User talk:ErnieNode

Edit reversions

Regarding your comments about your tour listings being reverted, there are two issues: the biggest is that Wikivoyage has very strict guidelines on tours (see WV:Tour), and guided tours are generally only considered appropriate when the destination cannot be visited without a guide. The second is that it appears that the tours are being added as advertising for a tour operator, which is considered touting and is strongly discouraged. If you disagree with these characterizations you are welcome to make your case, but the goal of preventing Wikivoyage from being used for advertising is a core value for the site, so edits which appear to be promotional are nearly always quickly removed. -- Ryan • (talk) • 17:07, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

It is not true that "guided tours are generally only considered appropriate when the destination cannot be visited without a guide." What the policy says is that they definitely should be included in such circumstances, ie a point completely irrelevant to this case. What the policy actually says is "In practice this policy disallows listing most audio tours, walking tours, and guided tours since the substance of such tours can generally be fulfilled by an independent traveller". So guided tours such as the one I added do qualify under the stated policy.

Here is the relevant policy:

Tours can be listed on Wikivoyage as long as they constitute a value-added activity. If a traveller could fulfill the substance of the tour on their own, the tour should not be listed.

Here are a few guidelines to assist determining whether a tour should be listed in our guides:

• The operator must have a "real world" office with a phone number and address where the tour is operated.
• Tours should offer something as a supplement, rather than a replacement for Wikivoyage guides. They should count as an activity available at a destination (e.g., a helicopter tour of a city, or a camel expedition into the Sahara).
• If the tour operator is providing a booking service or general travel planning then it should not be listed.
• Do not list resellers of tours, only list the actual tour operators.
• Always list tour operators if they are requisite to visit a certain area. Examples include tours required by law (e.g., Panmunjeom and Chernobyl) and tours required due to exceptional danger (e.g., war zones and extreme environments such as the Amazon, Antarctica, Space, etc).

In practice this policy disallows listing most audio tours, walking tours, and guided tours since the substance of such tours can generally be fulfilled by an independent traveller, and the information provided on such tours should ideally be included in the appropriate Wikivoyage article.

As you can see the tours in question not only qualify under this policy, but obviously qualify under this policy.

Have you read the page at touting? It consists of three sections:

• Identifying touting: 12 indicators, none of which apply in this case
• Contributing constructively: 6 bullets, all of which are complied with
• Examples: Perhaps you could let me know how my edits differ from the "good" example given, or resembles the "bad" example.

If you are not prepared to revert, then please advise how I lodge a complaint.

ErnieNode (talk) 07:52, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

You judge "lodged a complaint." I'm not sure you understand what Wikivoyage is, but there is no other way for you to complain.

In any case, it looks to me like you may be ignoring this fundamental part of the tour policy:

Tours can be listed on Wikivoyage as long as they constitute a value-added activity. If a traveller could fulfill the substance of the tour on their own, the tour should not be listed.

That means, if individual travellers can see these Cathar-related sights without hiring you, you don't get to list your tours or your company. As it further states:

"In practice this policy disallows listing most[...]guided tours since the substance of such tours can generally be fulfilled by an independent traveller[.]"

Meanwhile, your obvious anger about these deletions doesn't serve to show that you are motivated by service to the traveller, rather than commercial gain. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:21, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Warning to Newbys

Here's a summary of my experience on Wikivoyage. I found Wikivoyage a few weeks ago and thought what a good idea it was. I spent some time in the sandbox and reading various guidelines encouraging me to pitch in, and not to worry about getting things wrong, and telling me about the friendly and helpful community. I then thought about what I could add that would be useful to others, taking care to follow the relevant policies. Since there were a couple of tours that I went on last year that I could thoroughly recommend (because they provided lots of interesting information that was otherwise unavailable) I added them under Carcassonne and [Albi].

I checked back later to see if my edits had registered OK. There were no messages saying thank you for your effort. No message of welcome to the community. Nothing. Not even my edits. It took me some concerted effort to figure out that they had been deleted ("reverted") by Saqib. No explanation. No suggestions. No encouragement. Nothing. So I put the edits back and ask why they had been "reverted". In response they were once again reverted by Saqib. No explanation was given other than a link to Listings#Tour_listings, the policy on Tour listings. This was a bit puzzling because my edits obviously did comply with the policy - 100% as far as I could see. Anyone who knew the two places listed and who looked at what the details of the tours involved would have seen this immediately. On talk, I therefore asked this question "Saqib, Could you please explain why you are reverting my edits, even though they comply with the stated policy, as you will have known if you had followed the link included". But Saqib was clearly too important and too busy to provide a response.

Instead, a response came from Ryan. No welcome. No offer of help. He said that there were two "issues". The first was that "guided tours are generally only considered appropriate when the destination cannot be visited without a guide.". This of course is not true. What the policy says is that Tours can be listed on Wikivoyage as long as they constitute a value-added activity. If a traveller could fulfill the substance of the tour on their own, the tour should not be listed. (my emboldening). As I kept pointing out, my edits complied fully with the stated policy at Listings#Tour_listings, (since they do constitute a value-added activity and a traveller could certainly not fulfill the substance of the tour on their own, even with all available audioguides, guidebooks, and everything else available). Ryan's second "issue", was that "the tours are being added as advertising for a tour operator, which is considered touting and is strongly discouraged...". I looked at touting and found that my edits did not count as "touting" under the policy. I was then, and am now, completely mystified how anyone could read either edit as advertising or touting.

I was so annoyed that I asked how to complain. My assumption was that Saqib and Ryan must be just kids messing about and that a responsible adult would be able to put them right. But no. There is apparently no complaints mechanism, so if a group of kids fail to understand a policy or get some wacky unwarranted idea into their heads, or take a dislike to you, or just decide to back each other up irrespective of the facts, then there is nothing anyone can do about it.

Of course, neither Saqib nor Ryan responded to my key point - that my edits were in line with stated policies. Instead of addressing the points made, Ikan Kekek now joined in and said this

"In any case, it looks to me like you may be ignoring this fundamental part of the tour policy Tours can be listed on Wikivoyage as long as they constitute a value-added activity. If a traveller could fulfill the substance of the tour on their own, the tour should not be listed.

The idea of quoting back to me the fundamental part of the policy that I had myself relied on and emboldened was little short of malign genius. Ikan Kekek then added

"That means, if individual travellers can see these Cathar-related sights without hiring you [sic], you [sic] don't get to list your [sic] tours or your [sic] company. As it further states "In practice this policy disallows listing most[...]guided tours since the substance of such tours can generally be fulfilled by an independent traveller[.]".

I don't need to belabor this, but Ikan Kekek has gone to considerable lengths to ignore the "value added" criterion and the key fact that the substance of these tours cannot be fulfilled by an independent traveller - the whole point of the policy. He is now firmly convinced that I own a tour company. I find it difficult to believe that these are genuine errors.

Normally, if three out of three separate people suggest that I'm in the wrong, then I tend to suspect that they are right. But I have looked pretty carefully at this over the last few days, and there really is no question about it. I don't believe that Saqib, Ryan or Ikan Kekek have understood the policy (which is simple enough), or visited the places concerned, or even bothered to consider what might constitute value added in this case. I might have thought this was just wilful ignorance, except that all three have all gone out of their way to ignore or misconstrue every point I have made, and have then invented a pretty zany excuse to justify their mistake - my "obvious anger" proves that they are right!

So Saqib, Ryan and Ikan Kekek, I have no idea how your minds are working or why you you might want to behave like this. Frankly, I find your behaviour baffling. I'm sure you'll be delighted to learn that I will not be troubling you or Wikivoyage ever again with eccentric ideas about basic courtesy, listing attractions, adding value, complying with policy, or with my "obvious anger" or indeed with anything else.

ErnieNode (talk) 17:31, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Although I maybe run the danger of feeding a troll (and the fact that you appear to have copy-pasted this self-same text everywhere you could find indicates you might be one), you appear to be under a misapprehension. Can a traveler regardless of tour or no tour legally and actually reach the points the tour goes to on his/her own? If yes, it shouldn't be listed. If no, argue the case on the talk page. The information you might get during the tour are simply not relevant. Crudely put: There's [a website for that. And as to you being "accused of" owning a tour company... Well who but a owner of a tour company would so aggressively pursue an edit against stated policy after several reversions? Our mechanisms of handling unwanted edits are not 100% perfect, but they are very efficient at keeping the page from becoming cluttered with 100 useless pieces of advertising. Just imagine if every walking tour of Paris got its own listing... the don't tout and business owner policies exist for a reason. As does the policy on tours. Should you find it that a constructive contribution to WV is within your possibilities, your edits are most welcome of course. Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:34, 22 April 2015 (UTC)