Wikivoyage:What is an article?

From Wikivoyage
Jump to: navigation, search

In order to keep Wikivoyage organized and consistent there are guidelines about when a subject gets its own article. In this area there are two competing principles:

  1. Articles should be relatively self-sufficient so that travellers can print them out, put them in their back pocket, and use them for travelling around.
  2. At the same time, articles should not be so long that they're impossible to read, print, or use.

So, here are some rough guidelines for what topics should have their own articles, and what shouldn't. Nothing here is set in stone, but exceptions to these guidelines should have good justifications.

The test for destination-style articles[edit]

The most common and quickest assessment of whether a place merits an article is Can You Sleep There? That is, are there any types of accommodation open to the public: hotels, hostels, campgrounds, cabins, wigwams, yurts, space station bunks, etc. If a place, such as a national park, has no facilities, but has rules for pitching a tent in the wilderness, that can work too. On the other hand, while there are numerous hotels and other lodging options in a city like London, you can't sleep in a museum or park within that city; such parks and museums should thus be listed as attractions within an article about the city.

Sleeping isn't all that travellers do, though, and there should be some content to fill out our other standard article sections: content regarding what and where to eat, how to have some fun in the evening, stuff to do, things to see, etc. If you know there really is no place to find food, nothing to do, and nothing to see at a location, it's likely that the article won't meet the criteria established in this policy.

What does get its own article?[edit]

Geographical units in the geographical hierarchy should have their own articles. There should be articles about:

When dividing geographical units, keep in mind that boundaries of a "city" or "region" in Wikivoyage do not necessarily match legal divisions—nations, provinces, and cities—as the latter are created by governments for administrative purposes. If it makes sense to list a suburb (and its airport) as part of the city which it serves, do so. Treat vast, sparsely-populated areas like Anticosti Island as a single destination if that best fits the number of attractions. Divide huge cities like Montréal into manageably sized districts as needed. Geographical units should be large enough in scope to have at least 4 or 5 good quality destinations or attractions, while dividing overly-long lists into subgroups and avoiding gaps or overlap.

What does not get its own article?[edit]

Individual attractions should not have their own articles (in general). Their information should be listed in the guide to the destination in which they are located (or nearest destination for attractions located in the middle of nowhere). Again, the can you sleep there test is a good quick tool for assessing whether something merits an article. With a few very rare exceptions (see below) there should not be articles about individual:

  • Tiny or sparsely populated villages and hamlets that have no defining features that would attract a tourist. Their names can be redirected to a nearby or surrounding community, or a group of such communities can be covered in a single article (like Rural Montgomery County).
  • Companies (hotels, restaurants, bars, stores, nightclubs, tour operators, etc).
  • Museums, statues or other works of art.
  • City parks, town squares or streets. (Districts named after streets like San Francisco/Castro Street and Singapore/Orchard are OK.)
  • Festivals or events.
  • Transport systems or stations or routine schedules.
  • Individuals, objects, and concepts (with the exception of specifically travel-related concepts)
  • Bodies of water (actually, this one's a bit more complicated—see Project:Bodies of water).
  • Uninhabited islands.
  • Highly restricted government/military installations, or otherwise impassible locations, such as sites of long-term nuclear fall-out.

We prefer that attractions, sites, and events be included in the article for the place where they're located (see where you can stick it for details). For example, a lake might be listed under the "See" section of the closest town, and a bar would be listed under the "Drink" section of the town in which it is located.

If an attraction is really famous and travellers may not know the city or region it is in, then create an article with the attraction name as title, but make it a redirect to the appropriate destination article, and put the actual description of the attraction in the destination article. For example, Taj Mahal redirects to Agra.

Exceptions[edit]

There are exceptions to every rule, and Wikivoyage is no different. Be aware, however, that if you think something deserves an exception you should be ready to defend your position. Cases where exceptions are made include attractions, sites, or events that are far away (too far for a day trip) from any city and would require an overnight stay, or so large and complex that the information about them would overload the city article. A good rule of thumb is that information about attractions, sites, events, and transportation should always be initially placed into an existing article, and only when that information becomes too large and complex (more than 3-4 paragraphs) should a new article be considered. For example, if you think a theme park deserves its own article, first add content for the theme park as a sub-section of the "See" or "Do" section in the article for the region or city that the park is located in. After that content has developed sufficiently it will help to demonstrate why a separate article is (or is not) warranted.

As with most decisions on Wikivoyage, consensus drives the process, but we try to err on the side of consistency and not make these exceptions unless they are clearly warranted. Before starting an article based on one of the above exceptions, start a discussion to explore whether it would be appropriate. In general, "exception" articles that contain only minimal content will be merged and redirected into an existing city or region article.

Some examples of possible exceptions include:

...but not state or city parks that primarily serve as recreational sites for day visitors.
...but not individual ruins in or near modern cities.
...but not individual abandoned buildings or structures.
...but not amusement parks in or next to a city, such as Coney Island or Tivoli.
...but not trains only for transportation without extensive exposure to scenic beauty or on board entertainment.
  • Ski resorts like Aspen that function as a town, with all the services that a town would provide (more than one lodging option, restaurants, bars, shops, etc.)
...but not ski resorts that are part of or by a town, like Taos Ski Valley in Taos, which is part of the community of Taos that has a lot of "destination-like" features beyond the ski area.
...but not purely-regional events such as the WindsorDetroit International Freedom Festival, which are listed at city level.
...but not typical metropolitan or regional airports. Some specific guidelines as to when an airport merits its own article:
  • It should serve at least 100 daily flights, some of which must be connecting flights.
  • It must have several food and shopping options available; if the airport does not have enough amenities to fill out a "Buy" and "Eat and Drink" section then it does not merit its own article.
See also: Wikivoyage:Airport Expedition

Non destination-style articles[edit]

In addition, the following categories of articles are given their own articles:

We also have some extra article types for dealing with cases that do not fit elsewhere.

When in doubt[edit]

When in doubt, leave a message in the travellers' pub or simply plunge forward and create the article. Someone else will always be around to answer your question or to edit any mistakes.

See also[edit]