Wikivoyage:Collaboration of the month

From Wikivoyage
(Redirected from Collaboration of the month)
Jump to: navigation, search

The Collaboration of the month is a way to get many contributors working on one article at once, often to get it ready for an upcoming event or a nomination for destination of the month. While anyone can edit any article at any time, this provides a way to highlight specific articles allowing many contributors to help improve them together.

Current collaboration of the month[edit]

Template:Geo and Wikivoyage:Geocoding[edit]

As of 1 December 2017 there are 1232 articles without geo template

Task[edit]

  • Find articles without geo template. For example City articles in Asia or change the entries under categories to region and type of article you are interested in.
  • Place {{geo}} using the format {{geo|45.5|-73.6|zoom=13}}
    • number of decimal places should reflect the accuracy needed for the location (less for regions, more for small settlements) and the zoom factor the area covered by the article.
  • Best method to obtain coordinates is to use GeoMap
    • Type location into search (top right)
    • Make sure select correct location from list, as often number of places with same or similar names
    • Zoom to match area covered by the article.
    • Select the Geo option from Copy template list
    • Click on center of map to get template text. Triple click to highlight and Ctrl C to copy the geo template information.
    • At the bottom of the article Ctrl V to paste template.
  • Alternatively coordinates can be obtained from Wikipedia article. Also good to check they are showing the same location (sometimes Wikipedia can be wrong!). If unsure double check with another internet map site such as Google Maps and Bing Maps.
    • If the article is a city article and no page listed under In other projects, check if a Wikipedia page exists (in language of location) and if there is a duplicate Wikidata entry that needs merging.
    • If multiple places with the same name look at expanding or create a disambiguation page.
  • Once the article is saved click on map (top right) and check if map area matches the listing markers in the article in a reasonable way (check with fit all markers button to see if any listings have incorrect location). For region articles switch on Destinations in the map to see if covers area correctly.

Justification[edit]

Currently about 23800 out of 24970 destination articles have geo coordinates (95.314%). From this PetScan search, there are 1253 articles that still need to have the geo template added.

I think geocoding every destination on WV, and therefore providing the latitude and longitude on every place we have is a basic and achievable goal. Gizza (roam) 01:30, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

  • Support. Seems useful and accomplishable, and it's a task that users can help with a little at a time. —Granger (talk · contribs) 14:26, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Support. Same reasons as Granger stated. --Traveler100 (talk) 06:16, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

  • I am finding many of the city article that have no Geo template are very small places, most do not have Wikipedia pages in English or even the language of the country. Should consider for some of them, if no listings, to merge into other pages. Others are because the location is unclear, or in one case so far the wrong country, because there are a number of places with the same name. Would suggest in these cases spending time on a disambiguation page. Have also found that article that have a Wikidata only referencing English Wikivoyage have a duplicate Wikidata page referencing the location in other languages. Also found a few spelling mistakes or alternative spellings. --Traveler100 (talk) 11:18, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Nominate[edit]

Think carefully before making a nomination. A successful collaboration of the month must be more than just an article you would like to see improved. In particular, it's a bad idea to nominate articles that lack enough content—most collaborators won't have intimate knowledge of the destination, although they can do style edits and fill in some of the blanks with very basic research.

Nominations most likely to be collaborative successes are those that have clearly defined areas for improvement, are of interest to a wide range of people, and that are already pretty well developed. Particularly good choices for nomination are articles that could quickly become options for the Destination of the Month, or Off the Beaten Path featured articles.

When nominating, describe exactly what you hope would come of a Collaboration. Explain why you think it would be a successful collaboration. (Not why you would like it improved!) Then leave a list of several bullet points detailing exactly how other contributors can help with the collaboration. The bullet points should be very concrete, and should detail basic tasks that anyone can help with. Collaborative tasks should be geared towards the goal of having a large number of contributors doing a small amount of work. Examples of good collaborative tasks include:

  • Listingify all the listings (A task that anyone can do in small quantities spread out over the month.)
  • Fill in basic details for listings (Anyone can spend five minutes on a given day to look up addresses and phone numbers for a small subsection of listings.)
  • Add images (It is easy enough for an interested collaborator to look up one image on flickr [1] or Wikimedia Commons [2], upload it to shared, and add it to an article in about 10 minutes.)
  • Copyediting (A lot of articles have issues with basic grammar, spelling, and style, particularly when written by non-native speakers. This is another good task easy to finish when spread out across a number of contributors, each contributing in small chunks.)

Take pains to avoid listing tasks that require either a significant committal of time or in-depth knowledge of the destination from individual contributors:

  1. research beyond basic information (like contact information for a listing),
  2. original writing,
  3. map making (aside from more simple region maps),
  4. devising new districts.

These are tasks for contributors with a special interest in a particular destination, not for contributors simply interested in devoting a small amount of time in support of the collaboration. If these types of tasks are to work, the nominator will have to volunteer to do them, or find someone beforehand who is willing.

Because a month is a long time, and we can get a lot of work done when many contributors are at work, consider whether the tasks for your nomination will take longer than just one week. Huge city articles can be ideal for nominations, as can regions that already have well developed city articles.

Use the following format for nominations:

===[[Chicken]]===

This article has a ton of great content, but is poorly formatted, is full of basic errors,
and most listings lack addresses. Chicken will be the host of the 20XX Winter Olympics, so 
it would be useful to get the article into good shape beforehand. There's a lot to be done, 
but the work is basic and can be divided easily over many contributors.

*'''Task 1''' — rationale
*'''Task 2''' — rationale
*'''Task 3''' — rationale
*'''Task 4''' — rationale

~~~~

Select[edit]

We decide which articles to select for the collaboration of the month through discussion. To weigh in, add your argument next to a bullet point below the nomination. It's also appropriate to suggest here when the article should be featured.

===[[Chicken]]===

This article has a ton of great content, but is poorly formatted, is full of basic errors, 
and most listings lack addresses. Chicken will be the host of the 20XX Winter Olympics, so 
it would be useful to get the article into good shape beforehand. There's a lot to be done, 
but the work is basic and can be divided easily over many contributors.  

*'''Task 1''' — rationale
*'''Task 2''' — rationale
*'''Task 3''' — rationale
*'''Task 4''' — rationale

TravelNut 25:25, 31 Feb 2525 (EDT)

* Tasks 2 and 4 are not well suited to collaboration, and the article doesn't have enough 
content yet for us to work on.  ~~~~

Note that objections must relate only to the nomination's potential for success as a collaboration of the month, not to one's own interest in the destination.

Scheduling[edit]

If a nomination has the support of the community, it can simply be added to the upcoming queue at a time deemed appropriate in the nomination discussion. Priority will be given to articles based on the strength of the nomination, urgency of the collaboration (with respect to upcoming large international events), and the goal of ensuring that we have a good balance of collaborations on articles from all parts of the world.

Archiving[edit]

Move the nomination entry for previously featured articles to the article's talk page. Strike goals (using <strike></strike> tags) that were accomplished.

Move unsuccessful nominations to the Project:Collaboration of the month/Slush pile.

After they have been featured as the collaboration of the month, move the original nomination to Project:Previous collaborations.

Month recent COTM
November 2017 Wikivoyage:Previous collaborations#Cape Town
October 2017 Category:Articles with dead external links : phase 1 - guide cities
September 2017 Chennai
August 2017 Category:Listing with phone missing country code

Upcoming[edit]

Current proposals (subject to change).

Month COTM
December 2017 #Template:Geo and Wikivoyage:Geocoding
January 2018 #Buenos Aires
February 2018 #Category:Articles with dead external links - phase 2
March 2018 #Mauritius
April 2018 #Category:Articles with formerly dead external links
May 2018 #Metro Cebu
June 2018 #Small and medium sized airports
July 2018  ?
August 2018 #Eat listings for cities in Germany

Nominations[edit]

Metro Cebu[edit]

I added this article a year or so ago; see discussion at Talk:Cebu_(city)#Re-organize_some_things.3F. I think this top-level article is now mostly OK, but there are still problems. Worth fixing; this is the country's 2nd largest urban area, a major transport hub & a major tourist destination.

  • The main cities, Cebu (city) & Lapu-Lapu, need quite a bit of copy editing & various other fixes.
  • Some things are still listed in the wrong place; for example, the Cebu article discusses sights located on Mactan Island, some distance away.
  • There are a dozen or so smaller cities in Metro Cebu. Nearly all those articles are currently quite weak

If we are still doing CotM (Are we?), this might be a good one. Pashley (talk) 11:18, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

See also Talk:Metro_Cebu#Guide.3F_DotM.3F Pashley (talk) 15:53, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
I have done some edits & see others doing quite a lot. Bravo. Pashley (talk) 13:37, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Small and medium sized airports[edit]

Airports that are not large enough to have their own article should have a clear city page where detailed information can be found. Other articles referencing that airport should link to this city page using the {{IATA}} template.

Create the page with the three letter IATA airport code IN CAPITALS.

If there is an airport article then redirect the code to that page
e.g. For FRA IATA, the page FRA contains #REDIRECT[[Frankfurt Airport]]
If there is no airport article the redirect should be to the relevant section of closest city article.
e.g. For STR IATA, the page STR contains #redirect[[Stuttgart#By plane]]

For airports not large enough for their own article:-

  • On the city page closest to the airport create a listing of type=go
    • Use the IATA template in the alt field
    • Use the wikidata function in listing editor to connect to Wikipedia and fill in coordinates and possibly image information.
      • Once Wikidata is added, on the Wikipedia page of the airport you can add the Wikivoyage template linking to city page (it will automatically jump to the listing)
    • Add other information such as web link and telephone number to listing
    • Below listing give additional information such as methods of getting to the airport from city centre and flight destinations.
    • In Sleep section of city list a couple of hotels near the airport.


More consistent documentation of airports helps the reader understand the guide better. Removing of duplicate information on numerous pages reduces effort keeping information up to date. --Traveler100 (talk) 07:24, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Buenos Aires[edit]

Now that the district reorganization has been completed, we can give this article and its districts some badly needed TLC. Buenos Aires is a popular destination, so our coverage of it is important, but the articles are a little messy and parts are out of date (one listing in Buenos Aires/Centro gives advice for 2010!). They do have a lot of information, though, and with some work they will become much more useful.

  • Move "Learn", "Eat", "Drink", and "Sleep" listings to districts
  • Within the districts:
    • Fix dead links and remove closed POIs
    • Listingify, add coordinates
    • Alphabetize listings and organize them into subsections by price or by type, as needed
  • Copyedit
  • Maybe expand the list of embassies

Granger (talk · contribs) 14:23, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Support lots of work to do for one South America's biggest cities. Gizza (roam) 12:00, 19 September 2017 (UTC)


Eat listings for cities in Germany[edit]

Currently from 440 cities in Germany 115 do not have an Eat listing. See German city articles needing eat listing. Work has already been done to rationalise (expand or merge) cities and all have at least one See and Sleep listing, so what now exists are valid destination. This would be the next step to get all articles in the country usable. --Traveler100 (talk) 06:29, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

  • I'm not sure about this one. It's definitely a worthwhile goal, but I think it's better for a Cotm to be something that any contributor can help with, without needing extensive research or local knowledge of a particular country. I think restaurant listings should ideally be added by someone who has been to the city, or failing that, with significant research to figure out which of the city's restaurants are worth visiting. So I'm not sure we should ask contributors who may not know much about Germany or even be able to read German to add restaurants to articles in that country. —Granger (talk · contribs) 21:09, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Category:Articles with dead external links - phase 2[edit]

As of 31 October 2017 there are 6216 Articles with dead external links. There are no city articles of guide or star status with dead link but there are 140 guide articles and 13 star articles with dead links. Mainly district articles but also parks, airports and travel topics. Removing these would increase the quality of this site and help with search engine rankings. --Traveler100 (talk) 09:44, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Support. A lot of good arguments has been made in favor of this collaboration. Considering the fact the we managed some 500 articles during the first phase I believe that we may be even more ambitious than targeting these 153 articles. If we also include all usable airports, parks, countries, itineraries and topics, as well as all huge cities, the number of articles grow to 332, which should still be achievable in a month. MartinJacobson (talk) 11:52, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
Support, but I agree that we can and should be more ambitious. I was originally going to suggest trying to tackle all district articles with dead links as a collaboration (I don't know, maybe that would be a little too ambitious). MartinJacobson's idea sounds good. —Granger (talk · contribs) 12:43, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Category:Articles with formerly dead external links[edit]

As of 1 November 2017 there are 1086 Articles with formerly dead external links. Some of these will be good links but many are IP address squatters and will lead readers to unrelated commercial pages or sites with virus risks. This list needs clearing out and the web links fixed or deletion of the listings. --Traveler100 (talk) 08:42, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

  • Support. Important for the same reasons as fixing dead links, and additionally because some of these links may actively mislead readers into thinking they've found the right site when they haven't. —Granger (talk · contribs) 10:35, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment. I agree that formerly dead links are at least as important as dead links. However, during "Articles with dead links - Phase 1" we also managed to remove all formerly dead links from our guide and star cities. There are currently no articles which has formerly dead links, but lack dead links. I would say that correcting dead links and formerly dead links from e.g. non-city guide articles (Articles with dead links - Phase 2) is a higher priority than removing formerly dead links from outline articles. Consequently I believe that this should not be a collaboration in its own right, but rather should be considered part of the collaboration to remove all dead links. MartinJacobson (talk) 12:24, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Mauritius[edit]

The country article has been COTM before but still has a large number of See listings. There are 9 articles for the country but some big geographical gaps and some pages with little information. Could we look at reorganising and fixing the whole set of articles for the island? --Traveler100 (talk) 07:54, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Definitely a country that could use some attention. What would the tasks be, besides moving See listings to the city articles? —Granger (talk · contribs) 19:27, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Most frequently visited outline articles to usable status[edit]

A while back I asked at the pub if there is any list of outline articles by pageview traffic, and ויקיג'אנקי kindly created this list. I think that it would be a suitable cotm to update the most frequently visited outline articles to usable status. The nomination is rather apparent to its own rationale. These are articles which are low in supply, but high in demand.

However, the most visited decile alone contains some 2000 articles, way too many to handle in a single month. Further, many of these are major regions or countries. The task of updating these to usable status is large enough to be cotms in their own right. There is currently 636 outline city articles in the top decile. One option is to try to update as many as possible of these. We can further thin out the list by focusing on the largest articles, which are most likely to be near to usable status. For example, there are 136 articles which contain 15000 bytes of information or more, which should be doable in a month. MartinJacobson (talk) 14:57, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Support - I like the idea, could even start with the 165 outline city articles with listings. These probably would just need some tidy up of listings and checking of the get in section. —The preceding comment was added by Traveler100 (talkcontribs)
  • Support – I like it too. It's a well-targeted way to provide a lot of value for our readers. It also looks like editors can easily filter those links to just show articles within a particular country or region, which seems useful for this kind of collaboration. —Granger (talk · contribs) 19:25, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment I don't mind this but it is important to note that some of the most vital of articles don't get high page views because they are killed in SEO rather than lacking in significance or popularity. If the content of an article hasn't changed much post-fork, it won't get any hits from Google but only from internal links via other WV articles, other Wikimedia sites such as Wikipedia and possibly social media shares (but that itself would be rarer because it doesn't get as many clicks in the first place). Some of the most popular articles are niche topics like Bikol phrasebook but are popular because there is no WT equivalent [3]. Gizza (roam) 21:06, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
    That's a good point. Maybe we can somehow come up with a list of important articles that haven't changed much since the fork, and turn that into a future collaboration too. —Granger (talk · contribs) 21:46, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Outline Districts[edit]

So I have had it as a pet-peeve on and off for some time trying to promote outline districts to usable and have already advanced a bit in that. I think given that it is less than 200 pages, the rest should not be all that hard. In some cases we might need to redraw district borders. If and when we are done, I propose to enable some mechanism that reduces the potential for outline districts to be created in the first place. I don't think it'd be such a huge thing to ask that district schemes be created in such a way that each district have at least one eat and one sleep listing or a good explanation why there is none. Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:13, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Updating the Collaboration of the month[edit]

At the beginning of each month, the Collaboration of the month needs to be updated. Any registered user can do so. To update the current Collaboration of the month you should:

  1. Remove the current collaboration from this page and move the next one up.
  2. Move the current collaboration to the Previous collaborations page.
  3. Remove the Cotm template from the current Collaboration of the month pages and add the pcotm template to their talk pages.
  4. Add the Cotm template to the next collaboration article.
  5. Update the Template:Current collaboration with the new COTM.
  6. Update the Template:Cotmpromote page with the new COTM.
  7. Clear the cache for the Project:Project page by clicking here.
  8. Clear the cache for the Main Page by clicking here
  9. Schedule some new collaborations. There should be about 4 months worth upcoming in the queue.