Talk:Hacker tourism

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Wouldn't some sort of explanation of the topic be useful? Sorry to sound weird about this, but just looking at the article, if you did not know anything about hacker tourism, it would be impossible what the article is about. I assume that this is not there because the article is still in development, but I think it's important information that needs to be included in the article. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 01:41, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, some kind of introduction would be a good idea. —Granger (talk · contribs) 01:53, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Mbrickn: Any ideas for what should be included? Thanks! --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 02:13, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Sorry I did not see this until I got pinged. I absolutely agree that there should be an intro, as well as better subsection intros and in hindsight, probably should have started this as a draft in userspace until it was ready. Perhaps I should just move this article there until it is ready? Sorry for any hassle. Mbrickn (talk) 02:41, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]


What is the point of this article? What kind of traveler would it serve? No one's going to choose an international travel destinations just because there's a hackerspace there as listed here. Could we really give any non-obvious travel advice on the topic to justify having such an article? Otherwise, I see no value in having a page with just a blurb on what a hackathon is, something anyone familiar with the topic, to the point of looking up a related travel article, would already know. ARR8 (talk | contribs) 02:20, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that most/all of the info currently here is well known to anyone familiar with the topic. I think this article has the potential to be useful to a few kinds of traveler. Newbies might not realize that most Hackathons and Open Source conferences do often have scholarships and travel reimbursements available - I personally have visited cities that I would not been able to visit to otherwise without this assistance. While I would not travel abroad just to check out a hackerspace, I might use the info here to see if there were any close to the place I was visiting, and perhaps plan a detour if there was a cool one nearby. I also hoped that users more experienced then myself might contribute their own tips, tricks, and destinations that are not so obvious. However as I was working on this article I realized it may not be as straightforward to turn this into a good wikivoyage article as I assumed. I defer to your judgement as a more experienced wikivoyage editor if this should be removed. Mbrickn (talk) 02:38, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Mbrickn: Thanks for the explanation. The decision comes down to what the community thinks. I'd encourage you to keep working on it as long as you're comfortable with the possibility that it could be put to a vote for deletion at some point, and the outcome might not be favorable. However, you information you mentioned could legitimately be useful, and so that could be a reason to keep it on this page, which could be linked from appropriate listings in various destination articles.
A couple of things I'd personally recommend are to remove the listings/destinations, moving them to city articles if needed, since these sorts of lists aren't very helpful for travelers, and keep the introductory info brief. In short, I'd say that the best use for this article is to fill it with as much practical and non-obvious advice from your own experiences as possible. If that were the case, I'd personally gladly support keeping it here, and I'd work on linking it from other articles. ARR8 (talk | contribs) 02:52, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Since the Wiki-mania 2019 in Stockholm was recentlyannounced, should this page include specific locations/hackathon events that one can visit,like what we do with most guides? During the 16th of August, there will be a hackathon at the University of Stockholm, which is a notable international event. Zanygenius2 (WV-en) (talk) 22:06, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimania is not a hackathon, and please see the discussion topic immediately preceding this one. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 22:58, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Zanygenius2 (WV-en): That we do it for most guides is an ongoing issue with the quality of travel topics on this site. We are not Wikipedia; we don't compile lists. Our travel topics should be here to provide concrete, actionable, non-obvious advice that one would not be able to find on Wikipedia, not facts and figures. Frankly, I think Horse racing would be only greatly improved if the entire "Destinations" section were deleted. Nobody is going to read one of these articles to decide where to go, so there is no benefit, and "lists of places related to a topic" is not what travel guides are for. In fact, I would argue that this issue does real harm to the site: if people think of Wikivoyage as "that site with the articles crammed with useless minutiae," they'll go elsewhere for their travel info. ARR8 (talk | contribs) 23:24, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── @AndreCarrotflower, ARR8:, Yes, the entire Wikimedia conference isn't a hackathon, however part of it is, I think. Regarding adding listings, I'll certainly keep that in mind, and some Wikivoyage contributors have been trying to work out ways to reduce the list without damaging the good that came out of it. I believe listings should be the 7+-2 rules, correct? Zanygenius2 (WV-en) (talk) 00:23, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Zanygenius2 (WV-en): In general, yes, though for travel topics this is a guideline. Thank you for being open-minded on the topic of listings. I would argue that a list adds no value to that page beyond the sort of encyclopedic completeness-for-its-own-sake that we don't need in our travel guides, which should focus on travel as much as possible. It's not a comprehensive article on horse racing; it's supposed to be a practical guide for travelers, omitting all information not useful for those readers. And this isn't to say anything against your writing or that article in particular; this is a widespread problem with our travel topics. I bring it up only because you linked the page as a model. ARR8 (talk | contribs) 01:55, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to have the opposite opinion. The destinations and listings are the most useful part of the articles. It is far more visually appealing and direct for the traveller than verbose paragraphs of text which very few people will read. And it would just be duplicating what's already on Wikipedia. Gizza (roam) 04:07, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@DaGizza: I agree that it does look nice, but we're Wikivoyage, not Wikimaps, and I struggle to come up with a travel justification for the listicles. A list of makerspaces in the world does nothing to help travelers actually looking here for advice. We don't need long paragraphs, either, but we can describe notable destinations without duplicating listings from destination articles.

Prose formatting[edit]

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────@ARR8: Okay, that is granted. Personally, I don't think all of the 45 listings are of importance at destinations, however I would like to ensure there is a representation from each continent. I read once that using prose format instead of plain lists on here is better, as it explains why someone would like to go to that place. Would you agree with the idea? (And thank you for talking openly with me) Zanygenius2 (WV-en) (talk) 02:24, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Zanygenius2 (WV-en): Yes, I would say so. I think a prose summary is definitely preferable over a listing. A well-written sentence that links to a relevant destination article, even linking to a specific listing, helps those looking for more specific information while also having the potential to interest more readers, who may read more of the linked page, potentially following links to even more pages, etc. Network-linking effects are one of the great strengths of the wiki format. ARR8 (talk | contribs) 02:31, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────That definitely worked well, especially regarding districts, and listings) @ARR8:. For me, the question now is how much info should go into a sentence, and how often should this be used? Thank you, Zanygenius2 (WV-en) (talk) 03:27, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Zanygenius2 (WV-en): That's a good question, and tricky to answer. User:DaGizza just expressed dislike of long paragraphs up above, but we have articles which are both verbose and link-heavy. A guideline I like is to keep local information off the topic pages: a reader who got to the page from looking up racetrack tourism to England probably won't want to read about the specifics of how things work in Kentucky. As for overall length, I would recommend trying it out and seeing what works, and I'm sure the community will weigh in. ARR8 (talk | contribs) 04:49, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@ARR8, DaGizza: Just saw posts by the both of you, and it appears that the best solution here is to have listings 5-9 items long before dividing into sub-sections, and writing about a sentence to a paragraph for each. I'll definitely make sure to keep that in mind. Zanygenius2 (WV-en) (talk) 14:43, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]