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:

  • Have a look at our Help, FAQ and Policies pages.
  • 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 are wanting travel advice on a specific matter see the Tourist Office.
  • If you have an issue you need to bring to the attention of an administrator, try Vandalism in progress.
  • If you are having a problem that you think has to do with the MediaWiki software, please post that on Phabricator instead.
  • 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!

Click here to ask a new question

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

Contents

Mobile[edit]

Hey all. Our main page for mobile sucks.[1] Not sure what we can do about that?

Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:37, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

One thing that might be helpful is a feature called TemplateStyles. It's something the Readers Infrastructure team is working on at the foundation. It allows templates to have custom CSS styles without having to place them in MediaWiki:Common.css. This means that non-admins can update the CSS for templates used on the Main Page (and anywhere else) that can use more CSS rules and be responsive to any device - like mobile).
We have some help documentation if folks are interested in learning more. We have deployed to a few wikis and are looking for more communities to adopt and advocate. I'd be happy to help put English Wikivoyage on the list if there is community consensus (and folks interested in helping to implement). CKoerner (WMF) (talk) 16:22, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Let's get back to this idea, especially if User:Seddon (WMF) is going to run another reader-oriented banner for us. I had a look at some of the other Wikivoyage's mobile main pages, and here's a few that I think you should look at:

If you're looking at this on a desktop device, then make your browser window skinny, to get a notion of what the smartphone layout would look like. Compare it to https://en.m.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Main_Page which has no images and no color.

Are any of these more (or less) appealing than the others? If we like one of these designs, then it might be easy to copy the style here. Alternatively, we could combine elements from different ones to make something better. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:48, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

I'm glad this discussion is happening. I think I like the fr and zh versions the best. I might suggest combining most aspects of the fr version with zh formatting for featured articles. —Granger (talk · contribs) 18:04, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
Agree the start page of English Wikipedia on mobile needs some serious improvement. The other reason why the mobile version is not useful to use is that to get the map of a town with points of interest to show my current location is very difficult. As mobile surfing is the main use of the web today we really need to get this sorted. For me it is unclear how to edit the mobile version. Can someone provide some information on this so we can get an activity going? --Traveler100 (talk) 06:15, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

New Mobile Design - PLEASE BE KIND, THIS IS ONLY A PROTOTYPE CONCEPT[edit]

@Doc James, CKoerner (WMF), WhatamIdoing, Traveler100, DaGizza:: Hey all. So in a show of just how serious I am about wanting to run some readership growth experiments here. I decided to go ahead and build a prototype main page for mobile. The following caveats come before I share this:

  • Rome wasn't built in two days - which is about what I've spent working on this. It's rough and has many edges.
  • This is a concept and not a product - I've not bothered with linking or anything like that for now and the images just view themselves for the moment
  • Make sure you aren't accidently viewing this on the wikipedia app - It gets like..... really broken.

Link (VIEW ON MOBILE): https://test.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Seddon_(WMF)/testmobile

Seddon (WMF) (talk)

first impression is positive. Clear simple text and logo at top. Nice the way you have done the features. Think it would be a good idea to have the continents' world map and list underneath, and somewhere a link to tourist office.
Unfortunately the continents map doesn't world well on mobile but we can place some button links to the continents. Seddon (WMF) (talk) 13:02, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
The French mobile site does a resonable job. And as an aside how do I get a signature when using mobile UI?
I would have assumed the same way as desktop? With "~~~~" . Unfortunately image maps aren't responsive in either size or placement. Seddon (WMF) (talk) 15:44, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
I lie in terms of positioning. I've now included some buttons and the map. Seddon (WMF) (talk) 15:56, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
I think it looks like a big improvement over the current mobile main page. I agree with Traveler100 that a link to the tourist office would be nice. —Granger (talk · contribs) 16:09, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Agree it is definitely an improvement. Thanks for taking this on User:Seddon (WMF). A few thoughts. Our logo is make up of three colors. It would be cool to use one of each of those colors in each of the main headings.
Initial logo is a little big on the phone I am on. I am able to click on the world map and it works. It does not take up the whole width of the screen though and IMO it should. Happy to see it moved lower. Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:46, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your work Seddon. It looks much better and cleaner than the current mobile main page. As other have said, we could add a few more links like the Tourist Office, Discover and the temporary featured events. But it's more important to have a clean and user-friendly look than have every single thing on the page. Gizza (roam) 01:32, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Collaboration of the month - April 2018[edit]

We have a few hundred Articles with formerly dead external links. These are links that previously had domain or page not found but are now showing a valid web page. Many of these are referencing other, incorrect, businesses. Some are just incorrectly tagged. Would be good to have a concerted effort to fix these links or removed listings that no-longer exist. --Traveler100 (talk) 08:09, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

If you've not done this before, then there are instructions at the top of the category page. Alternatively, look in the wikitext for a dead link template with two months: {{dead link|Month 2017|Another 2017}} and check the marked URL. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:41, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
Here are a couple of examples were the web address exists but have been taken over by tourist site pages, Westfield MA , Truro MA. --Traveler100 (talk) 05:51, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
Half way through. --Traveler100 (talk) 06:43, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
A few contributors have made a serious impact on quality of articles reducing pages with link issues from 812 to 174 in one month. --Traveler100 (talk) 07:36, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Please help migrate related site links[edit]

The RelatedSites extension (which creates the links in the "Related sites" sidebar section) will be disabled sometime in the next few months. In most cases, this won't cause any problems since these links are now automatically created by the Wikibase client extension (under the "In other projects" sidebar section). For example, on the article Africa (permalink in case someone fixes it), the links under "Related sites" are repeated under "In other projects" and are exactly the same links. In some cases, however, these links differ. There can be many causes of this: one link is more up to date (e.g. reflecting a page move on Wikipedia); one link is wrong (e.g. linking to a disambiguation page instead of the exact topic); one link is more specific or general (e.g. linking to a city instead of a region); two Wikidata items need to be merged, etc. Please help to resolve these difference before the extension is disabled. Here are the pages that need to be fixed:

If the link in the "In other projects" section is the better link, simply remove the {{RelatedWikipedia}}, {{RelatedCommons}}, or {{RelatedCommonsCat}} template from the page. If the link in the "Related sites" section is the better link, please update the data in Wikidata to match it and then remove the template from the Wikivoyage page. If you have questions, please ping me or Traveler100. Thanks! Ryan Kaldari (WMF) (talk) 18:47, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Unfortunately there are some special cases which I don't think Wikidata can handle. For example both Rail travel in Canada and Across Canada by train use {{RelatedWikipedia}} to link to w:Rail transport in Canada. I understand that the Wikidata page can only take one Wikivoyage link. I think that we should look at how to handle these (and the cases where the two links are different).
Maybe the related templates could become a text box in "Go next", like the WP template Wikivoyage that is used to link in the other direction. I would also like this to allow for multiple WP links (max 5?), but I am happy to back down on this if it is a step too far for some. AlasdairW (talk) 23:06, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
Was thinking along similar lines. In the sandbox of the related template there is a version that makes the Wikipedia a reference box if it is not the same as that on Wikidata. --Traveler100 (talk) 06:01, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
{{RelatedWikipedia}} updated, will not display the Wikipedia link in the Related Sites section of the side bar if it is identical to the In other projects name. If the parameter rel=y is added the sidebar entry will be moved to an info box at the bottom of the page. --Traveler100 (talk) 12:24, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
See tasks for May Wikivoyage:Collaboration of the month. --Traveler100 (talk) 07:38, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
I processed 10 articles from the second category: Eight were redirects and thus redundant, while two were erroneous. This is a small sample but it seems to indicate that a mass removal might not be such a bad idea for this category. Cheers! Syced (talk) 05:50, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Inline=yes seems to not work in see listings[edit]

I unfortunately cannot recall who wrote the "inline=yes" parameter for listings, so I am asking here in the pub why it does not seem to work in the Erlangen article. Hobbitschuster (talk) 23:50, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

(raises hand) I only added it for {{listing}}, it isn't done/forwarded from {{see}}, {{do}} etc. Since nobody protested against it (inline=yes) yet, we can probably extend the latter templates... Andree.sk (talk) 06:53, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
Ah, I see. That makes sense. We should however have the debate at some point whether all those templates should be consolidated into the template listing with the type parameter. Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:42, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
Such thing was already hinted/discussed above ("all Wikivoyage listing templates other than {{listing}} are going to be unsupported very soon")... I guess we could decide against, but there's no reason IMO too. Andree.sk (talk)

Government, politics and opposition...[edit]

I've started a basic article stub here User:ShakespeareFan00/Government,_politics_and_opposition, but will need a lot of help to get it to a stub level that can be moved into article space. Anyone got ideas on what to put in it originally?

The topic name was carefully selected, based on a comment in the History of justice topic.

Once some basic content is added, I might get some ideas on where to expand. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:08, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

An inital thought is that it needs a concise 'history' - Politics is probably as old as civilisation, but I was unsure what the earliest 'government' was, given that there were if I recall governments in Asia and elsewhere before Egypt, Athens and Rome...

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:08, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

I think that we might be better with a more catchy title, but I don't know what. I think that there are possibly two different things to cover:
  • Visiting parliaments, government buildings, related historic sites and museums.
  • Attending party conferences or conventions. Whilst this is not something that a traveller is likely to do on a whim, it is a major reason for travelling.
Should we have a separate Conferences and Conventions article, which could also cover going to a conference for work or hobby reasons (including Wikimania) - we are generally lacking travel topics on group and business travel. AlasdairW (talk) 21:46, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
Not all Conferences are political in nature, and yes they should be a travel topic. (Also Trade Shows, spending 3 days in a Warehouse outside Brimingham isn't exactly a pleasure trip for some people, but is a business one.) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:20, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
Well it seems once more our editor base skews away from the type of people where most of the stuff is taken care of, like (most) business travel and all-inclusive stuff. For perhaps, understandable reasons... Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:28, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
Obviously, ShakespeareFan00 is going to the wrong kind of trade show. There are quite a few trade shows for chocolate manufacturers. :-) WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:06, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
I've been to quite a few National Flute Association conventions and one Fancy Food Show so far, and I assure you, no-one took care of anything for me except that I could check my coat and bag. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:20, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
For a trade show or convention, the advice that I first think of is not necessarily about the traveling aspects. It's more about meeting people, pacing yourself, and keeping track of commitments (so that "Sure, let's talk when we're home" doesn't turn into "Why didn't she call me, like she promised?"). There are also group travel issues (e.g., traveling sports teams). What else could we include? WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:00, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
I think that group travel issues should go in Organizing a group trip which was created a few months ago. Should trade shows and exhibitions be in the Conferences and Conventions article - Conferences and Exhibitions? AlasdairW (talk) 20:44, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the development so far, but I've reached the limit of what I know. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:15, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Out of date prices[edit]

The public transport fares on Barcelona and Barcelona El Prat Airport are out of date (for example, a T10 pass now costs €10.20, per [2]. I don't know the correct prices for all tickets, so can't update them, and updating just one would be even more confusing, for people trying to work out the best deal. Is there a template or some other way to tag that the section (or entire page) needs an update for prices? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:24, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Well there was a controversy some time ago whether or not prices should have dates attached to them. Don't know how (if ever) it was resolved... Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:56, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
This was the discussion. I proposed to delete the policy that says "If the underlying currency is stable, as a general rule we don't append a date to a price." There was a lot of discussion, but I was not confident that I could declare a consensus. I still think it's a bad policy because appending dates to prices lets the reader know whether they are current, and lets editors know they should be updated. Ground Zero (talk) 21:30, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
How about something like this - $2 (Apr 2018) ? --Traveler100 (talk) 07:00, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
👍 Andree.sk (talk) 19:44, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
I like the look of that. ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 13:27, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
The template would be a useful tool for experienced editors, but I expect that newbies will continue to put dates in parentheses because it's easier, which should be allowed too. Ground Zero (talk) 02:29, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
I don't really understand why the template is more useful than dates in parentheses. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:43, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
as it stands advantage is the date text is a little smaller and grey. Also in case of some currencies exchange rates are shown on mouse over. Could also easily create a maintenance category based on the entry that say lists prices more that 3 years old. --Traveler100 (talk) 06:03, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
Since when was "$2" an abbreviation for "US$2 ≈ €1.64, ¥214, £1.46"? Please don't abuse accessibility markup like this. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:35, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
Well, probably since Wikivoyage decided to shorten, aka "abbreviate", the text by listing only one or sometimes two currencies some years ago. 😜 WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:24, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Bus timetables?[edit]

Hello!

I'm wondering if there are any examples of bus timetables on this site? (Or rail would prolly work too.) I found this, and tried to update it like so, and then figured hundreds of other folks probably had this same problem at some point. I looked at all the templates, but didn't see anything there that meets my needs. Is this something that could be templatized? I could see a standardized format for bus and rail travel being helpful to the traveller, but I'm equally sure there is some reason this doesn't exist already. Thank you & happy Patriot's Day eve! --ButteBag (talk) 20:28, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

For the actual bus times, it is generally better to link to either the bus company website, or a local journey planner / transit authority website if they exist. If there are no websites then the phone number of the bus station would be useful. Usually bus services are described in a paragraph giving an idea of the frequency. Bus times change frequently, so it is best to give some way of the reader getting the latest information. AlasdairW (talk) 21:04, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
Agree that bus times change frequently, I thought it might be easier to notice something amiss within a table rather than "hidden" within a paragraph of text? --ButteBag (talk) 21:31, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
The paragraph is not supposed to say "the bus to Metropolis goes at 8:15, 9:15, 9:45... and 20:35" but rather "during the day there is at least an bus an hour to Metropolis. Hobbitschuster (talk) 00:16, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
Sure, I just figured if that information is expressed in a table, it might be easier to parse, which may encourage more frequent edits. --ButteBag (talk) 19:04, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
It is useful to state on pages here if a bus is just 3 times a week or every 30 minutes during the day but more than that should be taken from the transport company's web page. Clogging this guide site with timetables would not be beneficial. I would suggest setting up a specialist Wikimedia based site if you think it would be worth while. --Traveler100 (talk) 20:28, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
A table may be easier to read, but I think that it is a lot harder for inexperienced contributors to edit. We want it to be easy for the traveller standing in the bus station to update the information using his mobile. A paragraph is also better for describing the route or facilities of a particular route: "From Bigtown Busco runs one bus (with reclining seats) per day over the bumpy but scenic mountain pass, and Coachco runs two buses per day (with WiFi) via the much longer coastal road.". AlasdairW (talk) 22:03, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
there are of course plenty of places where the bis company has no website or it looks like it was last updated under Kaiser Wilhelm and what to do in those cases is of course a valid question. Particularly when the bus schedule seems to have steady for years. Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:41, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Marketing campaign?[edit]

An editor here has created an entry for a marketing campaign, Ireland’s Hidden Heartlands. This isn't a standard regional grouping, but a promotional one. Is that OK? --Calton (talk) 02:37, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

  • As long as there's no copypasting of copyrighted text or other such violations, there is no problem with it, especially if they're likely search terms. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 04:15, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Over exposed locations?[edit]

Saw this on the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-43700833 ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:08, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

There's also this great documentary speaking with locals about how they deal with the excessive number of tourists in Barcelona. --ButteBag (talk) 19:02, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
We have an article pair on sustainable travel (ecotourism and responsible travel), but these focus disproportionately on damage to the natural ecological environment. The whole "UNESCO-cide" concept (where a world heritage listing for a venue attracts more visitors and more vendors hawking more tacky souvenirs, degrade the integrity or features which got the site listed in the first place) needs to be addressed. The issues vary from driving out local residents to make way for AirBNB-style rentals and closing stores which served locals in order to open overpriced tourist venues (loud bars, pricey restaurants, endless postcards and useless baubles but no local grocer, hardware store or community resources) to damaging the environment (tours or tour boats disturbing wildlife, garbage or sewage dumped into the environment, or huge crowds in what was once pristine nature preserve). The consequences of just plain too many visitors ("it's so crowded that no one goes there any more") on the community from a sociological, architectural, economic or historic preservation standpoint also need to be taken into account - one motorboat won't destroy Venice, but a million of them will erode the foundations of the old city. K7L (talk) 00:50, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
Maya Bay is an example of situational irony. The Beach (the book as well as the movie) presented the tourist's dilemma to avoid becoming too many in the same place. In the real world they didn't just inspire a new generation of backpackers to visit Maya Bay and ruin the pristine location, but had the same effect across much of Southeast Asia. So, even if we set aside the local population's interest, visitors themselves want to avoid overcrowded venues which are far from authentic. Many destination articles describe seasons and places with risk of overcrowding, and warn about classical tourist traps which are overpriced without authenticity. Too few people can also take down a travel experience; people who visit Stockholm or Uppsala in mid-July to mingle with Swedes, might find the city to be nearly deserted. /Yvwv (talk) 02:13, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
This is a perennial problem. One of the Philippines' top destinations, a former DotM here, is being shut down for six months to clean it up after too rapid & corner-cutting development; see Talk:Boracay#Sewage_&_other_problems. I once found an article by some Frenchman complaining that Bali was being destroyed by excessive tourism; it was written in the 1920s! Pashley (talk) 03:56, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Do you know anyone famous?[edit]

A little off the beaten path here, but I wonder how many of us know someone (or know someone who knows someone) with a Wikipedia article? If so, I'd like to do a little plug for the c:Commons:Voice intro project. The idea is to get them to record a simple introduction. Some variation on "My name is ____, and I am ____" is just fine. It's fun for readers, and it should be helpful to anyone whose name gets mispronounced regularly. All the details are on the Commons page, or you can talk to Andy about it.

BTW, this kind of approach might be good for some articles here, for places whose names are difficult for travellers to figure out how to pronounce. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:14, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Swedish Wikipedia has an article on me. Wikipedia:sv:Tore Kullgren /Yvwv (talk) 21:59, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
Great - please record your voice for it. There is just one contribution in Swedish, so far. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:24, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
Back in the '60s, my uncle Mike was briefly a New York Yankee. Also, I'm Facebook friends with Professor Frank Popper from Rutgers. I'll see if I can drum up some interest. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 22:26, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:24, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
Here's an example of an interesting contributor to the project: the first content made especially for a Wikimedia project, in space! Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:24, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
You all are awesome. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:57, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Phrasebooks[edit]

Didn't we have the debate whether to include audio files in phrasebooks and it went nowhere more than once? Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:17, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, how about the audio for phrasebooks? That's much more relevant to Wikivoyage. I salute Wikipedia on this project, but it's a heck of a lot less important to know how to pronounce the name in a Wikipedia article you're reading than to know how to say "Where is the toilet?" in a foreign language when you're traveling. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:41, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
Yes. I have personal experience of exactly that at a service station in Spain several years ago. My pronunciation of ¿Dónde están los aseos? simply wasn't good enough and the situation was desperate. Good pronunciation is vital. But now we've got this shoehorn in, let's take it back to Talk:Phrasebooks#Phrasebooks. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:16, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

maplink: The JSON content is not valid GeoJSON+simplestyle[edit]

I see this error message at https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Hong_Kong/Kowloon#Get_around could someone please check? :-) Syced (talk) 03:26, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Looks like some bug in either the wikidata or {{mapshapes}}. I'll check it, later... Andree.sk (talk) 05:51, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
If not - there may be something incorrect in OSM -- Matroc (talk) 04:54, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Wikidata Q409036 --> OSM 272078 -- Mapshape/Inner is outputting "| stroke=#00888A, 00888a" for 5th line to be drawn thus GeoJSON error - Issue is the extra 00088a in the stroke parameter. The other 14 pieces are fine... -- Matroc (talk) 03:32, 22 April 2018 (UTC) -- see Talk Page
Fixed it. There was a duplicate sRGB color value, now it is gone. MSG17 (talk) 11:46, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Getting this error when copying lat/long numbers from GeoHack to McBride. (Also, the Geomap "find on map" function appears to be broken - all I see is the left-hand menu, no matter which browser or OS I use.) --Robkelk (talk) 01:39, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Issue apparently was type=Go and not type=go -- corrected to type=go --- Matroc (talk) 03:54, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

I don't know what we're doing, but let's keep doing it.[edit]

It's really astonishing that the edit-a-thon has been over for nearly two months yet our Alexa rank continues to improve. This is very different from what happened during the site launch in 2013, when the line on the graph shot up into the stratosphere briefly but came right back down afterward, without much if any lasting improvement. What do you all think might be behind that? -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 16:02, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Probably the 2013 spike came from Wikimedians, who might have been interested in WV primarily as a new sister, while those who now found WV might be more interested in the subject matter. A curious thing: the fraction coming via a search engine fell drastically that month (so they came via other links), but the rank persisted after that effect was gone. Is this due to some technicality at Alexa? Another thing that puzzles me is that we share audience with wikitravel (more so than with lonelyplanet, tripadvisor & co). Does that mean Wikitravel users actually are aware of us? --LPfi (talk) 16:34, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
I am quite new here and I found Wikitravel before finding Wikivoyage. I actually found Wikivoyage after clicking on a Wikitravel editor's profile page and saw that they had said that they moved to Wikivoyage and I decided to check it out. I now prefer this over Wikitravel as it is obviously more kept up to date. However, I would say that most Wikitravel users are not aware of Wikivoyage because I had used (not edited until about two months ago) Wikitravel for probably two or three years with no knowledge of Wikivoyage. BrysonH44 (talk) 17:18, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
This is brilliant news! --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:35, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
Wikitravel seems to have shifted to slower servers, as there is visible loading time for their images. I haven't seen that for years; at least not on a website which intends to be market leading. Their travellers' pub is mostly a charade between a few administrators, struggling not to mention the elephant in the room (Wikivoyage). /Yvwv (talk) 12:17, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
May is the critical month for us as Alexa uses a 90 day timeframe to measure the popularity of a website. We are still doing better than 2013 because 1) more editors have stayed on post edit-a-thon, 2) more original content was created, which is helps with the SEO and 3) the site itself is much more appealing with higher quality banners, adding a current events destination on the main page, adding dates to listings, removing poorly written and touty language and so on. Gizza (roam) 22:11, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
Wikivoyage's Alexa ranking is now in freefall. The second honeymoon is well and truly over. While the edit-a-thon was still very beneficial, we should think about ways to improve a similar event in the future so that more readers and editors stick around in the long run. Unfortunately, a huge chunk of the increase in views in the month of February were just people going to the edit-a-thon page (2.7 million of them) and not exploring Wikivoyage any further. The main page would be a better starting point for readers and potential editors in terms of exploring the site but as stated earlier, the mobile version for the main page is not well designed. Gizza (roam) 23:00, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Please comment at #Mobile above if you want to see the main page for mobile re-designed. WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:02, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
The good news is that some of that decline can be attributed to the seasonal nature of the way our page views fluctuate, and that the overall trend is still up. March 2018's page view numbers were at 2.7M readers vs. 2.6M in March 2017; April 2018's were at 2.5M vs. 2.2M for April 2017; May 2018's projected number of 1.9M views is similarly a solid improvement over 1.7M in May '17. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 12:42, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Update on map internationalization[edit]

A quick note to let you know that Collaboration Team is planning to release map internationalization next week for testing on testwiki (T112948). When it’s ready, we’ll post a note to confirm. But meanwhile, you might like to check out the detailed post I added last night to the Map Improvements 2018 project board: Special Update on Map Internationalization. It includes a lot of information on the feature’s status, how the it will work, how we imagine it might be useful, what the known limitations are, etc. I’m looking forward to getting your input on this challenging but important feature; the best place to leave your ideas and questions is on the project talk page. —JMatazzoni (WMF) (talk) 22:53, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

This is going to be put up on testwiki this week. Please have a look. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 16:07, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Gaspé Peninsula - a progress report[edit]

With yesterday's elevation of Land's End (Gaspé Peninsula) from Outline to Usable status, I'm now finished with the first of five phases of the Gaspé Peninsula project.

Though it was way back in May 2014 when I started on it, I don't anticipate that it will be decades yet before it's completed. It began as a side project that was subordinate to my main one of districtifying Buffalo and bringing it and its daughter articles up to Guide status. Even after Buffalo ran as DotM in 2015, my Gaspé work continued to be sporadic, as the maintenance of the Buffalo district articles - removing closed businesses, adding new ones, etc. - still took a huge chunk of my time at Wikivoyage, along with admin duties, buffing up DotM candidates before featuring, and other routine site maintenance stuff.

Furthermore, as the peninsula's main area of visitor interest, Land's End and its daughter articles were by far the most work-intensive of the five Gaspé Peninsula daughter districts. The district includes four of the ten bottom-level destinations I had targeted for Guide status (Percé, Chandler, Forillon National Park, and Gaspé; the others are Sainte-Anne-des-Monts, Bonaventure, Gaspésie National Park, Matane, and Mont-Joli; Amqui is already at Guide status but was ported more-or-less verbatim from its counterpart at fr: and needs extensive reconfiguration to comport with standard English Wikivoyage article structure). The remainder of the bottom-level destinations are less important touristically and probably don't need to be developed beyond Usable status, and - as can be seen with Grande-Vallée and Petite-Vallée, which I promoted to Usable recently - I could probably knock a couple of those out a day.

So I'm happy to say that we're probably still on track to feature Gaspé Peninsula as OtBP sometime in summer 2019. I'm going to hold off on officially nominating it - I learned my lesson the hard way the last time, and there's another round of badly-needed updates to the Buffalo district articles that could yet throw a monkeywrench in those plans - but I'm optimistic on this forecast.

-- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 17:12, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Actually, for Gaspésie National Park I have recently written a Russian article which has no status (because it lacks some essential info and also is waiting for my photographs), but it has essentially more info than the English article. The Russian version of Sainte-Anne-des-Monts I will soon nominate for a guide article since it contains almost all the info and just is waiting for a couple of photos I need to post-process. You may want to use these two texts (feel free to ping me if smth is unclear).--Ymblanter (talk) 09:04, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

MTR issues[edit]

With the earlier discussion of the Hong Kong MTR in Kowloon, I thought we should look at the lack of lines displaying properly with the mapshapes template for it. Only 3 lines of the MTR are displayed, which is probably the worst I have ever seen. MSG17 (talk) 12:38, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

3 out of 15 is my guess; most may not be mapped out in OSM or if they are; link not provided in OSM to Wikidata item and/or vice versa? Not that familiar with template interaction with OSM, but this should be a definite concern not only for MTR, but others as well... == Matroc (talk) 03:09, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, missing OSM data is a concern in general. However, sometimes I notice strange behavior where the OSM data exists and is linked, but doesnt show up. Other times the lines show up even without OSM data, like something else influences what lines show up in general. One thing with MTR I am looking at is taking away the link with the Airport Express wikidata and the *superrelation* on OSM, only leaving it on the actual lines. But that will take time to update, since the OSM-Wikidata link is notoriously slow. Of course, the wikidata page will still use the OSM superrelation. MSG17 (talk) 19:52, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

2018 FIFA World Cup Cities Regions[edit]

Dear colleagues!
Wikimedia Russia (WMRU) is a co-organizer of Discover Russia. 2018 FIFA World Cup Cities & Regions Wiki-Marathon (March 14 - July 15). Targeted CentralNotice banner campaign is initiated to inform Wikipedia, Wikivoyage & Wikimedia Commons visitors from among residents & guests of the Russian Federation about this opportunity.

  • Draft Banner (EN)

We invite you to express your opinion, voice your proposals about improving the banner or its settings, here or (better) at banner request page in the language of this notification. We will be grateful if you can help us to create or improve the banner and the project landing page in Your language.
On behalf of WMRU Banner Program, respectfully--Frhdkazan (talk) 17:35, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

I am strongly against this Central Notice, because the rules of this edit-a-thon were never discussed with the Wikivoyage community. --Alexander (talk) 17:52, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
Against - not enthusiastic about a non commercial site like Wikivoyage promoting FIFA. --Traveler100 (talk) 18:58, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
I take no position on this proposal, but I don't think there's any Wikivoyage guideline against promoting a for-profit event. Haven't we done some kind of promotion for Eurovision or something, and certainly we have for the Olympics, right? Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:06, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
I also have no opinion, but I don't see this as a promotion of FIFA at all. As I understand it, what's being promoted is travel to Russia in general, via a campaign that's timed to coincide with, but otherwise doesn't have much to do with, the World Cup. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 23:24, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
@AndreCarrotflower, Ikan Kekek: the problem here is not FIFA promotion, but the intention to create "new articles for Wikivoyage... about sights and touristic objects", which is against basic policies, such as Wikivoyage:What_is_an_article?. Moreover, none of the two jury members has any record of editing Wikivoyage. Unfortunately, the organizers never bothered to contact us regarding the rules of this edit-a-thon, and repeatedly ignored all proposals from our side.
Last but not least, Wikimedia Russia is notorious for not sending prizes outside Russia (because of taxes, customs and whatever operational reasons), so advertising this edit-a-thon in the English-speaking community is nothing but cheating. You can participate and win, but you won't get the prize. We had this situation last year when a Spanish/German photographer won Wiki Loves Monuments in Russia, and only got his prize from Wikimedia Russia 6(!) months later after enormous pressure from our side. --Alexander (talk) 07:14, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Oy! Thanks for explaining. :( Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:57, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
The rules say that articles must be created on Wikipedia. Articles on Wikivoyage do not compete for the main prices but for "illustrated de luxe edition books" (nothing said about what genre or language). --LPfi (talk) 09:48, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Oppose: The proposal page looks dodgy and ill though-out (which may or may not be due to an unclear translation), and I trust Alexander's judgement too. ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 10:35, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
The page barely mentions Wikivoyage; the contest is mostly about Wikipedia. It sounds like the early respondents would prefer to have Wikivoyage omitted entirely. That should be easy from the POV of the organizers, if that's what's desired. I kind of think it'd be a shame to miss out on an opportunity to get some more editors, though. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:03, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  • The banner campaign is specifically targeting only those browsing from inside the Russian Federation territory. Landing page translation into English & initiating banner-campaign proposal on Meta is totally my responsibility. Based on Alexander's comments on ruWP news forum & WMRU-mailing list, I'm afraid he seems to be somewhat biased against any initiative of any Wikimedia Russia member. --Frhdkazan (talk) 14:04, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
    • I think that I supported my point of view with arguments. i) no member of Wikimedia Russia has ever been in touch with anyone on Wikivoyage to discuss the rules of this edit-a-thon; ii) the rules make no sense in the context of Wikivoyage, because Wikivoyage does not write individual articles about sights, attractions, and tourist infrastructure; iii) the jury of this edit-a-thon has no record of editing Wikivoyage, so they can't make proper evaluation. You are welcome to argue with these three points rather than spread speculations about me and my relation to Wikimedia Russia (by the way, we have organized several WLE and WLM competitions together, so your assertions are just absurd). --Alexander (talk) 17:45, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
      • Based on the additional information that's come to light since I last chimed in, I'm going to oppose this campaign. In the abstract sense, I'm certainly open to collaborating with Wikimedia Russia, but collaboration is a two-way street. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 18:37, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
      • Alexander, I think you're overstating the situation. The English Wikivoyage has some articles about some individual attractions (e.g., Disneyland) and quite a lot about tourist infrastructure (e.g., all of airport articles). WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:19, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Articles about attractions are very much the exception, and we tend to have articles about only the largest airports, by design. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:31, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
WhatamIdoing, we had a special discussion at Russian Wikivoyage. Yes, you can envisage a few articles that would fit the rules of both edit-a-thon and Wikivoyage, but they are not many, and they are not articles that new editors may be able to write ((like suburbs of Saint Petersburg - really the last tourist destination you may consider four your travel itinerary). Any Wikivoyage edit-a-thon should be primarily based on adding and editing listings, not creating individual articles. That's a rather simple idea that we could never convey to the organizers of this edit-a-thon. --Alexander (talk) 19:06, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
  • ThunderingTyphoons! has a valid point in saying that banner, its proposal and the landing page can and should be improved. Please be constructive by linking to best practices I could learn from myself & communicate to other (mostly non-English speaking) volunteers of Wikimedia Russia partnership, who are quite busy - as we cover some thirty languages & 170 wiki-communities (excluding those in Wikimedia Incubator).
  • Alexander is also right to desire a stronger engagement of Wikimedia Russia volunteer-organizers with Wikivoyage community. But, as AndreCarrotflower rightly put it ― it's a two-way street.
  • On top of Alexander's above-mentioned stingy tongue in ruWP forum & WMRU-mailing lists, I only see him adding the same poison into the ointment of cooperation on WMRU-wiki discussions on this contest:
    1. lamenting about the sponsor not being interested in Wikivoyage
    2. bullied Wikimedia Russia volunteer organizers for not pushing the sponsor to provide funds for prizes for Wikivoyage
    3. now that guys found own money to offer some prizes for Wikivoyage participants (that could actually be posted out of Russia), he choose to rallying against Wikivoyage from joining in. He is especially vocal @ Russian Wikivoyage.
  • the organizers never bothered to contact us regarding the rules of this edit-a-thon, and repeatedly ignored all proposals from our side addressed at Ikan Kekek should be interpreted in the light of all above, plus likely choice of wrong venue/communication channel on behalf of Alexander (I don't see it in the WMRU mailing list, so it's not publicly visible). Regards,--Frhdkazan (talk) 07:32, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
Frhdkazan, the organizers can still contact any of us if they are interested. On the other hand, if you or any of them continue with personal accusations, you will be blocked here at Wikivoyage. Please, take this as an official warning.
PS. The discussion at Russian Wikivoyage that you linked to is exactly the discussion of how one could take part in this edit-a-thon despite its strange rules and lack of communication with the organizers. --Alexander (talk) 08:24, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Maps in the language of your choice—you can try it now on testwiki[edit]

You can now display maps in languages of your choice on testwiki. I made two pages to demonstrate the new features, on testwiki and testwiki2 (embedded maps on test2 are dynamic; those on test are static until you click to pop up an enlargement).

By default, internationalized maps display in the language of the wiki (which is English for the testwikis). So to experiment with these features, you’ll want to use the two new mapframe parameters we’ve added. Just insert them into your mapframe code.

  • lang=”xx” Shows map labels in the language you specify using the short language codes associated with each wiki.
  • lang=“local” Shows map labels in the languages of the territory mapped (essentially opting out of internationalization).

Right now, internationalization works only with mapframe, not maplink (which should be working some time next week). You can read more about this new feature and how to use it on the Map Improvements 2018 project page, under Updates. Our plan is to wait a week or two and assess user comments about the feature. At that point, we’ll decide whether to move forward with a general release or keep making fixes.

So please try the new features out and leave feedback on the Map Improvements 2018 talk page. We’re listening! –JMatazzoni (WMF) (talk) 23:24, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

I have just had a very quick play with the Zurich maps on testwiki2. When I zoomed into street level it did not change the street names when I looked at the map in Japanese. Have I misunderstood what the translation was meant to do? However this is a good idea in principle.AlasdairW (talk) 22:26, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
It's not a translation. It's just displaying OSM data in different languages. Have a look at this relation. You'll see it has the name:ja and name:en tag, and the map will display appropriate to the language. If there are no tags, it won't attempt a dynamic "translation". But you can add the tags on osm, and it will all work just fine. --Inas (talk) 02:56, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation. It looks like it would be more useful for region maps rather than street level ones - it is much more likely that alternate language tags will be added on OSM for city names than for the name of a hotel or museum. It would be good to have a way of displaying both the English and the local name, maybe by a mouseover or a language button - a traveller needs to know what the sign on the ground will be saying. AlasdairW (talk) 14:19, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
This seems like a great feature and I'm glad it's been developed. I hope it gets implemented on this wiki soon. I also support AlasdairW's suggestion. —Granger (talk · contribs) 15:17, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Yes, all of this looks very promising and useful. Thanks very much! Openstreetmap has a "Transport Map" layer which shows both the English name and the name in the local language (see for example in Shanghai, which seems very useful. As a further improvement one could give the reader the choice to change languages on demand via different map layers. Xsobev (talk) 10:25, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
AlasdairW, I created a task (T193406) to make note of the idea of an interface for language selection. I don't think the current team will have time to address it given the scope and timeline, but I wanted to make sure we wrote down the idea for potential future work. CKoerner (WMF) (talk) 15:47, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
CKoerner (WMF), Thanks. I realise that there are higher priorities for the team to work on at the moment. AlasdairW (talk) 20:24, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

If you want to try this out, then here's how to do it:

  1. Go to https://test2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map_internationalization_examples
  2. Edit any section (wikitext)
  3. Change the lang= parameter to say something else (any ISO language code, such as en for English or ru for Russia, or local for whatever the local language is).
  4. Preview your changes and see what happens.

WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:26, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Nicaragua warning box[edit]

An IP editor added some information on the recent protests to the "stay safe" section and I added a warningbox to the top. Please edit for tone, clarity, flow, fairness and so on and so forth. I hope we can soon remove the warningbox... Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:14, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

User:Ikan Kekek has done some light copy-editing, anybody else wanna weigh in? Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:01, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Content copied from one article to another[edit]

Hello. Most of the new Fleet article's content has been directly lifted from Farnborough, without credit. What is the procedure in these circumstances? Obviously it would be better if the text wasn't a verbatim copy of another article, but what are the actual rules with regard to this? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:57, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

If you want attribution in the article history, then you could make a dummy edit to add the information as an edit summary (no changes, just add an edit summary and save the page). WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:53, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
The issue here is that the purview of two separate articles should never overlap, especially in the case of two bottom-level destinations. If content belongs in Fleet, then ipso facto it does not belong in Farnborough, and vice versa. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 15:55, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
For context, the content that has been copied is 'Get in' and 'Go next' (which currently make up the majority of the Fleet article). The towns are neighbours, so there is a broad overlap in these areas. But of course there is more than one exact way to say roughly the same thing. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:45, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Swept[edit]

The pub has been swept in a (northern hemisphere) spring cleaning. If you think any discussions should have been swept to different places, please plunge forward and move them as you see fit. Ground Zero (talk) 13:17, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Thankee. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 15:16, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

no Wikipedia link - template removal[edit]

At the begging of the year there were about 200 articles with the {{no Wikipedia link}} template that were not in Category:Articles without Wikipedia links (via Wikidata). These mismatches have now been addressed. Should the template in the other 1500 or so article in Category:Articles without Wikipedia links be removed as is now covered by a wikidata check? --Traveler100 (talk) 12:30, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Yes Done--Traveler100 (talk) 10:43, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Related sites - removal of template when the same[edit]

You may or may not have notices that if the Related site link is the same as the In other projects then it is not displayed anymore in the sidebar. Before I execute the next step, just want a check with the group. In these cases were {{RelatedWikipedia}} or {{RelatedCommonsCat}} or {{RelatedCommons}} matches the Wikidata entry the template will be removed from the article. As of writing Category:Articles with Related Wikipedia same as Wikidata is 22169 articles, Category:Articles with Related Commons category same as Wikidata is 7826 articles and Category:Articles with Related Commons page same as Wikidata is 2000 articles. If no objections, and some confirmation of support, then I will run a bot to remove the templates from these articles. --Traveler100 (talk) 13:33, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Station/rint template not working on wmflabs map[edit]

Hi all, the wmflabs map (example Rome) - that's the one that opens when clicking on the icon in the top right corner of an article - doesn't show the station/rint templates properly, it just displays "NoName". Could someone please have a look at that? Thanks! Xsobev (talk) 09:01, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I know about this too. I suppose this has something to do with the GPX exporter - according to a previous discussion in future this will be an issue, and we'll have to find a better solution than putting templates into the marker 'name=' parameters. But for now, I'm not sure what to do - I'm glad the 'inline dynamic maps' work as expected at least. In the end, I'm curious why we use two types of maps... Andree.sk (talk) 18:59, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
The feature set of both of these maps is different, for example the Kartographer map still has some issues: no custom icons, map layers can't be changed when opened with a "maplink" template (and the default layer is not very useful as it's missing many details), right click doesn't give the geo coordinates/zoom level. These are my reasons of why I would strongly support having two types of maps at the moment, and there might be other reasons. But yes, sometime in the future it makes sense to have only one type. (And I'm not criticizing Kartographer - it has many great features!). Xsobev (talk) 09:19, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

"Find on map" shows a blank map[edit]

When I click on "Edit listing", then a form shows up, I click on "find on map", but then no map shows up, the page is blank. Is it a bug or just my computer? Where should I report it? --Micru (talk) 09:07, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

I can confirm this, it also happens to me. Xsobev (talk) 09:54, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
Likewise. Multiple browsers, multiple OS, multiple computers, so the problem isn't at my end. --Robkelk (talk) 01:53, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Wool?[edit]

It would be cool if this travel topic would be added. Thank you. --NSSusers (talk) 18:43, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

@NSSusers: I'm confused as to where we would even start. What is there to say about traveling with wool? —Justin (koavf)TCM 19:09, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
It would be an interesting topic; especially where and how to buy high-quality woolen clothing. /Yvwv (talk) 20:59, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
And not without precedent; we have a Guide-level article on purchasing a kimono. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 21:28, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Well judging by clichés, Wales and New Zealand would be good places to start... Hobbitschuster (talk) 23:26, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Certainly the island of Harris whose famous tweed is made from local wool would need to be included. Industrial Britain mentions fabric mills but does not go into detail; that might be expanded. Cashmere wool might get a section; from the name I assume it once came from Kashmir but now Inner Mongolia produces a lot & calls it by the Persian name Pashmina; I suspect there's an interesting history there.
Carpets are discussed at Turkmenistan#Rugs, Silk_Road#Understand & likely other places. They probably deserve their own article.
Arguably other fabrics, at least cotton & silk, would be good article subjects as well. Should we start with a general fabrics article & split out specific fabrics when there is enough text for them? Pashley (talk) 23:37, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
I'd suggest a more general "Textiles" article, or possibly "Textiles", "Fashion", and "Furnishings" as distinct topics..ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:26, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
Wool and silk are mentioned at Wikivoyage:Requested articles. Clothing already has an article. /Yvwv (talk) 12:12, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
Started Textile as a generalized article. If it assembles enough material about wool, silk or any specific textile, it could be branched off. /Yvwv (talk) 12:25, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

How to find Wikidata or Wikipedia entries by their GPS position?[edit]

Specifically, can I open a map and zoom into a certain place and get all Wikidata/Wikipedia items displayed that have a proper GPS coordinate?

This would be very useful to identify WD and WP items and relate them to WV listings, because often the name search in WD shows too many item or it does not give any results because of language barriers.

Cheers Ceever (talk) 20:23, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

For Wikipedia articles go to the Category of an area, if it does not have already add GeoGroupTemplate. See for example w:Category:Towns in Derbyshire. Do not know about Wikidata --Traveler100 (talk) 20:41, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
There is a map for Wikivoyage, I am sure I have seen one for Commons but cannot find one now. Would be useful to have one for Wikidata. --Traveler100 (talk) 20:46, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
For Wikipedia OpenSeaMap has on option under View. --Traveler100 (talk) 21:00, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
For Wikidata try Wikidata Locations Tool and also Wikidata Map (I think the first is a lot better), both from wmflabs. There used to be a "nearby" option in the beta features on Wikipedia, but I can't find it in the preferences over there. AlasdairW (talk) 21:24, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
Very helpful! Anyone know the difference between red and blue markers here: https://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-todo/around.html?lat=-15.7736&lon=-68.648&radius=15&lang=en ? Ceever (talk) 23:08, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
This shows articles around you: https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Special:Nearby https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Nearby It could be coupled with a fake GPS app if you want to see a place which is not around you. Syced (talk) 06:12, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
Top! Cheers, Ceever (talk) 23:59, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Temporary permissions bump?[edit]

Hello!

I was hoping to implement a few updates to the pagebanner template. Looks like the css files are (smartly) locked from editing. I was hoping to be granted access to (I think it's common.css and mobile.css?) for a week or so to: push the table of contents off the banner image, line up the text a little better, and swap the transparent square behind the page title for a drop shadow. I brought this idea up here awhile ago and it seemed to get a positive response. I'd commit the changes in 2-3 separate edits so they may be rolled back more easily. I'll comment again when I'm done and someone can bump my account back down. I also get it that this is a very important template, so if this request is a whole thing, no big deal. Thanks!

--ButteBag (talk) 22:31, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Apologies if the above question was gauche! Let's try it another way. If anyone has access to edit whichever css files affect the page banner, here are the updates to the code I'd like to make. Maybe you could make them instead? Thanks! --ButteBag (talk) 19:32, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

#1: Move TOC off pagebanner image

   @media screen and (min-width: 768px)
   .wpb-topbanner-toc {
       /* remove these two styles */
       /* position: absolute; */
       /* background: rgba(0,0,0,0.5) none repeat scroll 0% 0%; */
       /* add this one style */
       background-color: #171717;
   }

#2: Replace transparent box behind TOC title text with a dropshadow

   .ext-wpb-pagebanner .wpb-topbanner .wpb-name {
       /* background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% rgba(0,0,0,0.3); */
       text-shadow: 0 0 15px black;
   }

#3: text in TOC should align with text in disambig=yes in pagebanner template, printDistricts template (, and maybe others ?)

   @media screen and (min-width: 768px)
   .wpb-banner-toc {
       /* padding: 0.2em 2em; */
       padding: 0.2em 1.25em;
   }

#4: Dots in TOC shouldn't highlight onhover:

   /* remove this entire style
   .ext-wpb-pagebanner li.toclevel-1 > a:after {
       content: " ·";
       font-weight: bold;
       padding: 0 0 0 0.1em;
   }
   */
   /* add these two new stlyes */
   .wpb-banner-toc li.toclevel-1:after {
       content: " ·";
       font-weight: bold;
       padding: 0 0 0 0.1em;
   }
   .wpb-banner-toc li.toclevel-1:last-child:after {
       content: none;
   }
   /* finally, edit this one style */
   @media screen and (min-width: 768px)
   .wpb-banner-toc a, .wpb-banner-toc a:visited, .wpb-banner-toc a:active {
       /* display: block; */
   }

OK, I've got it sorted on my end. Did you know you can edit your own personal style settings? If someone is an admin and wants to update MediaWiki:Common.css, you can use the styles here: User:ButteBag/common.css. I clicked around to a bunch of different pages and it's looking like a nice improvement to my eyes. Very 70's Vignelli chic! Styles copied below if you want to try them out in your own personal style file. Thanks for looking! --ButteBag (talk) 01:53, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

 /* Move TOC off pagebanner image */
 @media screen and (min-width: 768px) {
   .wpb-topbanner-toc {
     position: relative;
     background: #171717;
   }
 }
 /* Replace transparent box behind TOC title text with a dropshadow */
 .ext-wpb-pagebanner .wpb-topbanner .wpb-name {
   background: none;
   text-shadow: 0 0 15px black;
 }
 /* Text in TOC should align with other template text */
 @media screen and (min-width: 768px) {
   .wpb-banner-toc {
     padding: 0.2em 1.25em;
   }
 }
 /* Dots in TOC shouldn't highlight onhover */
 .ext-wpb-pagebanner li.toclevel-1 > a:after {
   content: none;
 }
 .wpb-banner-toc li.toclevel-1:after {
   content: " ·";
   font-weight: bold;
   padding: 0 0 0 0.1em;
 }
 .wpb-banner-toc li.toclevel-1:last-child:after {
   content: none;
 }
 @media screen and (min-width: 768px) {
   .wpb-banner-toc a, .wpb-banner-toc a:visited, .wpb-banner-toc a:active {
     display: inline;
   }
 }

Problem with listings editor?[edit]

Does anyone have an idea what went wrong in this edit? I used the listings editor to add some text to the "content" of the listing, but a lot of different parts were affected in the surrounding section that I didn't even touch. Please also look at the resulting page [3]. Xsobev (talk) 09:25, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

I think the listings editor doesn't handle line breaks. Looks like in the edit you linked, there was an addition of two paragraph tags without their corresponding closing tags. I think I've had to add paragraphs to listings by hand before. Good luck! --ButteBag (talk) 23:10, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
The listing editor was written to convert newlines to paragraph tags, but in your example the airport was an inline listing, so the listing content should not have contained newlines (and now shouldn't contain paragraph tags). For a non-inline listing, newlines must be converted to paragraph tags for the listing to render properly in the lists used on Wikivoyage - leaving a newline in the listing would close the list and cause the content to appear as paragraphs following the list. See the following example::
  • listing content with newlines

content following a newline more content following a newline

...versus the following, which replaces newlines with paragraph tags:
  • listing content with paragraph tags

    content following a newline

    more content following a newline

-- Ryan • (talk) • 02:31, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your explanations. So if a section is edited with "edit source", then a regular line break (by hitting enter) in the "content" field of the listings template will cause problems both with rendering and with the listings editor later on. Only that in the linked edit the rendering problems were not visible, because the listing was not part of an itemized list. So the only way to manually (with "edit source") add a correct line break in the "content" field of a listing template is to use "<p>" (or "<br>"?) instead. Is that correct? If using the listings editor and adding a regular line break (by hitting enter) in the "content" field, then the listings editor will automatically turn that into "<p>" when saving, and turn "<p>" into regular line breaks when showing the content. Is that also correct? So there seems to be a case, which isn't handled correctly: if the listings editor encounters regular line breaks that are already in the wiki source text. It should just convert them to "<p>" when saving, but somehow that doesn't happen.
I now also saw another use of the p-tag, which also seems to cause problems when using the listings editor: the first listing for Rome/Vatican#St._Peter's_Basilica. It replaces the "<p>", but not the (incorrect?) "</p>". Also the first "<p>" seems to cause two regular line breaks in the listings editor. Xsobev (talk) 08:49, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
I tried to "fix" the line breaks in the airport listing in Edinburgh#Get in by replacing them with "<p>", but the preview shows the same display errors (all following line breaks in the section are screwed up) as they can be seen here. Xsobev (talk) 08:09, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Quickbar[edit]

d:Q14773 lists the emergency phone number for Macau as 999. That looks reasonable, but the {{quickbar}} on my cow here is displaying this as +1-999, which is nonsense. Same issue with United Kingdom, Emergencies +1-999, 112. Huh? Canada looks correct with 911. The template is supposedly pulling this data from Wikidata, so what went wrong? K7L (talk) 17:10, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

I have just corrected the phone number field on d:Q3086706, which was showing +1-999. Changing it to 999 does result in a format "potential issue" warning. This looks to have fixed it for Macau and United Kingdom. It looks like the problem was caused by a bot edit in February. AlasdairW (talk) 22:15, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. It's not a good sign when one asks a very expensive computer "What's the number for 999?" and the machine gets it wrong. K7L (talk) 00:25, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

AdvancedSearch[edit]

Birgit Müller (WMDE) 14:45, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

U.S. National Park Pass for seniors 62+[edit]

Last August, the lifetime price was raised from $10 to $80 (an eight-fold increase!). Unfortunately, I can't find the template to edit the new amount. Also, a new annual pass for seniors is available (for those who can't afford the $80 or rarely visit).

The template has double brackets with the words "USA national park passes." [4] —The preceding comment was added by 209.134.90.42 (talkcontribs) 2018-05-08T19:26:57‎

Yes Done Thanks! -- Irn (talk) 20:20, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Map internationalization launched everywhere—and embedded maps now live on 276 Wikipedias[edit]

As of today, interactive (Kartographer) maps no longer display in the language of the territory mapped; instead, you’ll read them in the content language of the wiki where they appear—or in the language their authors specify (subject to availability of multilingual data). In addition, mapframe, the feature that automatically embeds dynamic maps right on a wiki page, is now live on most Wikipedias that lacked the feature. (Not included in the mapframe launch are nine Wikipedias that use the stricter version of Flagged Revisions).

If you you’re new to mapframe, this Kartographer help page shows how to get started putting dynamic maps on your pages.  If you’d like to read more about map internationalization: this Special Update explains the feature and its limitations; this post and this one describe the uses of the new parameter, lang=”xx”, which  lets you specify a map’s language. And here are some example maps, to illustrate the new capabilities.

These features could not have been created without the generous programming contributions and advice of map-loving volunteers, including Yurik, Framawiki, Naveenpf, TheDJ, Milu92, Atsirlin, Evad37, Pigsonthewing, Mike Peel, Eran Roz, Gareth and Abbe98. My apologies to anyone I’ve missed.

The Collaboration team's Map Improvements 2018 project wraps up at the end of June, so please give internationalized maps and mapframe a try soon and give us your feedback on the project talk page. We’re listening. —JMatazzoni (WMF) (talk) 20:59, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Wikivoyage edit-a-thon 2018 results[edit]

The results for Wikivoyage edit-a-thon 2018 is ready. It took some time to compile and review, and I'm quite liberal with what's considered as an expanded article (something beyond adding a few short sentences or fixing typos). I have also included a few that began on January 31 since not everyone lives in UTC timezone.

One thing to note is that future edit-a-thon should consider using dashboard to make user-editing tracking easier and minimize the manual checking work. OhanaUnitedTalk page 03:28, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Shanghai districts again[edit]

Setting up districts for Shanghai is a difficult problem; we've had at least three structures so far & it is not clear we have it right yet. Both the talk page & its archive have long discussions. The latest round is at Talk:Shanghai#More_on_districts.

If you can contribute here, please do. Pashley (talk) 11:17, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Decision needed[edit]

Could you help finding a solution here: Talk:Argentina#Currency_notation Cheers Ceever (talk) 20:35, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Page loading performance study[edit]

The survey will look pretty close to this.

Hello, all,

The Wikimedia Foundation's Technology department would like to run a (very) small survey about performance on a few wikis. You can read more about it at phab:T187299.

I think that it would be ideal for this wiki to participate because the English Wikivoyage gets more traffic than many Wikipedias, and it's desirable to look outside the Wikipedias.

This survey would likely start in about two weeks. It would show a box with one question on a very small percentage of page views. (The results will be subject to the privacy policy, of course.)

If you have concerns about this, then please contact me directly by pinging me or leaving a note on my user talk page. Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 21:17, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Corporate shouting in Blue Lagoon[edit]

See here. Should we follow our de facto rule not to have corporate shouting show up in our writing? Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:51, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

I agree. If it's not an acronym then it shouldn't be in all caps. DethDestroyerOfWords (talk) 16:18, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata links to Wikivoyage redirect pages[edit]

Can anyone explain why the number of wikidata references to redirect pages on Wikivoyage is increasing so much? Increase of 70 in the last 11 days. --Traveler100 (talk) 12:29, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Two villages, wrong link[edit]

Hello. In Cyprus there are two villages with similar name. One is w:Platres and the other is w:Kato Platres.

Kato Platres (Kato means lower) previously was named as Tornarides but they change their name. Because of that, Platres was called from people as Pano Platres (Pano means upper). But their official name is Platres. This two villages are two separate community counclis. Are separate villages.

In en.wikivoyage article of Platres is said:

"Platres is a village in Limassol district. It is subdivided into Pano (upper) and Kato (Lower) Platres, which fuels healthy local rivalry (the Pano lot consider themselves superior) but for all intents and purposes its is the same village."

This is extremely wrong.

Moreover, the en.wikivoyage article of Platres is connected to wikidata page of Kato Platres [5].

My opinion is that the wikivoyage article must me an article for Platres (knowing as Pano Platres). And must be connected with the wikidata page of Platres.

Xaris333 (talk) 17:10, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

I think the Wikivoyage can stay as an article about the two villages, maybe what is need on Wikipedia is move Platers to Pano Platres. Is already on the Wikidata links to fix list. --Traveler100 (talk) 17:25, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
@Xaris333: As for the sentence about local rivalry; if you know this to be wrong then please correct it. --Traveler100 (talk) 17:31, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Traveler100 the article is saying that "Platres is a village in Limassol district. It is subdivided into Pano (upper) and Kato (Lower) Platres,". That is wrong. There are two villages. One with the name Platres [6] and one with the name Kato Platres [7]. And the article in wikivoyage has informations only about Platres, nothing about Kato Platres. Xaris333 (talk) 18:16, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

You probably know better then anyone the details so I suggest you make the edits. Is not clear to me if all the listings are in one village. --Traveler100 (talk) 19:22, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Fablabs/makerspaces[edit]

While traveling, it's inevitable to be confronted with technical problems occasionally, particularly during longer trips. The growing popularity/spreading of fablabs, hackerspaces and makerspaces is of interest to the traveler, because they're the ideal places to patch up a ripped backpack, fix a broken headlight, charge up batteries, and so on. They're also ideal places to find a wired and wireless internet connection without being touted into purchasing food or drinks. Run and visited by locals, they're a de facto safe bet to seek for unbiased help if you run into trouble during travels.

Unfortunately, despite their importance/relevance, these places are currently often missing from Wikivoyage! In the rare instances they're mentioned, they're usually buried somewhere in the Cope section between hairdressers, veterinarians and endless lists of embassies... However, from a traveler's perspective, it's important to find a place where you can stich up a ripped backpack, particularly in more rural areas where alternatives are few and far between.

As such, it could be argued that such places are more important/relevant to mention than anything listed under the "Drink" section for example, since not all travelers are nightlife/party animals, but most will sooner or later be confronted with issues that could be resolved in a fablab or makerspace.

Which leads to the question: how can these be integrated into Wikivoyage? Do we need a new top level section, define a sub section to any of the existing sections, or redefine the scope of "Cope" (no pun intended)? Does it deserve its proper listing/marker color, or do we go with the generic green ones? What do other Wikivoyagers think? ArticCynda (talk) 20:54, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

In many cases I think that the alternative to going to a hacker space is to go to a shop - either to buy needle and thread, or to buy a replacement backpack. So following that logic they could go in "Buy". However if a traveller is more likely to go to such a hacker space as an alternative way of spending the afternoon, coming away with just a keyring to put in a drawer back home, then they belong in "Do". If you have a lot of experience of these places, then maybe you could start a travel topic on these facilities. AlasdairW (talk) 22:23, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
That's exactly the ambiguity I wanted to point out and fix: depending on one's interpretation it could go in nearly any section, and that's confusing for the traveler. Hence why a better solution is needed, in my opinion, than throwing it into "Buy" and/or "Do" and/or "Cope".ArticCynda (talk) 10:57, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
I think most such spaces would fit best under Do. Adding them is a good idea & they'd make a fine travel topic if someone wanted to do the work. They might also be mentioned at Digital nomad. Pashley (talk) 23:23, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
ArticCynda, are you suggesting putting it in the "Connect" section? That's the only other possibility I can think of. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:15, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
No because it's not in the scope of the Connect section -- which is should focus on internet and phone access. It doesn't seem to fit into any of the existing sections aside from a loose relation to "Cope", so it might be clearer to introduce a new top level section called "Fix" for something like that. ArticCynda (talk) 13:20, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
There isn't such a thing as a "loose relation to Cope" as "Cope" is merely a catch-all section for items that don't fit anywhere else. In some truly remote places, we have been known to list which villages offer fuel or repairs - for instance, Labrador#Get around lists the fuel with the transportation. If something isn't transportation and doesn't fit in "Buy" with the shop listings, "Cope" is the fallback. K7L (talk) 14:59, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
As a preliminary reaction, I would tend to agree with K7L and oppose a "Fix" section, which could easily get filled with car repair shops and who knows what else (home appliance or building repairs, anyone?), but I'd be willing to hear out an argument. Considering that repairs are sometimes needed while traveling but even more likely to be needed at home, why is a new first-order section needed? Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:49, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
If the goal is to fix stuff, then ==Cope== is the right section. If the best thing to say about it is an internet connection, then ==Connect== makes sense (listing an internet+woodworking shop there makes just as much sense as listing internet+coffee shop there).
I'm not sure that I can agree with the overall premise, though. I kind of doubt that a typical business traveler (accounting for ~30% of US flights) would ever drop by a makerspace to stitch up a broken backpack, especially not when the nearest dry cleaner would likely stitch it up for you, and without requiring an annual membership fee. Also, makerspaces that are open to the general public (e.g., not inside a school) are tolerably rare in rural areas. I've got nothing against including them when they exist and offer something useful to a traveler, but it's more of an urban phenomenon. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:30, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Local guides[edit]

We normally don't list local guides (persons) or Wikivoyage:Tours unless they provide something that can't be done as easily independently (for instance, a "fishing charter" is a guide and a boat, while a Chornobyl tour crosses into an exclusion zone which isn't accessible outside the tour). What, then, do we do with Internet platforms like these: http://www.cbc.ca/life/travel/passport-hotel-reservation-date-with-a-local-the-case-for-talking-to-strangers-while-travelling-1.4633380 which are basically forums (fora?) to connect voyagers to local guides in individual cities? Do we list the sites in a travel topic, much like we'd list ride sharing sites or home stay networks in those respective articles? K7L (talk) 15:19, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

jcarousel implementation[edit]

Hi everyone! I am very new to mediawiki and web design in general, and I absolutely love the layout of the main page. I figured out how to do the banner, but I'm struggling with the carousel. Can anyone explain to me how I can create a carousel? I tried reading documentation and it didn't help. Thank you so much everyone! You guys are amazing! 162.221.11.71 21:33, 17 May 2018‎ (UTC)

Did you find https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Gadget-Carousel.js and https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Gadget-Carousel.css ? WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:33, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes I did! I'm not sure how to implement the two files though. Do I have to write something on MediaWiki:Common.js and MediaWiki:Common.css to enable the feature? 162.221.11.71 15:26, 18 May 2018‎ (UTC)

This site looks to be using mw:Extension:Gadgets to load the javascript? K7L (talk) 00:32, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Carousel implementation was moved from Mediawiki:Common.js and made a part of Extension:Gadgets around March 2015. I was told not to use it in article pages etc. Perhaps someone can clarify that assumption. -- Matroc (talk) 05:24, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Do you know how to implement jCarousel with Extension:Gadgets?

I used carousel several years ago and it may already be enabled by default. I don't remember having to do anything to use it. Check your Preferences - Gadgets and see if its box is checked. I would try doing a simple carousel on your Talk page or Sandbox and see what happens. There are several samples to be found by Google searching; also, may find some samples on GitHub... I also remember seeing a tutorial somewhere too. Others may know much more than I about this subject. -- Matroc (talk) 02:05, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Never mind I figured it out!

Star attractions[edit]

Our friends from the Russian Wikivoyage project have star attractions I discovered a few minutes ago. This indicates must see attractions such as the Eiffel Tower in Paris or the Colosseum in Rome, and is displayed as a star icon between the attraction's marker and its title/name. A few examples in the Russian Wikivoyage page on Moskow.

I personally find this a convenient sorting method because there currently is no hierarchy in "See" or "Do" attractions (note: according to Wikivoyage guidelines, these should be ordered alphabetically and not in order of perceived signficance). For travelers who have limited time to spend in a particular destination, it makes it easier to plan a day with most of the "highlights" of the destination rather than walking from fountain to park, and eventually leaving without seeing the city's gem that turned out to be at the bottom of the "See" listings.

Is there a reason the English Wikivoyage doesn't have this functionality? ArticCynda (talk) 13:43, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

The "must see" attractions are often mentioned in the overview paragraphs of the See sections, for cities like Moscow already in the city article (while the listings are in the district articles). For minor places the star attractions are usually mentioned already in the lead section. --LPfi (talk) 14:54, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
In some cities like Siena, there's a longstanding consensus on what the main sights are. But try getting agreement on where a list of the main sights ends in New York, London or Rome. Sure, a few may be obvious, but when you go beyond that, you run into huge problems. I'd absolutely say the same is true of Paris. In Paris, the Louvre, the Eiffel Tower, Notre Dame and the Arc de Triomph are probably obvious, but after that, will you get agreement on the following? The Tuileries, Musee d'Orsay, Pont Neuf, Sacree Coeur (mostly for the view), Cluny, the Sorbonne, Les Invalides, Musee Guimet, the Musees Picasso and Rodin, Place Vendome, the Sainte-Chapelle...the list of possible main sights is quite long, and they will be rated differently by different people, depending on their interests and tastes. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:10, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
I follow your logic, but the people writing articles are already forming a consensus, for example by choosing which attractions to deliberately omit. And clearly the Russians can come to a consensus on the matter, so why can't/wouldn't we? ArticCynda (talk) 19:36, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Because we don't want to waste time debating it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:51, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
We could adapt the English Wikipedia's rule for disputed external links, which is basically that disputed links are immediately removed, until there's a consensus to restore them. In the case of the Parisian example, that would mean starring whatever "obvious" items people agree upon, and nothing else (until people agreed upon more). It doesn't require much time. WhatamIdoing (talk) 07:07, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
I agree, that seems a good idea to reach a consensus. Suggesting the following work flow:
  • a star can be added to any attraction
  • that star can be removed at any time, after which a discussion must be opened on the talk page
  • the star is only reinstated when a consensus is reached
@Ikan Kekek, is that a good compromise to your time waste concerns? ArticCynda (talk) 10:59, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm not sure I like the idea in the first place. It's a cinch for people to find "Top 10" lists for the world's most visited cities, but most of them are districted on en.voy, anyway. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:24, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
That's an odd point of view because I would think that marking star attractions is particularly useful to districted cities, which tend to lose a proper overview of where attractions/landmarks with the highest value to the average traveler are located. I'm not fundamentally opposed to making lists, I usually only have a day or two to spend in a city, so I always make lists of attractions/landmarks I really want to visit in a city, making optimal use of my time there. ArticCynda (talk) 17:16, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
ArticCynda, it would be less work if the discussion only has to be started if someone wants to restore the star. So I add the star (5 seconds), you remove it (5 seconds), and I decide you're right (or that I don't care enough to object to the removal), and we're done already.
If, on the other hand, I add a star, you remove it, and someone (maybe me, maybe someone else) wants to advocate for including the dispute star, then *that* person should start the discussion. That approach means that the burden on the person disagreeing with a star remains low, and we stay efficient when everyone agrees. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:58, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the input WhatamIdoing, it would indeed be more efficient but the problem with this approach is that it leads to jojo effects. For example, consider user A who adds a star to an attraction. User B doesn't agree and removes the star, but then doesn't open a discussion on the talk page. User C reviews the article a day later and also thinks that attraction deserves a star, but unaware of the previous star/destar cycle immediately adds a star again, because there is no evidence on the talk page of a star/destar cycle. By opening a debate the moment the star is removed, that problem is solved because user C can reasonably be expected to check the talk page before making such modifications. ArticCynda (talk) 09:03, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
User C probably isn't going to check the talk page before plunging forward to add the star, either. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:14, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Ikan Kekek's point about the debatability of what constitutes star attractions is well taken, but I'd go a little bit further with it and say that each individual reader is going to have their own personal list of star attractions, and none of those lists are invalid or "wrong". For instance, the question of what place a visitor to Manhattan would gravitate to before any other would depend entirely on their own personal interests. Nature lovers might head to Inwood Hill Park; aficionados of medieval art might make a beeline for the Cloisters; immigrant history buffs might head to the Tenement Museum on the Lower East Side; those poor saps still unsophisticated enough to be unironically impressed by Disneyfied corporate-driven faux-placemaking would likely head to Times Square. Wikivoyage should be in the business of recognizing the individuality and diverse interests of its readership - and we largely already do that, by categorizing "See" sections by broad themes such as "Art", "Museums", "Parks", etc. - rather than trying to find the rough average among them. Especially if that means we end up funneling readers to the same handful of obvious cliché attractions that other guidebooks highlight. For a small fry like Wikivoyage to carve out a niche in a world of Lonely Planets and Frommer'ses means we have to offer something different than our competitors, not ape them. Plus, designating certain attractions as "stars" in an at least partially arbitrary way smacks of touting, anyway. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 15:07, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
On the face of it, I agree with this. Some people visit New York to go to bars and nightclubs in Williamsburg, Bushwick and the Lower East Side, others go to all the art museums, others go to parks, others just like to walk around different neighborhoods. It's possible in individual entries to suggest that something is a highlight, and it's also possible to highlight some sights in the summary in the "See" sections of districted cities, but except where it's really obvious and uncontroversial what the main sights are (as in my example of Siena), I don't think we want to have a separate section expressly called "Main sights", let alone a particular arbitrary number of them. I mean, let's look at New York a little more. Is the Empire State Building a top-10 sight? It's certainly a major landmark, but the Chrysler Building and various other shorter skyscrapers are more beautiful, plus it won't be worth it to many people to pay a lot of money to go to the top of a skyscraper and probably see a hazy view. Just to take one example. I think it would be less controversial as a top-20 sight, but let's not spend time debating which sights in what order should be specially featured. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:48, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
These are strong arguments, AndreCarrotflower and Ikan Kekek, and convinced me that assigning stars to attractions wouldn't be as good of an idea as I originally thought it would be. It is indeed a better strategy to emphasize on value or importance in the description rather than assiging a binary score. As far as I'm concerned, this discussion may be closed! ArticCynda (talk) 20:25, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Need your help fixing an annoying dynamic maps bug on Hebvoy[edit]

As a result of having the new dynamic maps fully integrated at the Hebrew Wikivoyage, we now have various bugs that need to be fixed.

The one bug that needs to be fixed the most happens When loading any article on Hebvoy that has a dynamic map - the interface always requests that the user would give permission to access an external source (this message keeps coming up on articles with dynamic maps unless the user clicks on "it's okay"). once the user click on "it's okay" the interface displays the map layer "articles nearby" automatically. (example - look for the dynamic map in this article)

how would I be able to fix this bug so that the dynamic maps wouldn't try to present the "articles nearby" automatically? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 11:38, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

CC from previous maps discussions: AlasdairW, Andrewssi2, Atsirlin, Ibaman, JamesA, JuliasTravels, Matroc, MaxSem, Mey2008, Shaundd, Sumit.iitp, Syced, TheTrolleyPole, Torty3, WhatamIdoing, Wrh2 -- ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 15:27, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
I suppose that you call these 'articles nearby' from some template, but I can't say more without knowing which templates are used. This is a bit hard to figure out in Hebrew. --Alexander (talk) 15:48, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
Managed to fix it by myself :) ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 16:48, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Another technical question for the map experts[edit]

One of the main features that dissapeared when the new maps were integrated to the Hebrew Wikivoyage was the option to display specific map layers automaitcally when a certain artice loads - for example, for an article about a hiking trails I would usually display the Hiking layer and the Hill Shading layer. These layers do not load automatically anymore when they are defined to do so in the code (example - look for the dynamic map in this article).

Do you know by any chance if this could be fixed?

CC from previous maps discussions: AlasdairW, Andrewssi2, Atsirlin, Ibaman, JamesA, JuliasTravels, Matroc, MaxSem, Mey2008, Shaundd, Sumit.iitp, Syced, TheTrolleyPole, Torty3, WhatamIdoing, Wrh2 -- ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 17:20, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

If I remember correctly this was an issue raised some time ago. I think that the parameter layer may have became defunct? As an aside, be aware that recent changes are happening and that the code for mapframe and maplink in Wikivoyage is slightly different from that to be found in Wikipedia. ie. group and show is not available and the box to select layers, groups etc. no longer exists and other quirks. The most recent update to the Kartographer extension in Wikivoyage dated May 7 of this year shows that sidebar.js was updated. Hopefully, any future changes to Wikipedia implementation will have no effect on our present capabilities. -- Matroc (talk) 19:19, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
Matroc - Is there anyone I can ask for help with this? appearntly this feature has not been removed... it actually still works - one can select the Hiking layer or the Hill Shading layer from the side box after the map has loaded, but it simply does not load automatically anymore. Maybe they changed the code so that a different code needs to be entered to display it automatically? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 20:18, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
The ability to select a layer using a parameter rather than a button was disabled here a while ago. This was to address privacy concerns as some of the layers used external sources. The button method still works. See Wikivoyage_talk:How_to_use_dynamic_maps#Layers. Unfortunately there has been no interest in just enabling the options that are not privacy concerns, but disabling those (eg Mapnik) that use external servers. AlasdairW (talk) 21:05, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Create an actual Mars travel guide?[edit]

I know that a little while ago a joke article was created for Mars, but since Mars has been reached by rovers and spacecraft like the moon, couldn't there be a more serious article about visiting the planet? The same is the case with some of the other planets in the solar system. Selfie City (talk) 00:28, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

We can create such an article after a human being sets foot on those planets, not now. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:42, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Or even later, when private trips or colonisation start? Pashley (talk) 03:26, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
I'd be more inclined to move the Moon or Space into the joke category, frankly, than to move Mars out of it. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 03:51, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
I definitely do not think Space should be moved, since it is already a possible travel destination. As for the Moon, I'd give it the benefit of the doubt since it might be possible in the foreseeable future & someone has taken the trouble to write it. Starting a Mars article would, I think, be seriously premature. Pashley (talk) 10:04, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
The only travel destination ever willed into existence by someone writing about it was Israel and then he was no travel book writer. While I would like to see Mars travel in my lifetime, I fear we'll have to wait until it is actually a thing to write the guide to it... Hobbitschuster (talk) 10:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm not fundamentally opposed against a travel article on Mars, but given the cost and preparation time required for such a journey, not many are ever going to make the trip. Shouldn't it be better to focus our efforts on the countless destinations that are actually credible travel destinations, but currently missing form WikiVoyage? Once planet Earth is completely covered, we can talk about other planets. ArticCynda (talk) 22:47, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
We should probably have an article on the deep sea before Mars. The Mariana Trench will probably be open to the masses at an earlier point in time than the red planet. Gizza (roam) 03:04, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
I think a Deep sea or Submarines article would be a great idea. —Granger (talk · contribs) 05:35, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
@Gizza @Granger You seem to be missing my previous point; what's the added value of creating new articles about places that are too impractical to visit? If you want to know how to reach the bottom of the Mariana Trench then read the Wikipedia articles on deep sea exploration, not Wikivoyage. ArticCynda (talk) 08:56, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Maybe not the Mariana Trench, but it is possible for tourists to go on submarine tours, which I think could make a good travel topic. I don't know how deep it's realistically possible for a tourist to go—that would be good information for the article to have. —Granger (talk · contribs) 09:07, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

An idea for April fool's 2019[edit]

I know this is discussing this way early, but I cannot see the harm in that given how we have in the past struggled to get something together in the last days of March... An idle thought I had yesterday was travel for space aliens or Guide for extraterrestrial visitors or some such. I think the possibilities are boundless and we could do a lot of tongue in cheek humor. And if it doesn't "work" we have eleven month to come up with something better. Hobbitschuster (talk) 09:37, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

My suggestion might not be practical or even possible, but wouldn't it be funny if on April fool's day we put every article in the "star" category, no matter what condition the article was in, just for that day. I can imagine the confusion of many Wikivoyage users, in particular, who saw the "star" template on every single page they visited! Selfie City (talk) 13:41, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

I'm sure Elon Musk could be convinced to sponsor the creation of such content! Jokes aside though, I have my doubts about the coverage these April fool's articles get, since I wasn't aware of their existance until I stumbled on the category a few weeks ago by coincidence. So if, as you mentioned, it's a recurring struggle to get something together in the last days of March then perhaps the idea of running an April fool's joke itself should be reconsidered? Is it really worth spending the effort on it? ArticCynda (talk) 22:52, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Indentation nitpicking[edit]

We fairly often have conversations that run off the right hand edge of my screen because there are too many layers of indentation. I think part of the problem is that people are indenting one more than the most recent comment when the rule should be one more than the comment you are replying to.

Not to pick on one user, since almost everyone seems to be doing this, but one clear example is at #Create_an_actual_Mars_travel_guide? above. It currently looks like this:

(quote)

I know that a little while ago a joke article was created for Mars, but ,,, Selfie City (talk) 00:28, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

We can create such an article after a human being sets foot on those planets, not now. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:42, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Or even later, when private trips or colonisation start? Pashley (talk) 03:26, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
I'd be more inclined to move the Moon or Space into the joke category, frankly, than to move Mars out of it. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 03:51, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
I definitely do not think Space should be moved, ... Pashley (talk) 10:04, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
The only travel destination ever willed into existence ... Hobbitschuster (talk) 10:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

(end quote)

Since Andre's comment is a reply to the original post, not to my remark above it, I think it should have less indentation; then the replies to it would as well, so overall we would have:

(quote)

I know that a little while ago a joke article was created for Mars, but ,,, Selfie City (talk) 00:28, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

We can create such an article after a human being sets foot on those planets, not now. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:42, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Or even later, when private trips or colonisation start? Pashley (talk) 03:26, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
I'd be more inclined to move the Moon or Space into the joke category, frankly, than to move Mars out of it. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 03:51, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
I definitely do not think Space should be moved, ... Pashley (talk) 10:04, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
The only travel destination ever willed into existence ... Hobbitschuster (talk) 10:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

(end quote)

In my view this both makes the conversation more readable & keeps the indentation levels down, so doing it this way is a no-brainer. On the other hand, perhaps I'm just being an old curmudgeon, wanting things to still be done the way I learned for Usenet comments back in the early 90s. What do others think? Pashley (talk) 13:56, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

  • Indentation replies are an issue on every project ..... I agree it can be confusing at times but that's the way the MediaWiki software is ..... Not much anyone can do I'm afraid. –Davey2010Talk 14:44, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
I don't think the excessive indentation is an intentional thing, it just so happens that in a discussion one usually replies to the previous post, and so on. It is relatively rare to trace back to a previous post far back and reply to it, which is why the indentation is often fairly linear. Personally I don't think it's much of a problem since computer screens are fairly large these days (and the aspect ratios keep increasing, which is great for indentation!). ArticCynda (talk) 22:44, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Template Template:Kilometer[edit]

Do we really want to show every km in miles (in brackets) as well? I find it a little overload of complexity. And if I am in a country that uses km, why also show miles? For that one country that is not able to stick to metric standards? Do you guys support this level of detail, or would you say away with this (template)? We had a similar template that was showing dollars in brackets for every currency and decided against it. Cheers, Ceever (talk) 17:19, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

If I'm not mistaken there are actually 3 countries that haven't yet adopted modern measurement systems, but that aside: meters (and thus km) are the standard unit, and for the sake of simplicity, we should stick with it. That's what standards are for in the first place. Of course you can mention other distance units where they're relevant (for example, how the ancient Egyptians used unit XYZ to measure the base of pyramids) but only as exception and not as a rule. ArticCynda (talk) 22:40, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Putting the traveller first, I think it some cases it makes sense to serve UK and US readers by including the conversions. A lot of our readers in the English Wikivoyage come from those two countries. I don't include the conversion in every instance in an article, but in a few.
Currency conversion is another matter: exchange rates change, so we put prices (for the most part) in the local currency, and leave it to readers to learn the current exchange rate for their preferred currency. As far as I know, the mile:kilometre conversion doesn't vary over time. ;-) Ground Zero (talk) 01:33, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Currency conversion is pretty pointless indeed since it's too volatile, so I agree with your point of view Ground Zero. Unless travelers are likely to be confronted with multiple currencies (for example in Croatia where kuna (kn) is official tender but euro is widely accepted in tourist areas), only stick with the local currency and leave it up to the traveler to quickly look up the exchange rate before they visit. ArticCynda (talk) 08:49, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
The exchange rates in the template are kept reasonably up to date. --Traveler100 (talk) 12:00, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
On a related point, I'd say neither 'kilometre' nor 'kilometer' should ever be used; just avoid the dialect issue by using 'km' everywhere. Pashley (talk) 02:07, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
The {{km}} template was not created to show every km in miles in brackets as well; it is intended for showing both units when the author feels both values need to be shown. Also the $ currency conversion display (also not for every entry) as far as I know was not a consensus decision to not adopt, was a unilateral one.--Traveler100 (talk) 06:18, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
The 'metre' was never a thing, the 'meter' is the only valid definition. Only use 'km' and there is no confusion anywhere. ArticCynda (talk) 08:45, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Eh? Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:51, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
A "meter" is a measuring device, a "metre" is a unit of length. The only country which doesn't grasp this distinction may be safely ignored as they happen to be stubbornly opposing metrication every inch of the way. K7L (talk) 12:44, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Let's just introduce the metr and end this debate once and for all. Hobbitschuster (talk) 13:26, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
You win! Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:54, 22 May 2018 (UTC)