Talk:Voyaging along the Amazon River
Feedback on itinerary
- Swept in from the pub
I'm currently traveling up the Amazon river from Belem to Tabatinga, completing my Amazon trip that I did from Tabatinga to Iquitos last year. I found the itinerary Voyaging along the Amazon River and did my best to make it useful for fellow travelers. The actual itinerary data that was already there is pretty useless (up to outright wrong) as it describes only one of many ways to do the trip and it heavily relied on a single experience. I've tried to generalize this data and turn the article into a more generic guide of how to do this trip.
My requests for feedback are:
- Does it make sense to keep the detailed information on prices and schedules, knowing that they only represent a small subset of the reality? (Esp. the "Itinerary"-section).
- What is the general policy about describing trips that cannot be planned en detail in advance (boats are primarily used for local trade and transportation, not for tourists)?
- If you wanted to do the trip, which information is missing for you? —The preceding comment was added by Jlg23 (talk • contribs)
- Sounds awesome! My feedback: Add many pictures :-) Prices are very useful even if just to give an idea of the kind of price it might be, even if it is very approximate. Syced (talk) 05:04, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, @Jlg23: I agree with Syced, it would be nice to have some pictures of the route if you could take some. In terms of the prices and schedules, I think it's good to have them there, even if it's just a rough guide, because otherwise, I think I'd end up going to another travel guide/site to find these out. I'm not sure about the general policy, and I don't think I can find one by searching for it. And for your final point, I think the get in section can be expanded a bit with more details in the by plane and by car subsections, stuff like which airports/roads to take and where they come from. But to be honest, anyone could do this by just copying the text from articles like Belem or Macapa (I will probably do some of this soon actually). 20:50, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks; I take it that there basically is no real guideline for itineraries like this. WRT pictures: Yes, I took a ton and will upload a few next week, when I am in an area with much better internet connection. Thanks for the feedback! Jlg23 (talk) 17:36, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
- I've noticed your work on the article (but for some reason not this pub discussion) and give you a really big "like" for that!
- For detailed info on prices and schedules, I think they can be included, but with a note stating how old the information is. As others just mentioned, even if prices and schedules are not up to date they will still give a rough indication about the cost and the duration of a leg. For instance Russia to Japan via Sakhalin was made several years back but you can probably still make the trip using it.
- If a trip cannot be planned in advance, then I guess it's best to just state this. And give some useful hints where applicable.
- Otherwise, photos and a dynamic map with markers would be great additions to this article. Have a look at the current Featured Travel Topic Ruta del Tránsito for some inspiration. Also, I think the headings need to be "WV-standardized" (made into imperatives like Understand, Prepare, Go...) and arranged like in our other articles. ϒpsilon (talk) 18:41, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
- Awww, thank you *blush*! WRT unplannable trips, yes, I mention that explicitly in the text and will highlight it - but please be welcome to add emphases yourself where you consider a fact very important. WRT "WV-standardization" - any links to guidelines for that? If not, I'll just try to find imperatives (you already gave some good ones to start with). WRT "photos and dynamic map markers" - thanks, I'll look at the page you link next week, when I have a connection that is faster than the "one byte per minute" I get here. That's also when I'll make a last pass over the page and finalize "my" version. Thanks again! :) Jlg23 (talk) 23:53, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Judging from some awkward wordings with "one", I gather that the original author of much of this article is unaware that second person pronouns are okay on Wikivoyage. It's "I" and "we" that are banned. Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:12, 3 April 2016 (UTC)