User talk:(WT-en) Silenyjizda

Hello Silenyjizda! Welcome to Wikivoyage.

To help get you started contributing, we've created a tips for new contributors page, full of helpful links about policies and guidelines and style, as well as some important information on copyleft and basic stuff like how to edit a page. If you need help, check out Project:Help, or post a message in the travellers' pub. --(WT-en) AHeneen 13:02, 28 November 2008 (EST)

Accommodation listing

Hi there. I just wanted to let you know that we only list accommodation listings in the nearest destination article, which in the case of Barn House B&B would be the Millersburg article. Instances elsewhere of this listing will be deleted. (WT-en) Texugo 14:25, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Regarding your comments on other user's talk pages, I suspect that the reversions were due to the appearance of touting, which is heavily frowned upon and often leads to mass reversions. Provided you create only one listing for your business and avoid language that sounds like advertising then there should be no problem listing it on Wikivoyage. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 15:14, 30 November 2008 (EST)

In relation to all of this, since you've actually taken the time to discuss, it may be appropriate to direct you our Welcome, business owners page. It's a huge pile of work for a lot of us, keeping wikivoyage a reliable place to get relevant travel information, hence our stringent policies - wikivoyage would quickly turn into a unreliable version of the yellow pages without them. I would especially like to point out the possibility (due to our licence) for you to print the guide for relevant destinations near your hotel, and hand them out to guests for free - and in that light it may be in your interest to share your knowledge about your area in our guides, so these would be more useful than their current state. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) ^Talk 17:58, 30 November 2008 (EST)

Regarding the double entry for the Honey Inn under both the Holmes County and Millersburg articles: you're right, that's not consistent with the guidelines. Guessing from the article history, it simply got overlooked when the duplicate was added (they weren't both at the same time, so it wasn't obvious); no conspiracy against you, just an oversight. I've removed the county-level listing, so now it's down to just one entry, like it should be. Thanks for noticing. (WT-en) Dguillaime 20:25, 30 November 2008 (EST)