User talk:Whitsera/Historic Burke Tour
Add topicWhy not just have a destination article about Burke? I see no point for this article to be an itinerary article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:10, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
- I have proposed a merge to Wallace (Idaho). Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:20, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
- Support per nomination. Ground Zero (talk) 16:18, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
I explained this in my last discussion. I have been trying to use the "Burke Tour" with the OSMAND Travel App. Burying Burke inside of Wallace ruins my original intent of creating the itinerary. OSMAND allows you to download the content (called Travel Guides) prior to embarking. This allows users to pull in the WikiVoyage data and go on the "tour" without cell signal. Embedding the Burke Tour inside of Wallace's information muddy's the content and makes it more difficult to find. It essentially breaks the purpose of me adding the content to the page. I don't feel like the criteria or purpose for an "itinerary" is well defined. I still argue that my purpose is just as valid as Chernobyl or Breaking Bad. You are making assumptions (having no context for those assumptions), that my itinerary won't be as well used as the Breaking Bad Itinerary. It's all about exposure and the number of people with access to the data. HOWEVER, I don't think that I'm going to be using this platform to provide the data so I don't really feel like getting into a long argument with you. If I feel like this is my best option for delivering my content, I'll come back and make the argument later. For now, I'm removing the merged data from the Wallace Idaho page. --Whitsera (talk) 19:41, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
This describes the feature I was trying to get to work. https://osmand.net/blog/travel Merging the Burke Tour with the Wallace information makes it difficult to add the level of detail we were hoping to incorporate into the Burke Tour. We planned on building that content out over the next semester with the help of a high school intern that will be working with the local museum. The tour will be very comprehensive with detail and pictures about each location. I still think we are going to be better suited with an actual app. But you should know (if you don't already), that this feature is something people may be trying to use WikiVoyage for. --Whitsera (talk) 19:56, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
- Feel free to create a version of the tour in userspace, but consensus in mainspace is for a merge, which must be followed in this circumstance. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 20:03, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
- @Whitsera, Ikan Kekek, SelfieCity: I merged this because there had been no opposition not the proposal for two weeks, and the itinerary article as it stood did not meet the standards expected of a Wikivoyage article. It looked like something that had been started and then abandoned. But nothing is cast in stone in Wikivoyage. We can absolutely revisit this issue, and consider whether this should be an itinerary again. I will take a look at the link you provided, and would like to hear from Ikan Kekek on this too. I am interested to see how this would work with Osmand. Regards, Ground Zero (talk) 20:08, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
- I would support making it an itinerary. I just felt that consensus needed to be followed here, and that Whitsera's actions were inappropriate at this time. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 20:12, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
- I agree. I don't know what would achieved by removing the information from the Wallace article. Thanks for reverting. Ground Zero (talk) 20:13, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
- Whitsera, I would be very happy to see a detailed itinerary for Burke and the other villages. I'd suggest that while you're developing it, you use your sandbox (a page like User:Whitsera/Sandbox) and then move it back here when it's clearly a usable itinerary. I would be happy to have a look and give you an opinion before you move it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:15, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- I have reinstated the itinerary, since consensus now supports it. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 12:40, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
- SelfieCity, Ikan Kekek and I are looking for more from Whitsera before proceeding on these. Ground Zero (talk) 12:42, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
- I am? I'm confused; I thought there was consensus here to bring back the itinerary so Whitsera can expand it. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 12:43, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
- Oh, I see — per Ikan Kekek's comment, the plan is to move this to userspace. I'll do that. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 12:44, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
- I am? I'm confused; I thought there was consensus here to bring back the itinerary so Whitsera can expand it. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 12:43, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
- Whitsera, I would be very happy to see a detailed itinerary for Burke and the other villages. I'd suggest that while you're developing it, you use your sandbox (a page like User:Whitsera/Sandbox) and then move it back here when it's clearly a usable itinerary. I would be happy to have a look and give you an opinion before you move it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:15, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- I agree. I don't know what would achieved by removing the information from the Wallace article. Thanks for reverting. Ground Zero (talk) 20:13, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
- I would support making it an itinerary. I just felt that consensus needed to be followed here, and that Whitsera's actions were inappropriate at this time. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 20:12, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
- @Whitsera, Ikan Kekek, SelfieCity: I merged this because there had been no opposition not the proposal for two weeks, and the itinerary article as it stood did not meet the standards expected of a Wikivoyage article. It looked like something that had been started and then abandoned. But nothing is cast in stone in Wikivoyage. We can absolutely revisit this issue, and consider whether this should be an itinerary again. I will take a look at the link you provided, and would like to hear from Ikan Kekek on this too. I am interested to see how this would work with Osmand. Regards, Ground Zero (talk) 20:08, 3 September 2019 (UTC)