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 Help, or post a message in the travellers' pub. If you are familiar with Wikipedia, take a look over some of the differences here.--ϒpsilon (talk) 13:57, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
- No problem. I have a question though: I saw you used a reply with a link to [external links#what not to link to] when you deleted one of the spam messages. Are there special templates or a page with what information should be in the edit summary in such cases? Thanks. --Drat70 (talk) 06:10, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Link to Wikipedia
you reverted my edit on Rotterdam: a link to Wikipedia. You explained this with a link that does not work. Perhaps you should change this. Apart from that, I don't quite understand your vision. To my humble opinion it is always useful to make relevant links to sister projects. See for instance: Wikivoyage:Sister_project_links#When_to_link. So please reconsider your behaviour. Greetings, --Dick Bos (talk) 09:38, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Dick Bos, Ikan Kekek: Hi there. Sorry for the wrong link.
- I understand where you are coming from, however I was not part of the discussion on the rules to links to Wikipedia. Maybe you should mention this to User:Ikan Kekek he reverted the other of your edits and is much more active than me and has been for a long time, so maybe he can explain better why this rule stands and how come there's a discrepancy between the links to Wikipedia page and the links to sister project page. Afaik this is so that all the essential information is present in the article in case it gets printed out for offline access. Cheers Drat70 (talk) 12:08, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for covering this, guys. Dick Bos, Wikis run on consensus, and the way that works is that policies adopted by consensus aren't changed until there's a consensus for change. That builds in a degree of conservatism that can be frustrating at times, but that's the way Wikis roll. Drat70 does a lot of great work in reverting edits that are at variance with site policies. It's not that Drat has some kind of individual vision that powers such edits, it's just the Drat is keeping the site as close to previously agreed-upon policies and formats as possible. You are welcome to reopen the discussion of adding more links to sister sites in articles, but I would suggest that you wait until new policies for opening links that are currently under discussion are put into effect, because part of the argument against putting inline links to Wikipedia all over Wikivoyage articles is that it will encourage people to surf to other sites and not come back. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:31, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Update: The change has been made: External links are opening up in a separate window. Go ahead and restart the discussion about adding additional links to sister sites if you like. The place to reopen the discussion is Wikivoyage talk:External links. But do read through previous discussions first, to get a feel for the nature of the objections that have been made. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:46, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Postal codes on Unst
Hi Drat70, is there a specific reason, why you removed the post codes from listings on Unst in this edit? In the UK, postal codes provide quite a precise location, so they are very useful to have (see Wikivoyage:Postal_codes). If you don't have any objections, I would revert the removals. Thanks for the other edits to the article. Xsobev (talk) 10:23, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- @Xsobev: Hi Xsobev . Yes, I am aware of this special rule for the UK. However I thought this only applies when the postcode allows to pinpoint the location quite precisely. I noticed that in rural areas of Scotland those postcode often span over the whole town or several villages, making them pretty useless. As there were two locations in this post with the same postcode, I assumed this was also the case here. Please feel free to revert if this was wrong. Thanks! Drat70 (talk) 12:32, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi, and thanks as always for your work! Template mergecredit was deleted on this site some time ago, as it's quite sufficient to merge the content and then redirect the article from which the content was merged. The history remains available in the redirect article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:16, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you! I was quite confused about that, as the template obviously didn't work. I think the page Wikivoyage:How to merge two pages should be adapted then, as that's where I got the instructions from. Drat70 (talk) 05:22, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi Drat70, You left no edit summary for your deletion of the Aquaholics entry on Diving the Cape Peninsula and False Bay. Do you have reason to believe that the entry was not valid? • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 05:26, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
- Hi @Pbsouthwood:. Sorry about the missing edit summary, I was going through a lot of dead links, and after a while I missed out some of the edit summaries.
- Concerning this specific entry. I've seen that the website is offline and so went to search for alternative sources. The only reference to this place I could find was the wikitravel article. Furthermore there is a different dive shop (Duck and Dive) at the same address, same floor which is also mentioned in this article. So I assumed this is an old entry and the place must have closed down.
- I see that you have been editing this article a lot, so if you have more updated information and this club is not actually closed, then I'm sorry for my mistake. Drat70 (talk) 07:36, 6 February 2017 (UTC)