irrational belief that banners download the original size of the image hosted on WikiMedia (this is false - images are scaled before downloading)"? I disagree. The image is scaled, at least in the desktop version, to an 1800px wide "thumbnail" - even on a screen that isn't 1800px wide. Any further downscaling only takes place in the browser, after the bandwidth cost has already been incurred. K7L (talk) 12:58, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Disagree if you like. If you check the resolution size of the banners actually downloaded it will be 1800 pixels wide on standard screens and 3600 pixels with on high definition screens. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 04:38, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
So how do we fix this? Hobbitschuster (talk) 13:13, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
See https://en.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=Wikivoyage:Travellers%27_pub&oldid=2782789#Table_of_contents above
We can fix through editing the Mobile template.. an area I haven't looked at yet. Maybe now is the time. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 04:40, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Other mobile issues[edit]

What about other mobile issues? e.g. How do maps work on mobile devices? And has the original issue of banners been addressed? Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:10, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Maps more consistency in article[edit]

Hey All. When I travel I often use the offline version of WV. The offline version Kiwix however does not yet support dynamic maps. I am hoping to figure out some way it can convert the dynamic maps to thumbnails so that these can be included. Have also been adding maps to a number of articles. Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:59, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Absolutely!
To paraphrase Emmanuel Engelhart: Wikivoyage is like water; a common good everybody should have access to irrespective of whether they have access to the Internet or not... —The preceding comment was added by 175.138.97.134 (talkcontribs)
It looks like nobody is reading multi-lingual Wikivoyage Lounge on Meta any longer. Some weeks ago Joachim, our main map-maker, together with Italian colleagues announced a script that generates gpx files containing all listings on a page. You can test it in Italian or Russian Wikivoyage by clicking on the GPX icon in the top right corner. GPX files are easily imported into OsmAnd to create an offline map, which is truly dynamic unlike any static thumbnail proposed above. Ideas about generating gpx files for the whole region or for a given area have been discussed too, and implementation is underway. --Alexander (talk) 15:59, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
So we need some automated way for Kiwix to do this than? I like the dynamic map in this article Cranbrook but when it is offline I assume that it will need to be static in Kiwix. I can easy create static maps but than both Kiwix and WV will have the static ones. Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:18, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Kiwix is not a software for offline maps, so it won't have a solution for this problem. --Alexander (talk) 04:27, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Frozen dynamic map in Kiwix
The dynamic map of Tokyo/Roppongi shows correctly in Kiwix, right? Obviously on Kiwix (and when printed on paper) it is not scrollable: it is just a screenshot of the dynamic map at default zoom. A few months ago I tried to write a script that generates such screenshots every once in a while if the article has changed, using the open source pageres command-line tool. Unfortunately there is a bug preventing its use on my particular Linux system, but anyone with time and scripting skills please give it a try :-) GPX sounds great too, both are needed: map for quick reference when reading the article and GPX when actually going there. Not sure how the GPX is linked from within Kiwix though. Syced (talk) 11:19, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
That map does not appear at all in Kiwix. Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:33, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
I added a screenshot showing Kiwix displaying the "frozen" dynamic map. It is in the "See" section. It is a rather old Kiwix file though. Cheers! Syced (talk) 04:05, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Will look at it further. Thanks Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:21, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I am going to implement the GPX feature tomorrow. If you have any objections, raise them now. This feature is as important as dynamic maps (and so far they are the only real thing that distinguishes Wikivoyage from its, well, competitors), so the lack of response from this community is quite shocking. Nobody interested?

By the way, the tool for downloading GPX files from multiple destination is now available as well. --Alexander (talk) 12:03, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

My technical abilities are poor but I would love to see if added. Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:33, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Feedback for gpxmap.php:
  • The MIME type returned by the server for the GPX file is "MPEG-4 video".
  • If any POI name contains an & character then the XML is corrupt. You just need to escape such characters.
Extremely promising tool otherwise! :-) I created a GPX for the whole region I am in right now, and after fixing the "&" XML syntax a bit it loads perfectly in OsmAnd, and is already extremely useful! I hope the tool will soon be able to handle more than 25 articles. Keep up the great work! Syced (talk) 04:12, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
@Syced: thanks for your advice. I masked all 5 special characters [1] now. The Content-Type I changed to "application/GPX+xml". I hope that's right. - The script can download as many files. The limit is arbitrary to prevent mass downloading. This could lead to blocking by WMF, I fear. -- Joachim Mey2008 (talk) 15:52, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Title blacklist and "the..."[edit]

I request that an administrator redirect Theft to Crime. It's a valid, viable requested topic for an article but can't be created because a filter is preventing non-admins from creating any article name beginning with "The..." K7L (talk) 02:36, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Done. Nurg (talk) 02:47, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
And I've removed "the" from the blacklist. Nurg (talk) 03:04, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Tag:emoji[edit]

What does this mean? It's an edit tag, for example in this edit history. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:11, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Special:Tags -- no longer used -- Japanese emoticon (smiley face)? - Matroc (talk) 04:30, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Someone's using emoticons that can't be seen?? Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:53, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
The new Indian rupee or Indonesian rupiah symbols may also trigger this tag. —The preceding comment was added by 149.241.32.203 (talkcontribs)

Tourist office is not working correctly[edit]

I just tried to ask a new question at the Tourist office by clicking "Ready? Ask a new question". After I typed my question and clicked "Save", my question did not appear at the Tourist office but on a page that had "#redirect [[Wikivoyage:Tourist office]]" and my question after that. I had to edit the Tourist office page directly to get my question to appear there. What's going on here? JIP (talk) 19:30, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

This issue should now be fixed. -- Ryan • (talk) • 19:48, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
The whole thing is a result of the move from Tourist Office to Tourist office. I think before we do a similar move (the whole transport(ation) issue was somewhat similar) we should consider these kind of things... Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:58, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Eh, most page moves are uncomplicated so we assumed this one would be too. With that kind of thing, it's pretty unlikely for anyone to think of it ahead of time even if we sat and said "what do we need to do to make way for this move?" But anyway, I don't think any real harm was done. Texugo (talk) 21:19, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

New graphing software is rumored to make maps[edit]

There's an upcoming tech talk about the new Vega-based graphing system this week. It's 13:00 PDT on Thursday, 14 May (21:00 UTC). If you're interested, the link is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7DTn9jHnI0 There should be a demo as well as some technical information about how the system is built. I believe that this can make some kinds of static, vector-based maps, so naturally I thought of Wikivoyage's need for good maps. Please share this link with anyone who may be interested. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 02:23, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

How about using that for region maps? Let's at least give it a try :-) Region maps would gain at being more easily changeable. Syced (talk) 12:34, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Trademark symbols[edit]

They're not allowed in Wikivoyage articles, are they? An example is in this edit: Machu Pichu express® Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:30, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't know of any policy against them, but they're certainly unnecessary and distracting. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 03:47, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
So if we delete them, what should the stated reason be? I think it's that this is a non-commercial site and that trademark symbols are normally used only on commercial sites that are promoting the products. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:05, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
I recently noticed a particular product that says on its website "Never ever use this product's name without ®!" yet the Wikipedia article about this product does not use ® at all. I think we should follow the same policy as Wikipedia does, but I haven't found their policy page about that yet. Syced (talk) 04:40, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Ikan - Well enough to say we're copyediting the article so it reads better, I think. Not every edit has to have a policy-based rationale. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 04:50, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
True. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:31, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Or I could point to this discussion as showing agreement not to use the symbols. :-) Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:32, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
The WP policy, which is to not use them, is at w:Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trademarks. Nurg (talk) 08:09, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
I like their policy. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:24, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
I think the mere fact the symbol is unnecessary and obstructs fluency of reading is quite sufficient. I'd also go with the WP policy. Danapit (talk) 09:16, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Actually we have a policy on this, since almost the beginning of the site: Wikivoyage:Trademarks. Vidimian (talk) 18:40, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the link! And it's a much simpler policy than Wikipedia's. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:15, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

SNUBA could probably do with some tidying up then. It even includes Trademark disclaimers as well as a few uses of the ® symbol. -- WOSlinker (talk) 12:08, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Dynamic temperature graphs[edit]

This is not an image, just 100% easy-to-edit JSON text (see source):

Example stolen from the German Wikivoyage, as you have guessed. If I understand correctly, this too is brought to us by Vega. Cheers! Syced (talk) 08:49, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Whatever happened to the good ole' climate - diagram according to Walter/Lieth? Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:41, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia version of the climate chart - more information provided
This discussion belongs on Wikivoyage:Climate_Expedition but anyway..
The Wikipedia Climate chart is actually far superior to the German WV shown above. It is a complex template and I still havn't been able to make it work in Wikivoyage yet, but on my todo list. If anyone else wants to help it is currently at Template:Climate_chart
--Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:18, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
I was not aware of this template, sorry for the noise! Syced (talk) 03:23, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
um, no need to be sorry. In any case the template is not ready yet! --Andrewssi2 (talk) 04:15, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
The small chart shown above was created to show the existence of <graph> tag using the powerful Vega library. My aim was not to present already a final solution because I am not familiar with the Vega chart syntax. The chart templates as used in the Wikipedias would be changed after some time because they could not be printed. For the bars usually div tags with colored backgrounds were used which were omitted in the print. The graph tag will produce a chart image in png or svg format which can be presented at all devices. To get an imagination of the opportunities of the Vega tool please use the Vega editor and choose the example weather chart from list. I think we will have in future a weather chart module which will create the JSON syntax from a list of weather characteristics. And maybe these data are stored in Wikidata, and we are only in need of an Wikidata qid. --RolandUnger (talk) 16:03, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks RolandUnger , I didn't notice that the color bars didn't actually print in Wikipedia. I just created a PDF printout and it is less aesthetically pleasing as a result, although still more than readable.
Happy to look at the Vega editor some more. We need to consider the English WV requirement of displaying everything in fahrenheit as well as celcius. (Since this can be done mathematically, we hopefully don't have to duplicate both measurements in Wikidata) Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:49, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Oh why did the only major countries to refuse metrication have to be among the most powerful and influential in the world? Do we also have to give precipitation in inches? Hobbitschuster (talk) 23:16, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, German Wikivoyage has the advantage that all German speaking countries use the metric system. English Wikivoyage has the unique burden of having everyone in the world as its audience. That said if the US ever gives up its fond attachment to imperial (unlikely) then I'm sure this wouldn't be an issue anymore Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:25, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
I suspect it might be possible to draw the second vertical axis in Fahrenheit, or have custom text for all the labels based on a formula. Also, make sure you check out Vega tools page - good demos there. --Yurik (talk) 08:07, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata: Access to data from arbitrary items is coming[edit]

(Sorry for writing in English)

When using data from Wikidata on Wikipedia and other sister projects, there is currently a limitation in place that hinders some use cases: data can only be accessed from the corresponding item. So, for example, the Wikipedia article about Berlin can only get data from the Wikidata item about Berlin but not from the item about Germany. This had technical reasons. We are now removing this limitation. It is already done for French Wikisource and Dutch Wikipedia. Your project is one of the next ones:

  • 18. May: Farsi Wikipedia, English Wikivoyage, Hebrew Wikipedia
  • 1. June: Italian Wikipedia, all remaining Wikisource

We hope to have it rolled out nearly everywhere by the end of June 2015.

We invite you to play around with this new feature if you are one of the people who have been waiting for this for a long time. If you have technical issues/questions with this you can come to d:Wikidata:Contact the development team.

A note of caution: Please be careful with how many items you use for a single page. If it is too many pages, loading might get slow. We will have to see how the feature behaves in production to see where we need to tweak and how.

How to use it, once it is enabled:

Cheers Lydia Pintscher 15:19, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

So what are the consequences if we add an extra field to the {{listing}} template, something like {{see| name=Musée du Louvre | address=Place du Carrousel | lat=48.86106 | long=2.33562 | directions=Métro: Louvre | phone=+33 1 40-20-53-17 | wikidata=Q19675 }}? Would pulling any Wikidata information for an individual venue slow the servers too much? K7L (talk) 17:50, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
That sounds like tempting server slowdown, according to what Lydia just said, since that template is used dozens of times on many pages. Texugo (talk) 18:43, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
True, though the number of listings with Wikidata entries is currently small for most destinations. In theory, though, someday, there could be an entry for every single one. Powers (talk) 18:55, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Wonderful!!! Now listings collaboration can really become a reality. There is still a lot of effort ahead, but we should definitely start experimenting on a particular article. I see the following tasks:
  • Identify what Wikidata properties we can reuse as listing properties (ex: latitude longitude URL etc)
  • Define new Wikidata properties if there is no match yet
  • Make the templates use these properties if a Wikidata identifier is specified
  • Make the listing editor read/from from Wikidata if a Wikidata identifier is specified. Should work on mobile too, as editing these properties in wikicode (source) will become impossible
  • Long-term: For properties that contain human language (like description or price), I suggest doing nothing for now, and when we have more experience, see whether using Wikidata for that too would bring us any benefit
  • Long-term: Create a Wikidata property like "See Listings" in "Timbuktu". While big Wikivoyages might not use it, smaller Wikivoyages might want to just write something like "==Eat=={{wikidata_eat}} ==Drink=={{wikidata_drink}}" to get started. In that case, localized description would probably have to be stored on Wikidata too.
Cheers! Syced (talk) 03:46, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Taking coordinates from Wikidata may not be practical because this will largely complicate the scripts for dynamic maps and any similar applications. There are only two easy thing to retrieve, the web-link and image. One could also retrieve links to Wikipedia and Commons if they are needed. Transferring phone numbers to Wikidata may be possible. However, the most important thing is also the most difficult one. The synchronization of web-links and images is by far less important than the synchronization of opening times and prices, so the whole thing is about these fields, not about anything else, which is rather unimportant (recall the template for opening hours; this is one place where it becomes extremely useful).
And question number one is: how to connect listings in different language versions? How to connect listings to existing Wikidata items? Some language versions have been adding links to Wikipedia or Wikidata IDs since years, so things are more or less prepared, and integration with Wikidata can start immediately. But English Wikivoyage has never tried this, and it will take a while before listings are ready for integration. --Alexander (talk) 06:19, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
I agree for opening hours: A few months ago I suggested using the standard format that other Wikivoyages are using, but it had been decided against because it is less readable for humans without a graphical user interface. With inter-language listing collaboration now a reality, it might be time to reconsider the question :-) As for your question number one: Yes the English Wikivoyage is being Wikivoyages that have Wikipedia links, but anyway it is time to get started! I have added a "wikidata" property to the listings template, and I added the wikidata property to all listings of the See section of Tokyo/Roppongi. Let's use that page as a prototype to see how Wikidata fares performance-wise. Cheers! Syced (talk) 07:52, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Musings[edit]

  • Overcoming the limitation of working with the current page is a definite plus when accessing Wikidata using Lua....
  • List of Wikidata properties in French - I remember there was a list of properties in English but can't seem to find it now.
  • The current Module:wikibase can be used to obtain a limited number of properties such as lat/long/capital etc. (can easily add banner as well). Would it not then be reasonable to beef that module or another to perform future work?
  • I am under the impression that one would use a parser function {{#property:P36|from=Q183}} rather than calling a Lua Module directly {{#invoke:xxxxxxx|P36|from=Q183}}. One would still have to know the ID in order for either to work? Would then a call be needed to a Lua module to get the ID in the first place? .... {{#property:P36|from=Germany}} (Let process find the ID?) - Also would have to know the property (P numbers)
  • To get more than one data element probably would be easier to do with a single call to a Lua module.
  • Doing a quickbar or some infobox would also be rather simple though.
  • There may be an issue with timing and page parsing. (ie. numbering of listings and when that occurs - before or after you get the lat/long from Wikidata).
  • Putting listing information into Wikidata is an admirable idea; however, I am not as optimistic when it comes to sorting, updating, editing, duplicate names and parsing etc.
  • More to consider - All the best! ... Matroc (talk) 06:13, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

What about editing of listings with some entries from Wikidata (as long as the information on Wikidata is correct and up to date, there is no problem – those in the know can handle it, for others it's just magic), by the listing editor or by hand?

If what you see is just the item/property code, then you can probably replace it with correct information, but often you want to correct just part of it, you would prefer to have the current version available for editing.

And, of course, in most cases the edit should be done to the Wikidata object. Directing a random user to Wikidata (as is now done for iw-links) is very confusing. In some cases the information is correct, but corresponds to something other than what the listing is supposed to be about. We rely on random users much more than Wikipedia, especially regarding the listings.

--LPfi (talk) 08:32, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Opening Hours[edit]

What is the proposed universal format of opening hours? I can see that as being a problem, considering the different ways hours are represented in French, Italian, and in English in different parts of the world. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:17, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Here is the hours format used by the French Wikivoyage. Day names are of course translated, see for instance the same format in Russian. Syced (talk) 11:10, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

I listed what we might be able to reuse, property-by-property. Needless to see, feel free to edit :-) Syced (talk) 11:10, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Also consider that hours are not only different between languages, but they differ in complexity from establishment to establishment, with different days open, different holidays, some open only seasonally, etc. Some have the same hours each day, others have different hours on different days, and some with two (or occasionally even three) shifts per day, such as restaurants with separate breakfast/lunch/dinner hours. A WD element truly capable of holding all the information we need would probably have to be at least a 7-by-3 array of start/end-time pairs plus some additional way to handle the bits on seasonality and holidays, etc. Then, on the WV side, we would need a very smart template that would be able to read that info and collapse it to remove the redundancy, so that we can still say "Tu-Th 11AM-3PM and 6PM-11PM; Fr, Su 11AM-3PM and 6PM-1AM; Sa and holidays 11AM-1AM, closed Mondays" instead of taking 3-4 times as much space to list each day of the week separately, one after the other with its respective hours. Then, on top of all that complexity, it would have to be able to do all that in the various languages. Texugo (talk) 12:35, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
A restaurant might also have a bar which stays open into the wee hours, even though the kitchen closes early in the evening. Our "just list it once" policy for mixed entities like a hotel (sleep) with a restaurant (eat) that has a bar (drink) on a golf course (do) will make a mess when this bundle of related businesses on the same site each keeps different hours. K7L (talk) 13:54, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
That's another good point. Similarly shopping centers sometimes have different hours from their food courts, etc. Texugo (talk) 14:04, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
You need exactly one string to code whatever you want about working hours. For example, 109002000_20900200_309002000_409002000_509002000_609001700_7 would mean Mo-Fr 9-20, Sa 9-17, Su closed. Then you will also need to teach listing editor how to transform these numbers into human-readable templates, and you will need something like {{hours}} for the final display in the text. Months or seasons are trivial as well. When there are two different objects within one listing, you will need two strings with standard (and translated into different languages) identifiers such as 'restaurant', 'bar', or 'food-court'. Wikidata people may come up with other ideas, but even this "one-string-based" is the working solution that relies on the existing functionality of Wikidata only.
Of course, it is possible that one listing out of 1000 will have something very special. This listing can stay intact, while 99.9% other listings can be converted to standard format and shared on Wikidata, which would be a big step forward.
This is nothing but a very straight-forward coding. As I mentioned, the most difficult task is not this one, but finding connections between listings in different language versions and identifying existing Wikidata items where some of these listings belong. This requires joint effort of all editors who should understand what is going on and why it is needed. And this may be difficult to achieve. --Alexander (talk) 15:41, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
So how do I represent "Open weekends only from Victoria Day to Dominion Day, open daily from July 1 to Labour Day, then open when we feel like it until Thanksgiving. Closed for the winter, except for New Year's Eve and Winterlude, and if we're bored we usually go home early on Easter Sunday"? SnowBound DriveIn's showings of "Closed for the Winter" tend to be very seasonal; campgrounds, waterparks and tourism venues staffed by summer students are just as bad or worse. K7L (talk) 15:56, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
I am sorry, but the majority of things are not like that, even in US and Canada. I said that we would likely end up with 0.1% exceptions. Even we have 1% of those, it does not matter. I created thousands of listings for different European countries, and I never ever wrote descriptions like the one you quoted. They all follow the bloody simple month-day-time scheme.
If "closed for the winter" has no particular definition of winter, this could be a standard string as well. --Alexander (talk) 16:02, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I would also venture that your single string is not capable of encoding my above example of Tu-Th 11AM-3PM and 6PM-11PM; Fr, Su 11AM-3PM and 6PM-1AM; Sa and holidays 11AM-1AM, closed Mondays. And that example is not extreme in any way - loads of restaurant have stuff like this. It's not just some 0.1% or even 1%. Texugo (talk) 16:04, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
With a bit of creativity you will easily understand how to encode these working hours into a single string. Several time slots per day are abolutely no problem if your interpreter (Listing editor) takes this possibility into account. --Alexander (talk) 16:28, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
I know it's easily possible to fit the information in a single string, although it would need be at least 3 times as long as yours to include the necessary minimum of possibilities for even single-entity restaurants. But the structure of the storage codification is not really what I was concerned about - the challenge would be to craft:
  • an interface that makes that complex code easily editable without learning a complex syntax and without precluding common possibilities, but also without forcing someone to enter 8:00-6:00 PM seven times just to get a simple Mo-Sa and holidays 8AM-6PM; and
  • a template that can take such a code and turn it back into the succinct, non-redundant form we customarily present that information in. Texugo (talk) 16:37, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Your text can be coded by a sequence of {{hours}} templates. Tu-Th "11AM-3PM and 6PM-11PM" becomes "{{hours|Tu|Th|11|AM|3|PM}} and {{hours|||6|PM|11|PM}}" Do I have to explain how to convert this sequence into the numerical string and back? --Alexander (talk) 17:35, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Notwithstanding the fact that your proposed "Hours" template doesn't seem to have an appropriate way to group together non-continuous days of the week (e.g. Fr and Su, etc.), that still doesn't even begin to get us there. That just gets us to the point where, in order to say
Tu-Th 11AM-3PM and 6PM-11PM; Fr, Su 11AM-3PM and 6PM-1AM; Sa and holidays 11AM-1AM, closed Mondays
we have to type
{{hours|Tu|Th|11|AM|3|PM}} and {{hours|||6|PM|11|PM}}; {{hours|Fr, Sa||11|AM|3|PM}} and {{hours|||6|PM|1|AM}}; {{hours|Sa and holidays|11|AM|1|AM}}, closed Mondays
There has to be a way to enter and edit this information that doesn't require a traveller to directly mess with all that code, and to get it stored properly in WD there would have to be further syntax to connect all that together the right way (commas, semicolons, "and", etc.), and it has to be adaptable and responsive to all the various levels of complexity common to our listings. I still think you're being a bit idealistic about this. Texugo (talk) 18:04, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
I am not an expert in programming, but I did write the codes that support the whole flow of Russian WLM and WLE competitions and sort photos in a better way than any other country does. And I can seamlessly write "further syntax to connect all that together the right way (commas, semicolons, "and", etc.)", although I can't do it with Java/Lua for the Listing editor, but the algorithm behind this (and any other) change in syntax is absolutely trivial. Regarding the input, editors must use some type of markup, one or another. They can't write whatever they want, and a magic script that converts nonsense into formatted text is hard to craft indeed.
If you prefer writing 9:00-17:00 instead of 9|00|17|00, this is certainly doable. If you are an expert in Java and Lua, I would probably trust your opinion, but if you are not, I suggest that we stop this discussion now. An algorithm for changing syntax is very simple, and any simple algorithm can be turned into a code. --Alexander (talk) 18:21, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
I am primarily suggesting that, pipes or colons, any arrangement where a user has to type that much markup every time is unacceptable. There would at the very least have to be a listing editor interface component which is both intuitive for a new user and flexible enough to handle the normal range of complexity our listings require. If you can do it, I'll be happy to see it and to be a part of the development process to the degree possible, but what I don't want to see is something that requires a significant learning curve, nor some partial solution which fails to adequately handle the full range of complexity possible. It's simply that what you have suggested so far does not to me seem to encompass all that is needed. It looks too complicated in terms of what it asks of the casual user, and too simple in terms of what kinds of hourly schedule it expects to encounter. Texugo (talk) 18:40, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, the worst thing would be to make it complicated for people to just type hours. I hope that whatever is done doesn't make it hard to do that and ignore any codes. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:47, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
I would like to reiterate that the easy-to-share and reusable information does not come for free. You will have to make sure that opening hours follow one and the same format wherever this format can be applied. If you do not accept this restriction, you have to accept that certain features will never be available here and, in particular, Wikivoyage will be inferior to Foursquare, Tripadvisor and other websites where opening hours are fully machine-readable, which does not prevent regular users from modifying them. --Alexander (talk) 12:11, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Actually, on Wikidata this information will be likely stored as the (still to be proposed) property Opening Hours and the qualifiers which dnote opening/closing, day of the week and some other standartized information.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:41, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
No problem. In cases when the hours description is so complex that it can not be expressed easily under the standard format, it can be left on English Wikivoyage as human text. For properties that exist as wikicode we should just use it and not load the value from Wikidata. No need to express everything in the standard format. If Wikidata can help hours collaboration on 90% of all listings, then it is already wonderful :-) Syced (talk) 02:41, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
There is the problem of updating. If the hours stay the same, but somebody notices a weird exception, this somebody should be able to do the correction in an obvious way, which should not involve reopening the old version of the page and manually copying the entry as previously autoformatted. --LPfi (talk) 11:32, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Weird exceptions lead to weird results. I don't understand your comment. Editors will always see something human-readable, so they can edit it and add some more human-readable text if appropriate. When the format is wrong, the information will not go to Wikidata. That's all about it. --Alexander (talk) 12:11, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
I meant "weird" as in not well supported by the user interface, i.e. something that should be entered as free text (at least by the non-savvy).
The question is about what I see when I click "edit". Do I see the plain text version, the parseable format or a reference to Wikidata? If I get the first, then OK, but an edit will easily destroy the Wikidata entry or the Wikidata coupling (as there is no hint about what formats will be parseable or correctly parsed). If I get the second (e.g. the {{hours}} template or the "simple" string discussed above), I will have to hunt for some manual page. If I get a reference to Wikidata ("wikidata=Q19675"), then there is nothing obvious to edit. If I land on Wikidata, then I am confused, as this is another site.
As usual, the problem is to come up with a robust user interface, which does not scare away casual editors. There might be some "obvious" solution I cannot think of just now, but the templates and strings suggested require understanding we cannot presume.
--LPfi (talk) 13:47, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
My idea would be wikidata properties for Opening time and Closing time each with qualifier applies to. The qualifier could link to items for 'Mon', 'Tue', 'Wed', 'Thu', 'Fri', 'Sat', 'Sun', 'bank holidays', 'weekdays', 'Ramadan', etc. Each item can have multiple opening and closing times each with a different qualifier.
Opening time:9.30(applies to:weekdays)
Opening time:10.00(applies to:Sunday)(applies to:Saturday)
Closing time:17.00(applies to:weekdays)(applies to:Saturday)(applies to:Sunday)
This can record all the info needed. The info isn't in the french wikivoyage format because it is data. Formatting is something for the wikivoyage template to do. —The preceding comment was added by Filceolaire (talkcontribs)
That would indeed store the info, though it would not be a concise as some previous suggestions. What we really need to establish is that we can create a template that will read it and convert it to the simplified format we want. For example, using your example, the template would have to take
OT:6.30(M,T,W,Th,F)
OT:7.00(Sa,Su,h)
CT:10.00(M,T,W,Th,F,Sa,Su,h)
OT:12.00(M,T,W,Th,F,Sa,Su,h)
CT:3.00(M,T,W,Th,F)
OT:6.00(M,T,W,Th,F)
CT:10.30(M,T,W,Th)
CT:12.00(F,Sa,h)
CT:9.00(Su)
and turn it into:
M-Th 6:30AM-10AM, 12PM-3PM, 6PM-10:30PM; F 6:30AM-10AM, 12PM-3PM, 6PM-12PM; Sa and holidays, 7AM-10AM, 12PM-12AM; Su 7AM-10AM, 12PM-9PM.
This a rather complex conversion, logically speaking, and would definitely have to be done in lua because it would require the use of variables. Texugo (talk) 11:23, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

ease of understanding and use[edit]

Although from a purely database point of view I can see the logic of a central store of information that can be accessed by multiple wiki projects, I however am concerned that for the non expert this could become too complicated and totally unclear how data is added and edited in an article. This would not encourage new contributors. --Traveler100 (talk) 11:07, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Available now[edit]

Hey folks :) Arbitrary access has now been enabled for you. I hope you'll do awesome things with it that make your work here easier. Let me know if you encounter any issues please. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:42, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Great! I have put it at use without loosing time, so now Wikidata arbitrary access is being used (experimentally) at Tokyo/Roppongi#See for the National Art Center listing. It works great! Syced (talk) 03:58, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Do we have an exhibition page for this on Wikivoyage?
This would be to discuss scenarios where we would leverage this new functionality. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 04:53, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, it works great, and the image is not displayed because Joachim's code reads it directly from the Wikivoyage page, not from Wikidata. At the moment we can't take coordinates and images from Wikidata. Perhaps we can't do this at all. --Alexander (talk) 07:14, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
It is interesting to see the National Art Center listing in Roppongi. It does raise the question of when it is appropriate to have the same details in multiple languages - the URL is now of the Japanese page when it used to be that for the English page. However this is a good start - we should pick a few smaller city pages to try this to see what happens. AlasdairW (talk) 22:49, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes I hesitated a lot before moving the URL, but since it is a single proof-of-concept on a single listing, I decided to use it for demonstration purposes. By the way, I proposed a new property on Wikidata to address the lack of localized official website info in Wikidata. In the future, how about showing the official URL if the listing and the wikicode don't have a more specifically English-language URL? Syced (talk) 05:12, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Syced, I would like to emphasize that neither name= nor image= fields can be read from Wikidata by the map script. Therefore, your example on the Tokyo page creates a "NoName" object without any thumbnail image. --Alexander (talk) 19:12, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
I currently do not see any way to retrieve the wiki source text, including the imported data from Wikidata. Does anyone know of such an API call? - Joachim Mey2008 (talk) 12:41, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, Wikidata has its API, so you can retrieve everything you want by making this type of call. However, I am not sure that this is going to work on a larger scale, because you will have to make tens or even hundreds of calls to Wikidata in addition to loading the Wikivoyage page, so things will slow down dramatically. --Alexander (talk) 13:06, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
I asked about performance at the Wikidata DEV page. Syced (talk) 04:43, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Is there something like &wikidata=expand, which would expand the Wikidata variables? I believe such a thing exists for templates. That would probably be more efficient than making a request for each listing, as the requests would be made on the Wikivoyage server side, and probably cached. Syced (talk) 09:55, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
I just asked for &wikidata=expand at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T100399 Syced (talk) 07:31, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Phabricator reply: "Resolving this as declines, since the requested functionality can be covered otherwise" Syced (talk) 07:18, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Hours cleanup: YOU can help :-)[edit]

Wikidata or not, we really need to make listings conform with our Manual of Style.

HELP NEEDED: List of possibly ill-formatted hours that YOU can fix.

Please read the Manual of Style's Hours section (it is short and worth a read) one more time, then fix what you can :-) There are false positives: Hours that are clearly human prose should be left as is. Please remove the lines that you fix or that do not need fixing. Thanks a lot! Syced (talk) 03:43, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Power-users can download the CSV file of all listings data, remove unrelated columns, and perform custom searches/matches to spot errors not detected by my script. Syced (talk) 03:49, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I assume that you are referring to Wikivoyage:Time and date formats. To me the list seems to be just a good illustration of the problems that we might have in trying to automate times, rather a list of things to fix. I did see a few problems in a long list of things which looked OK. I would prefer to try to fix problems in a list in which 90% of the list have a something which will actually cause difficulties for a reader. It would be ideal if the list could be in country rather than alphabetical order, as it is usually easier/quicker to fix things in places which I have been near / appreciate what was meant. AlasdairW (talk) 17:35, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

It would be good to convert this into a maintenance category and make mention of the common false positives that would commonly appear. But I also agree with Alasdair and think that the time and date inconsistencies don't necessarily make it more difficult for the reader to understand or trust the listing. Sometimes it clearly does though like "930am-10PM" in York (Maine), which looks terrible, so I think this list still has some purpose. Gizza (t)(c) 22:43, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback! I added an explanation. Adding a maintenance category might be a good idea indeed, it would contain many articles though! Syced (talk) 12:07, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes incoherent hour formats are still understandable, but we have a Manual of Style for a reason: it improves the reading experience. So actually about 90% of the items in the list need to be fixed. Even in the same article there are so many different format in use: 07:00-22:00, 08:00 - 20:00, open 5pm to 11pm, 3pm-11pm, ... adhering to the Manual of Style would definitely improve Wikivoyage. Syced (talk) 12:07, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Seven digit phone numbers in Nicaragua[edit]

We still have some seven digit phone numbers in our articles on Nicaragua (some even lack the country code which is +505 and simply added to the phone number). Since at least 2011 seven digit numbers are out of use and replaced by eight digit numbers starting with 8 (mobile) or 2 (landline). However in recent years there have also been some eight digit mobile numbers starting in numbers other than 8. I know that many businesses (even those active in tourism) are notoriously bad with having up to date websites, but if you come across a seven digit phone number in a listing for a business in Nicaragua, please check with their website what the new number is. Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 12:52, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

WMF Board of Trustees[edit]

Hey All. I am running for the WMF Board of Trustees. I hope to bring more development resources to community lead ideas. Voting is here [2] Thanks Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:22, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Voted. Good luck Doctor! --Saqib (talk) 13:32, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks User:Saqib Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:21, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Lots of people are running! Good luck. I'll try to get my vote in before the cutoff on May 31. There are a lot of candidate statements to read! Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:07, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
I have voted as well. -- DerFussi 04:43, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Two maps in one article[edit]

I am currently trying to give the article on American Football a better geographic representation. So far I have found the coordinates of all 31 NFL stadiums as well as Wembley and made listings for them, which already appear splendidly in a map.

I wanted to the same for our Canadian friends of the CFL. However, I encountered two problems. First only three of the nine stadiums appear to have coordinates and I don't want to just guess them or use the coordinates of the city they represent instead. The second problem is that I would like (for aesthetic as well as practical reasons) to have a second map that contains the CFL stadiums and only them. How would that be done if it is doable at all? Best wishes. Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:08, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

You can only have one dynamic map visible on a page. It is possible to have a formatted link to other maps, see example on the Rheinburgenweg page. Alternatively create static maps. On the coordinates of stadiums I would think they are listed as articles on English Wikipedia. --Traveler100 (talk) 14:27, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
They are, but only three of them offer the coordinates or at least I couldn't find them in the other six... Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:43, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Are you looking in the upper right corner above the infobox? I just checked w:TD Place Stadium and w:Tim Hortons Field and they have coordinates there. You can also check on Wikidata (ex: d:Q7008048). Powers (talk) 15:50, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
It's done. Thanks. I would almost think that our article on American football is fast approaching guide territory. However, the coverage of Canada and minor leagues is still insufficient... Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:26, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Hobbitschuster, Traveler100, to show more than one dynamic map in one single page, MediaWiki:Gadget-MapFrame.js, must be patched like the it:voy one. --Andyrom75 (talk) 13:17, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
I don't know about the technical details, how is this done and what would be (possible) downsides? Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:06, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Hobbitschuster To allow two maps an admin must patch the above script, and I don't forsee any downside on doing that. --Andyrom75 (talk) 23:01, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees elections 2015[edit]

Wmf logo vert pms.svg

This is a message from the 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee. Translations are available.

Voting has begun for eligible voters in the 2015 elections for the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees. Questions and discussion with the candidates for the Board will continue during the voting.

The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees is the ultimate governing authority of the Wikimedia Foundation, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization registered in the United States. The Wikimedia Foundation manages many diverse projects such as Wikipedia and Commons.

The voting phase lasts from 00:00 UTC May 17 to 23:59 UTC May 31. Click here to vote. More information on the candidates and the elections can be found on the 2015 Board election page on Meta-Wiki.

On behalf of the Elections Committee,
-Gregory Varnum (User:Varnent)
Volunteer Coordinator, 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery 17:20, 17 May 2015 (UTC) • TranslateGet help

I'm a new user would like to start series of articles on fossil collecting[edit]

Hi. I'm a long-time contributor to Wikipedia's coverage of paleontology. One of my more extensive projects at Wikipedia was a series of articles on the prehistory of and history of fossil discoveries within each US state. I was considering starting an analogous series of travel topic articles for Wikivoyage- a travel guide detailing in each US state where to collect fossils, view them, visit prehistoric themed attractions and events like rock and mineral shows. Not to mention staying safe and within the law while participating in these activities. Sort of a paleontology version of Hiking, Salsa dancing in Latin America and similar articles.

I'm completely new and wanted to verify that this concept was within Wikivoyage's scope. I was also hoping I could ask here for feedback and assistance with this project if it gets the green light. Abyssal (talk) 06:10, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Sounds like an interesting travel topic. Two suggestions: first, if you create a separate article, start out broadly - i.e. don't initially create 50 skeleton articles about fossil collecting in each state, instead create a single, detailed article that can be subdivided if it eventually gets large enough to warrant splitting up. Second, rather than starting out with a new article (or series of articles) you might want to begin by adding info to existing destination articles about museums with fossils and places where fossil collecting is possible, for example adding something to Petoskey about collecting w:Petoskey stones, or updating Capitol Reef National Park with info about fossil hunting (with the obvious caveat that fossils cannot be removed from national parks); your topic article could then reference the info you've added to the destination articles (and vice versa). -- Ryan • (talk) • 06:25, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Sounds great, I am sure hobby paleontology fits very well in the scope of WV. It is surely very much related to travel. You might have noticed that our travel topic articles have a little more flexible structure compared to destination articles. For an inspiration, we have a great collection of Scuba diving articles, and some of them have reached star status. Danapit (talk) 07:15, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
I could also see the use of a "global" travel topic on "fossil hunting" that deals with issues like where to go (geologically speaking, e.g. Granite is a bad idea, Limestone is a good place to look) what to take care of (a helmet is a good idea in a quarry), legal hurdles as far as you are aware of them, terminology and etiquette and further resources. We could than maybe one day find enough information for articles on fossil hunting outside of the US, even though it would of course be lovely to have coverage on the US. Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 13:50, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
There also needs to be a robust discussion on the legality, at various sites and in various countries, of removing/keeping anything you might find. Texugo (talk) 13:58, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Speaking of which, do we (have to) include a legal disclaimer like WP does? If there is no obligation, I would think that the fact that we are not an attorney and our information may not be 100% accurate falls under WV:Obvious Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:04, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
I don't think we have legal disclaimers in any article; instead, we do our good-faith best to warn people about possible dangers in the "Stay safe" and "Stay healthy" sections, and in warningboxes, etc. Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:17, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Convert coordinates: DMS to decimal[edit]

Hi all,

Do we have tools to convert coordinates from DMS to decimal? I copied Module:Coordinates from the English Wikipedia but I haven't managed to make it work...

Specifically, I would like to try converting Wikidata coordinates like

35°39'55.01"N, 139°43'34.82"E

to something like

lat=35.66483 | long=139.72685

.

Any idea what is the best way to do that? Cheers! Syced (talk) 04:20, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I believe {{#invoke:Coordinates|coord}} outputs both dms and dec separated by a slash. ie. 29°37′N 79°40′E / 29.62°N 79.67°E - things change a lot as I originally thought there was a format parameter or call or a template but that is just guessing at this time - Matroc (talk) 07:10, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Converting the coordinates from the wikidata format is tricky, so much so that it is probably just worth making an template for it. There are two steps to this. First separate the degrees, minutes and seconds using Module:String - e.g. {{#invoke:String|match|s= 35°39'55.01"N, 139°43'34.82"E |pattern=%d+°|match= 1 }} (results in 35°). Then use Module:Coordinates to format the coordinates into dec format like so: {{#invoke:Coordinates| dms2dec | N | 35 | 39 | 55.01 }} (results in 35.6652806) and {{#invoke:Coordinates| dms2dec | E | 139 | 43 | 34.82 }} (results in 139.7263389). If you can not understand what I just wrote, then I'll happily just write an Lua module that does all of that.--Snaevar (talk) 19:53, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Maybe This... can help? -- DerFussi 04:17, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Thank you all for the answers! Matroc: I don't see any DMS in your example? Snaevar: That would call Wikidata 8 times right? I guess I need to learn how to code templates with variables. Fussi: I don't see dms2deg at that page unfortunately :-/ Cheers! Syced (talk) 10:21, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Syced to use that function the extension must be previously installed. Those functions are quite useful. For example I've used #deg2dd in it:Template:GeoData and #dd2dms in it:Template:Geo. --Andyrom75 (talk) 13:24, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Syced - {{#invoke:Coordinates|coord}} results 29°37′N 79°40′E (DMS) / 29.62°N 79.67°E (DECIMAL) - just have to clean up the last group after the "/" to get 29.62 - 79.67 (appears to be rounded up to a specific precision... 29.61667 - 79.66667 - this may change
To retrieve latitude/longitude info:
  • The new access to Wikidata {{#property:P265|from=Q????}} doesn't work for P265 yet and exact status is unknown .. might need a conversion as well when available
  • {{#invoke:wikibase|latitude}} and {{#invoke:wikibase|longitude}} used to work but apparently doesn't at this time - again a conversion would be needed
  • dms2deg and deg2dms are functions within the module Coordinates - {{#invoke:Coordinates| dms2dec | N | 35 | 39 | 55.01 }}
  • Module Wikidata - not implemented at en:wikivoyage
- Formula from ancient school days (correct me if incorrect): dms to decimal = degrees + minutes/60 + seconds/3600
- would need some data validation/checks plus Math and String functionality if you are going to write something in the meantime be it templates or modules (Parser and String functions - Math module and String module etc.) Mediawiki is like Perl - more than one way to do the same thing! - LOL
  • I think that this will all be ironed out in the long run... Best wishes...Matroc (talk) 04:57, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
The whole point of Wikidata is that it is meant to be format independent. We should be able to get the coordinates from wikidata in either format. As wikidata does not do this I think is probably worth raising a bug on phabricator. That won't help you solve the problem today however. Sorry. Filceolaire (talk) 03:53, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Pagebanner extension for Wikivoyage[edit]

Hi all, I'm Sumit, and I had posted a proposal for a pagebanner extension for Wikivoyage sometime back, which is now moving ahead under the guidance of User:Jdlrobson and User:Syced. As of now only a basic setup of the extension has been developed which adds a default specified banner on all main namespace pages, and replaces it with a custom banner, if a construct like {{PAGEBANNER:File.jpg}} is used. As it is being developed, all its live changes can be tried out at this test wiki. Your comments and/or views and/or feature additions shall be very helpful during the development process. The development shall follow the lines of the proposal much of which has been taken from Template:Pagebanner and its discussion page and will be modified depending upon the feedback.
For giving feedback, one can view the pagebanner workboard which has a few open tasks to be achieved in the coming time. If a task you wish to comment on already exists, simply go to that task and leave your comment. If it does not exist, you can create a new one from here(both require a phabricator account). While creating a new task, remember to add WikidataPageBanner to the Projects list so that it appears on the pagebanner workboard. Example of a task thats already open for discussion is this.
Whenever I'll add any significant feature, I'll leave a comment here, for everyone to see on the test wiki. For all other purposes, the progress can be monitored any time by looking at the tasks on the pagebanner workboard.
Looking forward to your cooperation. Feel free to comment and discuss.--Sumit.iitp (talk) 04:59, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Page banners and Wikidata[edit]

So, I just discovered that Western Finger Lakes has a banner image. Yay! But why didn't I see it added in my watchlist? Oh, because when it was added back in September 2014, it was added to Wikidata. The wikicode in our article still shows the default banner. Now, I do have Wikidata changes on in my watchlist, but I can't tell edits that add or change a banner from edits that add a language link or change the Korean spelling or adjust the geolocation, not without viewing the diff of every single edit. Does anyone else see this as a problem? (Potentially, this loophole could be used to perpetrate undetected image vandalism.) Should we consider a moratorium on Wikidata banners? Powers (talk) 01:50, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

I actually stopped using WikiData for banners for this reason. I think the more realistic problem would be someone updating banners with mediocre images rather than vandalism.
Still as we contemplate more integration with WikiData for other things (temperature readings, currency exchange rates, geo-locations etc) then it would be highly desirable to track all WikiData changes related to an article. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 02:02, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Wikidata is no worse than Commons for this. Do you get a notification when anyone uploads a new (possibly worse) version a banner stored on Commons? Are non-important changes (categories, spelling in the Korean description - no offence to Koreans) filtered out from the notification feed? Syced (talk) 05:14, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Property-specific Wikidata notifications would be great indeed. This is very feasible (at least as an RSS feed), and I suspect some might have implemented that already, I will have a look. Meanwhile, I don't think there have been many tragic incidents so far, and to me it does not sound like a good reason to abandon the huge benefits of sharing banners between languages. Creating banners is hard-work. Multiplying this work by 17 would be a huge pity (17 languages). Syced (talk) 05:14, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
I agree with Syced on this subject. -- Ryan • (talk) • 05:34, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
This is going to become even harder to monitor if we start using Wikidata to fill fields in individual {{listing}}s. Paris/1st arrondissement is d:Q161741, one Wikidata item to watch if changing it affects the article, but if individual venues with {{listing}}s have corresponding Wikidata items, changing d:Q19675 (musée du Louvre) or other individual-venue records could affect the article in some manner. d:P969 (located at street address) should be the address on "rue de Rivoli" (au moins que je sache) but one stray edit on Wikidata could send the traveller somewhere else (hopefully not to the loo instead of the Louvre?). That sort of thing is hard to catch, as it runs cross-wiki. Indeed, the same issues exist with Commons - blindly tag {{listing|image=museum.jpg}} onto something and expect to wonder why the result becomes nonsensical if someone on Commons replaces the photo of the museum you wanted with some other museum in some other faraway land. I think Wikipedia was taking images that appeared in promotions for featured articles on its front pages, copying them to the local wiki and protecting them as "insurance" against this sort of mishap, but on a limited scale.
It's not a major issue at this point, but any proposals for a technical solution to the problem will need to recognise that a page could be pulling "shared resources" from multiple places, and not just the one matching Wikidata entry. K7L (talk) 13:01, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Instead of doing the work 17 times, using Wikidata means that 18 communities (each Wikivoyage plus Wikidata) are watching the changes. However, it would be nice to have a feed that shows the changes we're (individually and collectively) interested in. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:20, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
I agree with wikidata being a huge benefit for the banner effort, but since the implementation I've had concerns about the patrolling of new page banners, mainly regarding the correct size, but also quality. It's really hard to spot wrongly sized banners added locally, but impossible if wikidata item is used. Then it can only be found by a matter of chance. I'd welcome any technical possibility to be able to track newly added wikivoyage banners at wikidata. Danapit (talk) 21:48, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
There is a genuine need to get a watchlist notification whenever something from Commons/Wikidata is modified that actually impacts one of the pages you watch. I think it is time we raise a Phabricator issue about this, I am pretty sure Wikimedia developers will agree it is important. Meanwhile, anyone willing to try and code an RSS-based temporary solution? I a quite busy rigt now with other open source software, but that sounds like a fun project to create :-) Syced (talk) 04:38, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Phabricator issue for adding relevant Wikidata events to an article's watchlist Very Wikipedia-focussed at the moment so I added a comment to expose our point of vue.
Phabricator issue for adding relevant Commons events to an article's watchlist This issue is marked as solved, so please test it and add a comment asking for reopen if it does not actually work.
Please subscribe to these issues and bring your ideas (diplomatically) thanks! Syced (talk) 06:45, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
I do not understand how to add Commons events to my watchlist. The topic on phabricator does not say anything about that, and I never heard of such a possibility. --Alexander (talk) 16:52, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

A minor note on Commons: images there are not supposed to be replaced with completely different images that fit the same name. There are issues with maps and graphs, where there sometimes are edit wars regarding a file with a generic name (Map_of_Kosovo.jpg & similar), but museum.jpg should not be replaced. It could be moved, with a bot changing the reference on affected projects (and thus insuring we thereafter do not depend on the generic name). I do not know how well images are watched over there, but I have seen only a couple of cases where an image has been replaced in a problematic way. --LPfi (talk) 09:11, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Certainly, it happens. Image:Santa.jpg used to be a picture of Satan Claus, now it redirects to a team photo of a soccer (football) squad at Image:Santa Eufemia team.jpg - which looks weird if one looks at an old version of a page like https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Area_code_867&oldid=7193002 (as originally created) which expected the other image at that name. The same issues arise if someone monkeys with the template designs. K7L (talk) 12:29, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
That file was deleted as copyvio and later replaced by another, also deleted as copyvio, at least five times. With such a generic name this is hardly very exceptional. The reference to the file should however be removed by a bot quite quickly after deletion. Sure, it is confusing in the history, but it does not affect the current version of pages. (And good images should tend to have good names, avoiding the issue.)
For the current pages the more common problem is probably when an image is overwritten (not deleted) with a similar one, while the caption mentions something specific for the original image. This should not happen for photographs (according to policy), and does not happen too often in my experience.
--LPfi (talk) 15:24, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Huh? Santa.jpg used to be a picture of "Satan Claus"? XD ϒpsilon (talk) 16:21, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, and what happens very often is that good images eligible to be used on Wikivoyage under fair use are removed from Commons without any notifications. This is horrible. --Alexander (talk) 16:52, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
While non-free images can be used here under free use provisions, they cannot be stored on Commons. They can be temporarily restored to allow for transferring them to projects allowing fair use images. If you see the bot removing the reference to a deleted image, you can ask for this procedure (Commons:Undeletion requests). --LPfi (talk) 09:42, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Grat point, LPfi. Back to wikidata, I am quite helpless with it. Is there a way to watch changes in a certain property (wikivoyage banner) for any item, not just those one has on a watchlist? Danapit (talk) 11:28, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I can, and nobody will respond because these images are such terrible copyvios, and most of the Commons users consider their obliteration as the most important task of their life. Fortunately, we have one Commons admin in our ruvoy team, so all issues are easily solved on the personal level, but those images that we don't take care of are simply lost for the community. --Alexander (talk) 13:38, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
My request for a way to watch individual Wikidata properties got a reply: "for the watchlist, this should already work exactly as you described. If it does not, please file a separate ticket about that." Syced (talk) 09:03, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Fossils by state structure draft and titling dilemma[edit]

I've composed a draft for my planned series of articles on seeing and collecting fossils by US state and was wondering what you guys thought about its structure. Am I missing any sections? Any I should exclude or rename? What do you think about the order? Also, I was wondering how I should title these articles. I was originally thinking something like "Collect and see fossils in [State]", but some miscellaneous attractions of paleontological interest may not be fossils in their own right and I want these articles to be as inclusive as possible of destinations and attractions of paleontological interest, so that kind of title might not be strictly accurate for the article contents. I've considered something along the lines of "Paleotourism in [State]" in parallel with terms like "agritourism", but it would be a neologism and not necessarily super clear what the article is about just from the title. Another possibility would be to just use the same titling convention as their companion Wikipedia articles and call them "Paleontology in [State]". I dunno, maybe I was overthinking it in getting away from the "Collect and see fossils in [State]" construction. Comments and feedback are appreciated. Abyssal (talk) 02:19, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Maybe just "Fossils in [State]" or, if that's not broad enough, then "Paleontology in [State]"? I think that short and simple is a good approach. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:18, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
I think "Fossils in State" or "Paleontology in State" are better, here on WV we try to use short titles. Perhaps some of the headings should be subsections of Understand. Actually if you plan to write a lot about the the topic, it would perhaps make sense to first create a "Fossils in the United States" article as a "parent" article with general information, an overview (which part of the US is best for what kinds of fossils...), federal laws etc. and then create articles for individual states. ϒpsilon (talk) 19:08, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
I'd strongly suggest reading through the responses in your previous thread on this subject. As Ypsilon notes, and as was stated in the previous thread, starting out with a high-level overview is the recommended way to approach most travel topics, rather than starting out with numerous skeleton articles. -- Ryan • (talk) • 19:19, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Well before you create articles about collecting fossils in a state, I would suggest creating a travel topic Fossil hunting, and add details of individual sites to the relevant city articles. Individual site details like directions, admission fees etc will always belong in the city article. If you start Fossil hunting, you may find that somebody adds a load of useful information about fossils in Africa. Creating articles on a wiki is not like writing a book - other editors are likely to contribute, and this may take things in an unexpected direction. If you are unsure of the worldwide situation for a particular section, just put in what you know, perhaps with a general "things vary around the world" statement before a "in the US..." paragraph. See topics like Volcanoes or Hot springs for some examples. AlasdairW (talk) 22:37, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
I don't necessarily think that COLLECTING fossils should be the bulk or main focus of the article. I think where to see fossils, what locations possess the holotypes of dinosaurs, what locations possess unique or one-of-a-kind specimens, etc would be a better focus. Collecting fossils, to me, seems to be drifting out of scope. I think Paleotourism which you mentioned would be a better title as the name implies a clear travel focus rather than an article about a hobby like Fossil hunting. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 23:33, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Several users have advised me to create a more general overview article before starting individual ones. No need to worry, that has actually been my intention since the first topic, but feel more confident in my ability to structure an article about fossil hunting unassisted, than I do about writing a regional guide. @Ypsilon: what sections do you feel belong under "Understand"? As I understand it lots of articles have separate sections for safety and being respectful of local laws and customs. Abyssal (talk) 02:05, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Why don't you simply start an article in your userspace and link it here? That way, we can comment on it specifically or even edit it before it goes "live". Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:28, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Actually none of the sections. I was probably too tired when looking at your article draft yesterday or something. Nevertheless, it's good to a have little of everything in the Understand section as it serves as an introduction to the reader. Broadly speaking, you can arrange travel topics almost as you like, as long as they're logical and useful to someone actually going there. Also, I too think it'd be a good idea if you'd start one or more sample articles in your user space, especially if you plan to make a whole series of articles. ϒpsilon (talk) 13:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Of course there are fossils in many areas other than US states. The egion around Drumheller in Canada has some of the main dinosaur sites, Ngorongoro Conservation Area in East Afica has major proto-human sites, and others all around the world have interesting fossils. It is fine to start ith the US, but some care is needed — both in writing the ovrview and in choosing a title convention — to ensure we do not limit coverage to those sites.
What can we offer that just linking to w:List of fossil sites does not already cover? Pashley (talk) 15:07, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Places that fossils can actually be collected by travelers. Abyssal (talk) 16:02, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
I quite like Paleotourism, however I feel this term might also include some elements of archeology or prehistory. For that reason and for reason of searchability, the "boring" fossil hunting might be more suitable. Regarding the proposaed structure, I would move Stay safe and Law and ethics toward the end. Danapit (talk) 15:11, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

When is a country a country[edit]

Interesting to see a new page Liberland. My learnt something new for the day. Although I really do not want to get into a political battle here, I do not also want to see this site becoming a place to have political battles. Do we have a policy on recognised countries? --Traveler100 (talk) 16:00, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't know if we have an official policy on the matter, but these crop up occasionally - see European microstates#Micronations for other examples. Since these are all unrecognized countries we usually tag them with the city template rather than the country template, and that may be the best option for Liberland as well, assuming the article develops - if it stays as just a skeleton then a redirect might make more sense. -- Ryan • (talk) • 16:09, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
that is a reasonable solution. My test for a country would be: does it have an army; does it have a tax and fiscal system; and does it have a football (soccer) team. Scotland and ISIS only have 2 out of 3, do not know about Liberland. But I guess recognised by the UN would be the best guideline. --Traveler100 (talk) 16:19, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
We do also have articles of some other micronations. I don't see any problems in having places like these present on WV in a form or another, especially if they have something to see/experience; for instance the w:Principality of Hutt River. ϒpsilon (talk) 16:38, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
A demand for UN recognition knocks Taiwan out of the guide, a requirement for a standing army excludes Costa Rica. Are you sure you want to do this? (Y/N) K7L (talk) 16:40, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
No, that would be a bad idea, well over 10 countries in the world mostly in the Pacific and Caribbean lack an army. If an area immigration-wise is separated from the rest of the world and in practice has it's own requirements for crossing into the area, then we regard it as a country; therefore Taiwan, Kosovo, Hong Kong etc. but also Abkhasia etc. are regarded as countries. Then there are countries that don't have really have any border controls (out of personal experience Liechtenstein, Monaco, San Marino, and I believe, the Vatican), but we also count these as countries because they've been recognized by the UN. ϒpsilon (talk) 16:53, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
This is a solution in search of a problem. I can't imagine there are very many country articles currently that belong elsewhere on the regions hierarchy, and those that do exist can easily be taken care of on a case-by-case basis. Creating or adjusting policy to respond to actual problems that have cropped up takes enough of our time and energy already; making new policy for the sake of making new policy is not something we should waste time doing. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 17:32, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Sorry do not want to start a big policy discussion. I think the solution above has address the question and as you say, best addressed on a case by case basis. --Traveler100 (talk) 17:58, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Check out Sealand , which probably has more claim to independence than Liberland, but falls under United Kingdom Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:24, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Pakistan photos[edit]

Perhaps some of you may have noticed that I was collecting photos of Pakistan here on Wikivoyage and wondered why. Actually still there're many Pakistan articles that lacks page banners so I thought of gathering big resolution photos that looked impressive to me so we can craft some nice page banners out of them. I'll be gathering some more images in the next couple of days but in the mean time would appreciate if some of you may help me make some page banners. No hurries by the way so what say User:Danapit and User:Ypsilon? --Saqib (talk) 15:19, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Beautiful photos of beautiful locations! Though for the next few days I'll be exploring southern Spain and be limited to a throwaway tablet with no real editing software and only occasional Internet access in practice. ϒpsilon (talk) 17:12, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Oh, very beautiful, indeed! I'll try and help out in the coming days. Danapit (talk) 18:26, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Eeeeer... how would I know where the pictures were taken, and therefore which article they might belong to? Danapit (talk) 18:36, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Each photo has a name that makes sense and could be used to find the article, although a suggestion from Saqib for the appropriate corresponding articles would help a lot. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:49, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Dana, this collection contains photos of 3 regions of Pakistan (Gilgit-Baltistan, Azad Kashmir and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa) and while many of the locations where these photos were captured are very tourity places but still we don't have articles on them. I've very limited knowledge of that parts of the country but I'm planning to start articles on them by next month. I was thinking of having banners beforehand which can be then added as articles started to pop-up. --Saqib (talk) 23:16, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Quite frankly, although I'm more than happy to help with any task related to WV banners, I still have no idea how to approach this task in a structured way. The pictures are far too many - I don't believe there will be this amount of articles created. I have for example noticed that there must be many pictures from the same location (Hunza Valley). How is this way of creating banners be more efficient then going to an appropriate article, find a matching category in Commons and picking one photo there? Danapit (talk) 06:33, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry this issue doesn't crossed my mind. Most of the image are not yet categorized on Commons as they're freshly uploaded. I'll soon categorize them and will let you know once I'm done. Until then, we can put this on hold. BTW I've noticed you already created some nice banners. Thank you. --Saqib (talk) 15:03, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Two for the price of one[edit]

Three and a half years of work has drawn to a close: the final Buffalo district article, focusing on the East Side, has gone live, and not a moment too soon. The opportunity to write about what my hometown has to offer visitors has truly been a pleasure and a privilege, and I thank all of you for it. (Don't worry, I'm not going anywhere.)

In tandem with the East Side article, I've also wrapped up work on the closely related Historic Churches of Buffalo's East Side itinerary. It's the first itinerary article I've ever written for Wikivoyage — and as I envision creating several more in the future, I'd appreciate some feedback and/or pointers on what to do or not do the next time around.

-- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 02:37, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations! Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:47, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Awesome work! :-) Syced (talk) 07:10, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Islands[edit]

Islands that are not nation states or the bigger part of a nation state themselves are usually handled as either a "city" or a "region". While this has thus far not been a huge problem, I fear it may be unsatisfactory in some cases, as islands have some distinctions that separate them from "normal" cities and even regions. This begins with the fact that (with the exception of a small number in the North Sea that have "on foot") the "get in" section usually consists of "by boat" and (in some cases) "by plane". Furthermore for many islands there would be a "swim" subsection not entirely without use under the "do" header. And having an "island" category would make it easier to have "cities" within an island that was originally thought of as not big enough to justify more than a "city" template, because calling settlements on an island "districts" of a "city" is usually quite plainly wrong. I know it is neither a huge problem, nor urgent, but maybe new articles on islands could be improved by having a more fitting template to start with. Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:11, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't see the problem. Templates can and should be modified as needed to fit the destinations. Powers (talk) 17:08, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
I don't think it's a huge problem, either, and I also think it's impossible to have a single template for islands as different as Madagascar, Aruba, Socotra, Manhattan and Roosevelt Island, and having one that applied to some of them and not others would only confuse the issue. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:50, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Well first of all islands that are (the biggest part of) sovereign nation states like Madagascar would stay the same. And where they are obviously best qualified as districts of a city, that is also not going to change. But as to your concern that we would treat vastly different things like Los Angeles and Hahn basically the same, as they are both classified as "cities" (along with a number of islands). Though of course, Hahn is unlikely to ever be districtified. Just as I doubt that Neuwerk will ever need further subdivision. But Ometepe might, especially given the rate at which tourism is growing in Nicaragua right now... Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:12, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

It is a problem, but not a huge one. It is confusing to editors whether to use the region or city template for islands with small populations. A bigger issue is that the city status message is a little offputting to readers: Stewart Island has a population of 381 in 674 mi² and we call it a city. I can't think of any cities with over a square mile per inhabitant! If we don't want to have a separate template for islands, could the city status templates take a parameter to use the word island instead of city e.g. usablecity|island. (I would also allow town and village as parameters for similar reasons.) AlasdairW (talk) 21:49, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

We technically have a small city template, but it neither appears on the top of the page when creating a new article, nor is it indicated in the status... Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:07, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
It might make sense to consider something like a "rural region" template to use for bottom level regions without cities. As Powers and Ikan noted the template should probably match the smallcity template, but it would give us the ability to track these things and customize the status template message, and might avoid some confusion for new users. -- Ryan • (talk) • 22:17, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
A bottom-level article for a large rural area uses the small city template; we already have plenty of examples, like Rural Montgomery County, Prince Edward County and Thousand Islands. It's not a region (in the sense we use the term in article skeleton templates) if there are no cities or regions beneath it. The urban vs. rural status also has absolutely nothing to do with whether something is island or mainland. Technically, Labrador is mainland, Montréal is an island. Only one of the two has a Get in#By subway (the train departs from Longueuil). K7L (talk) 00:04, 30 May 2015 (UTC)