Section headings: capitalize the first word in the title, and any proper names. Everything else should be lower case. See Wikivoyage:Section headers.
Listing addresses: include the street address for the business or attraction. Do not include the city (if the same as the page title), the state/province or postal code. See Wikivoyage:Listings.
SelfieCity, when you add into a listing address the town's name (where it is the same as the article), the state, and the zip code, you are creating work for other editors who end up cleaning up after you.
Thanks. Actually, someone told me that recently and they were right. Should I add Nuevo Ideal to the list of cities in the state of Durango? SelfieCity (talk) 05:18, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, great that you are expanding articles on Wikivoyage. I am however interested how you are creating listings, do we have an incorrect tool or document somewhere? A number of listing created do not have a bullet star at the start of the line and are starting with capital letter for the type, i.e. See not see. This will cause a few minor formatting and mapping issues. Have you used the Listings icons in the edit window? This also creates a spacing that is easier to read and edit. --Traveler100 (talk) 06:45, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Generally, yes, I noticed that articles generally have bullet points before them. I have often not followed this practice. That is because some other Wikivoyage pages, like some of the major entries on New York City don't have bullets. I'll use bullets now I know that's the only right way to do it. SelfieCity (talk) 15:19, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, that is a little different, is is classed as a Huge City with districts, treat it more like region which does not have listings. Do concern yourself, does not take too long to get the hang of the conventions here. --Traveler100 (talk) 21:08, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merry Christmas, SelfieCity, and thanks so much for all your diligent work, which has brought a lot of improvements!
One small but not totally unimportant favor I'd like to ask of you: When you post to talk (discussion) pages such as Talk:Morgan Hill, please sign each post. You can do that by typing 4 tildes (~) in a row at the end of the post. It's important to do that, because no-one will have an easy way to determine who posted a message if you don't sign it.
So I saw the comment on your user page about your interest in Guadelupe Island, about which I knew nothing. I started reading up on it, and ended up starting an article here using stuff from Wikipedia. It's very rough, but it's a start. Would you be interested in helping develop this article further? Ground Zero (talk) 02:33, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The other thing is a much less important issue even than this: Wikivoyage has a rather restrictive guideline on posting photos of businesses. The gist of it is: "As a general rule, photos of individual businesses, especially those seen to be promotional, will be removed. Exceptions include images that are meant to be illustrative of the type of business establishment in a certain region, or those of exceptionally famous establishments." It's for this reason that I removed the photo of Strizzi's in Pleasanton, which is not particularly interesting to look at. If the restaurant is super-famous regionally (i.e., for some ways beyond Pleasanton), I may have been wrong to do so, but to give you a bit of a sense of current Wikivoyage practice, in the Manhattan/Lower East Side and Manhattan/East Village articles, respectively, photos of Katz's Delicatessen and McSorley's Old Ale House are included. Katz's is world-famous for its pastrami, history, and having been featured in When Harry Met Sally, and McSorley's is the oldest continuously operating bar in New York, reportedly dating back to 1854.
That makes sense. If that's the case, the one inside the main Inklings room could also go. With some of the park articles (like Henry Coe and Del Valle), they are large parks with campsites, so they pass the "can you sleep there" test. Selfie City (talk) 04:13, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The "can you sleep there" test is just a rough guideline. There are places where you can't legally sleep for the night that have so much to say about them that they are viable articles (e.g., Angkor Archaeological Park, Manhattan/Central Park), but there are also places where you can sleep that nevertheless work better being parts of other articles. It's pretty common for an article to also cover some neighboring towns, or even to cover someplace at a fair distance as a "Go next" entry instead of an entirely different destination article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:23, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure about the interior of Inklings. It's an interesting room. I think the photo could remain if you like, but if so, the photo of the Tri-Valley Jazz Trio playing there needs to be removed because promoting one business with two different photos just seems unacceptable to me.
I'll remove the picture. When it comes to inline primary links . . . I'm guessing you mean Livermore, I removed some of the ones to minor organizations, not the ones for restaurants and that sort of thing. Selfie City (talk) 15:18, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen you remove such links a number of times and don't remember specific cases off-hand other than the 100-year-old lightbulb. I'm happy to leave you to your own judgment and I'm not saying you were wrong to remove them, just that it's not always best to do so. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:55, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I'll just be more careful about which ones I remove in future. I just thought that links could only be used for restaurant listings, etc. Selfie City (talk) 15:56, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
VfD on Mexican Riviera
I was archiving the discussion while you posted. You didn't give me much time to complete this. The archived discussion doesnt include your comment, because that was posted after I archived. Your comment therefore has been deleted. If you want to included in the archive, feel free to add it. Ground Zero (talk) 16:44, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
An award for you!
The Wikivoyage Barncompass
I've been watching you. Not only have you been doing good work, but you've been doing a lot of it. I hope you like it here and decide to stick around long-term, because Wikivoyage could use more contributors like you. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 02:30, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
First, that article is an itinerary; this will be a travel topic. However, I plan to write about more jazz locations than just the ones in that itinerary - the itinerary only goes up to the 1930s and gives little mention to Charlie Parker, Ornette Coleman, Benny Golson, and other jazz musicians in more recent times. That article is talking about one area and time period in jazz; I plan for this to cover the whole thing. Selfie City (talk) 01:57, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your thoughts on this. By the way, I also want to mention that I'm not blaming the itinerary. It does a decent job of talking about the jazz of a certain period, but it still only really talks about a particular period in jazz. Of course, that itinerary could be called the "Traditional jazz track", which would more accurately describe the purpose that article is serving. Selfie City (talk) 02:20, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Administrator?
How would you feel about being nominated to be an administrator? You haven't been here that long, but I think you've demonstrated the necessary level of interest and commitment. If you are willing, I will make the nomination. Regards, Ground Zero (talk) 00:54, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Selfie, I am sorry for the rough ride you are getting through this nomination. I feel partly responsible for having nominated you so soon. You are making a tremendous contribution to Wikivoyage. Although we disagree on some matters of policy, that is part of life in a collaborative project. I still think you would make an excellent administrstor, and I look forward to supporting your re-nomination sometime down the road. It is great to have you in the project. Ground Zero (talk) 05:16, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I hope to revisit this in the future, too. I don't think it's your fault that you are not yet familiar with the hornets' nests on this site, but you've stumbled into a very big one in the Pub. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:51, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi SelfieCity. I'm glad to see you're working on upgrading city articles, but please make sure that they actually meet the criteria explained in Wikivoyage:City guide status. I'm noticing quite a few articles being added to the "usable" category that don't actually meet the criteria, so please be careful. Thanks! —Granger (talk·contribs) 13:58, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Which ones are you referring to? All of the ones I've been upgrading to some information about getting in, and information about where to sleep. If they don't have anything in the "eat" section, that's because one of the hotels includes a restaurant according to the article. Selfie City (talk) 14:01, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm referring to articles such as Afandou (which has no "Eat" listings), Åbenrå (which has no attractions or activities), and Altus (Arkansas) (which has no "Sleep" listings even though it says that the town has bed-and-breakfasts).
It's true that a couple of the articles I've reverted mention food options in the "Drink" or "Sleep" section—I guess it can be argued that that's enough to satisfy the "Eat" requirement, but I think that's debatable. At minimum I think the "Eat" section should contain a pointer to the section that has the restaurant listings. —Granger (talk·contribs) 14:10, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I can see now that Altus (Arkansas), for example, lacks truly useful information about where to sleep. I'm pretty sure my standard for usable was too low when I was upgrading these. Sorry if I've caused any problems with this. Selfie City (talk) 14:13, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe that's advisable, rather than just speedily deleting it. Dunno. Since you're the author, I think maybe I could just delete it with your say-so. Granger, do you think that would be OK? Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:48, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I saw on the "Vandalism in Progress" page that you accused me (and my parent page, User:Libertarianmoderate) of being a guy named "Telstra". How can that be? From what little I know about this "Telstra" user, it seems like he's from Australia. I'm from America. If I were Telstra, why would I go to all the trouble of flying to America, going through TSA and customs, spending 1000s of dollars, just so I can hide out in America, set up three sockpuppet accounts, and seek revenge? Couldn't I have just used a computer at a friend's house?
Also, on an unrelated note, that was a great idea to format your page like an actual city article! I would never have thought of that myself! Of course, I'd have to create an account with the word "City" in it first. LibMod (talk) 20:07, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, well just some things to say: you edited two pages that were also edited by Telstra, so I thought there was a connection until Traveler100 convinced me that you weren't Telstra. Also, thank you for making clear that you are the same person as LibertarianModerate. LibMod and LibertarianModerate are sockpuppet accounts and this made me suspicious that you could be Telstra or some other vandal, but now you've made that clear, I can make that clear with the others.
Finally, I want to make clear that you had a three-day ban. Creating another account before the ban ended is considered by WV to be a block evasion. I know you didn't create an extra account to purposely cause problems but in future don't create multiple accounts with the intention of getting around a block if you ever have one again. Thanks, and hope to see you keep contributing to the site! Selfie City (talk) 20:57, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And a little background to Telstra: yes, he/she's an Australian user who makes contributions to the site that are fairly harmless, but not very helpful either. He/she creates multiple accounts to avoid any bans or blocks on his/her account so he/she can continue making useless contributions over and over again. The fact you had created multiple accounts seemed to be a warning sign, but you're not Telstra because Telstra never replies to statements on his/her talk page or makes any comments. And once again, thanks for your contributions and keep contributing. Selfie City (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I hope you're not offended by my connecting you to Telstra. I'm not trying to cause any problems for new users and would like to see you contribute regularly to the site, since we have plenty of users and administrators but not enough contributors on WV. Selfie City (talk) 21:05, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, because recently I edited a page that had been created by that person; wasn't completely sure if Telstra or not, so I didn't take action. Selfie City (talk) 17:01, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Just a tip with the activity you are working on. Enable the "ErrorHighlighter" gadget from your user preferences. After enabling the gadget, invalid links will display followed by a very noticeable "dead link" warning. For example Daytona Beach had 12 listing with broken web links, and Charleston (South Carolina) about 6 when upgraded to Guide status. --Traveler100 (talk) 15:00, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You mean, this will let me know if I'm upgrading something to guide that has some issues with links? Thanks, Traveler100, although I haven't been doing a lot of upgrading to guide over the last few days.
Well it is not quit that smart. There is a bot that is run a couple of times a year that marks links that do not work at that point. These marks will be seen highlighted in yellow when this option is on. The link could be working again but there is always the possibility another company is now using the domain. --Traveler100 (talk) 05:04, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes, I vaguely remember seeing something about flagging dead links, when was in article history. Thanks for telling me about this. Selfie City (talk) 14:41, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry, Libertarianmoderate, you said nothing to me that was rude (you weren't even addressing me in the first place). The real reason I responded to your comment, which I (to some extent) said in the first place, was that I was bored, looking for things to do while I was on the website, and discovered your comment and responded. Now I've gone back to to Talk:Baqubah, though, I'd say that Ground Zero is correct — there are many, many articles on Wikivoyage with formatting errors, so don't go by other articles to tell what's correct formatting. Thanks anyway! Selfie City (talk) 13:47, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Given the frequency of vandalism to your userspace, you may wish to get it protected so that only auto-confirmed users (i.e. accounts which have been registered for 4 days) can edit. It's entirely up to you, but if you do want it, you can ask me or any other admin at any time. Best wishes, --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:14, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I saw that the same thing happened to OhanaUnited. And protecting in that way sounds like a good idea. ThunderingTyphoons!, could you do that please? Normally I'm not worried about vandals to my userpages but 1) vandals use some pretty terrible language, and 2) if you don't add the protection, you guys end up spending time restoring my own user/user talk pages. Selfie City (talk) 15:00, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Besides {{ping}}, are there any other, easier ways to type in a reference to someone's user name? Just asking in case I've been doing it the long way all this time. Thanks. Selfie City (talk) 04:05, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm using the normal wikicode editor (not the visual editor), and I think it's very easy to click the link icon above the editing window, type the user name and click insert link. ϒpsilon (talk) 13:11, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
When I made the articles for Rojava and the cantons, I guess it never occurred to me what would happen if it collapses entirely. It's likely that Rojava will try to save itself by making some kind of deal where they trade land for autonomy. If one city is turned over to Assad, we can move its article back to where it was before. But if the whole system collapses, what happens to the Rojava article and the canton articles? Do we keep it as a region, like in the case of Iranian Azerbaijan? Or do we move it back to the Syrian Desert? Libertarianmoderate (talk) 15:20, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
IMO this is one reason to avoid creating new articles and region structures for places that are unvisitable and unstable—if the situation changes, the articles may have to be rewritten completely before they're ever useful to anyone. —Granger (talk·contribs) 15:36, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I'm not too keen on writing about war zones but User:Libertarianmoderate created these new region articles, so I tried to make the situation better by asking him to create at least 3-4 lower-level city articles for each new region he had created. I personally think with the war zone articles that they need not be edited until the wars end. Selfie City (talk) 16:12, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nvrm, if Rojava collapses, I'll fix it myself and revert everything back to what it was before. Al-Qamishli would be part of the SE Desert, and Tel Abyad would be in NW Syria. Libertarianmoderate (talk) 16:53, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
:::I don't think so. These are all your logs, everything from the thanks you have sent, to the pages you've created, even all the abuse filters you've triggered (just kidding) but there doesn't seem to be a Wikilove log. Pressing the button just opens a window where you can choose between a barnstar, a goat, or make your own custom template, so if you haven't done that before then chances are you haven't sent any Wikilove messages using that button. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:36, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Yes, definitely. I was actually just going to an article where they talk about bighorn sheep. Also to clarify: when I say I went through all my contributions, I mean that I went through all my Special:contributions pages, not that I went through every single one of the 5,000 contributions I ever made! Thanks for the information though. --- Selfie City (talk | contributions) 19:09, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your recent report on my talk page; that vandal has been dealt with. Not by me; someone blocked him globally (all WMF sites) before I went to see if I should block him. I'm a WV admin so I could have blocked him here, but not globally.
Oh yeah, someone else also had a 00:00 timestamp "today" in one of their comments. Also, if someone sends a goat in my direction, could it please not be the goat? Just kidding. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 03:53, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And thank you for your work archiving the pub and other pages. These would be thankless tasks but for the fact I just thanked you. Best regards, Ground Zero (talk) 21:16, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I just wanted to let you know, in case you didn't, that I'm a professional flutist and composer with a Doctorate in music who taught college music courses for 15 years. That doesn't mean I can't be wrong or have incomplete knowledge about certain things musical, but it could be something to keep in mind for the sake of context. And if you'd like to see a system of musical instrument classification that's still in common use among ethnomusicologists (and therefore works to classify instruments worldwide), have a look at w:Hornbostel–Sachs. Just as we don't use IPA symbols despite their use among linguists, I don't propose for us to use Hornbostel–Sachs, either, but we can move just a tad toward that, IMO, and that's what I'm trying to do.
Yes, you clearly have a lot of musical experience and you mentioned to me that you're a musician before. Perhaps a good solution for the naming of instrument groups would be just to list the most common musical instruments to start with (without trying to classify them in sections like percussion, etc.) and then we can add more instrument sections as the article progresses and, if the article gets too long or has too many sections, we split it out. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 21:41, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi SelfieCity. I see you moved Food to Food and drink a few days ago, but you didn't fix the breadcrumbs in all the subtopics. For all the articles in Category:Food, the "PartOfTopic" template needs to be fixed to link to Food and drink instead of Food. I don't have time to fix them all now, so I hope you can. If not, I can fix them when I have the time. In the future please make sure to do this when you move a page. —Granger (talk·contribs) 00:54, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, you didn't know. Thanks for doing most of them! Just so you know for the future, it's also necessary to create a new category and adjust the subcategories as I've done here: [1][2]. (To be clear, all this stuff is only necessary when moving an article that has other articles breadcrumbed under it—for bottom-level articles you don't need to worry about it.) —Granger (talk·contribs) 03:39, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think the issues that held up your earlier nomination have been pretty well ironed out, and IMO you continue to make impressive progress as a member of the community.
Honestly, I've been sort of counting the months with the hope in mind and was planning to bring this up in a couple months, but if you think I'm ready to be an administrator, I would be happy to proceed with this.
Thank you for you and others' help with in teaching me about this website. It's given a lot of experience and helped me continue to develop my writing, geography, and just people in general. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 01:54, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ikan - to my recollection, the thing that sunk SelfieCity's earlier nomination was not his active status at Wikitravel per se, but his specific assertion that Wikitravel was not "as bad as some Wikivoyagers make out" and that they "have reason not to like us [because] we've taken away a lot of their business". Those comments seemed to be an honest (though serious) mistake borne out of unfamiliarity with our history with Wikitravel, and to his credit, SelfieCity seems to have both learned from the incident and not allowed it to discourage him from continuing to grow as a member of our community.
I have to admit that I was unaware until now that SelfieCity actually edits Wikitravel, and I'll concede that the fact that he continues to contribute there despite knowing what he knows now brings up certain questions. But I don't think that necessarily closes the door to the possibility of him becoming an admin. My question is, at the end of the day, what exactly is the problem as you see it with having a Wikivoyage administrator who is also an active contributor to Wikitravel? Does it boil down to a principled stand against divided loyalties? One could argue cogently in favor of that, but in the past, consensus has avoided taking such stands: for instance, we have neglected to outright prohibit editors on our site from maintaining active Wikitravel user accounts (there are several who do; Justin is another one), and also my earlier proposal to prohibit all copying of content from Wikitravel, even with proper attribution per the CC license, was rejected as too draconian.
Or is the fear that SelfieCity would somehow use his admin status at Wikivoyage for the benefit of Wikitravel? Personally, I think he has ably demonstrated his good faith over the time that he's contributed here, and I would put the possibilities of his being some sort of mole for Internet Brands at close to zero, but for the sake of argument let's pretend that he is. The fact is that having a "man on the inside" at Wikivoyage would be of very little actual value to Wikitravel, at least at the level of Administrator, which is still pretty low on the totem pole compared to posts like Bureaucrat, Steward, CheckUser, etc. Admins actually have very little additional insight into the inner workings of our site over and above what ordinary users are privy to, and there's very little damage that can be done with administrator-level sysop tools that can't be easily undone. And if push comes to shove, admins can be userbanned just like any other user (as recent entries on my user talk page have shown!) And this is leaving aside the question of whether Internet Brands is even particularly inclined to want to do this. In the year or so after the fork they would periodically send trolls and vandals over here to annoy us, but it's been years since we've seen any of that, and IB seems to have lately resigned themselves to a relatively peaceful, if grudging, coexistence with us.
A major issue was what he posted to Wikitravel, namely the attempt to mediate between the two sites. By the way, I was operating under the misimpression that we had decided against allowing any copying from Wikitravel. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:09, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There is to my knowledge one existing admin who also contributes regularly to WT, so SelfieCity's contributions to that other site shouldn't be a barrier to a nomination here.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 18:01, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Generally I edit different pages on WT than here to make sure there is no overlap or accidental plagiarism, should I say. To put everything in perspective, though, I have edited about 300 times on WT compared to several thousand edits here. And a large proportion of those edits are DOTM nominations. Also, I created this account in December 2017 and the Wikitravel account in June 2018. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 23:08, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I looked through your WT contributions last week while I was checking their York article for SEO purposes and saw nothing to be worried about. I suggest those with concerns do the same.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:21, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Current considerations
I think we ought to get these current considerations somewhat down and clarified before we proceed with my administrator nomination. Unless we decide for sure that contributing to Wikitravel will not stop this nomination, the nomination itself (which has not begun yet) will have too much opposition to be united and effective. If I fail 2 nominations for administrator, any future nominations for me to be administrator will become a waste of time.
I've explained my position and you're all able to see my WT contributions. I still am absolutely willing to become an administrator, but if this nomination is going to be as slow and complex as that of Kavanaugh* I'd rather stay what I am now. I understand there's a process we need to go through and I do not want to harm the nominating process for administrator here but I'd be interested in knowing where this will lead. But in the mean time it's still a joy to serve Wikivoyage. Thanks!
Alternatively, you could leave it for now and wait until your great contributions become so obvious that no-one will voice any WT-based objections, and people will stay stuff like "Wait, SC isn't an admin already?!". You'd have my support if you were nominated today (and that's still an option IMO), but maybe we haven't left long enough for the WT stuff to blow over for others' liking.
Thanks for the kind words! But yes, maybe it would be better to wait a month or two so the Wikitravel thing completely blows over. In my mind it was a while ago, but to some people, especially those who do not edit so often, it may still seem like a very recent event. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 13:17, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Patroller?
One thing we could do right now to give you a couple of anti-vandal tools is to make you a patroller. This is a kind of 'admin-lite' position which gives you the ability to "rollback" (undo) several edits at once, and also allows to you physically 'patrol' newer users' edits (hence the name). There's no nomination process, just say you're interested, and we can ask either User:Ikan Kekek or User:LtPowers, our bureaucrats, to make you one.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:37, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've just been through and I've marked a few changes as patrolled. I think I'm getting the hang of it now, just that I haven't used the Rollback tool yet. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 02:42, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘I keep accidentally hitting the "rollback" button on mobile because it's easy to do on accident. So I'm not going to use mobile in future — now I understand when admins talk about accidentally hitting the wrong button, etc! --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 01:21, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Historic houses
Hi. I don't agree with redirecting that to Museums. Loads of historic houses are not museums. I'd recommend deletion, unless someone wants to write an article on the topic of historic houses, which seems too broad for an article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:06, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, but I want to make sure we see eye to eye. I think of the fact that some chateaux in France can't even be visited under normal circumstances because they're occupied. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:32, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I see. I was actually somewhat mistaken that there was quite a lot of information related to historic houses in the "Museums" article. It's actually only the caption that brings this up. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 02:33, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, there's a lot of overlap, so I understand that. But neither category is close to a perfect match with the other - many museums are in modern buildings and many historic houses serve other functions. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:09, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Start one if you like, but keep in mind, it's a bit of a messy overlap. Some old houses and palaces are museums because of their history, whereas others are occupied by museums of art or something else. Maybe the Louvre Palace is a poor example, but it was a royal palace before it was turned into an art museum. Right here in New York, the Frick House houses a collection of art based on Frick's own collection, but it's not a museum primarily about Frick. The Isabella Gardiner Museum in Boston is similar, except that they can't collect new pieces and must display everything exactly as she did. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:08, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also see w:Civil rights movement (1865–1896). The fact that the KKK and Democratic Party effectively crushed the post-Civil War civil rights movement in no way retroactively annuls its existence, and following the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision, 19th-century civil rights laws, newly again in force, have made a difference.
I think most people think of the Civil Rights Movement as existing during the time of Martin Luther King, Jr. But like any assumption, if it is wrong there is no reason to go along with it. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 00:07, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's debatable. The civil rights movement in the 19th century ended chattel slavery that had existed on a huge scale. Yes, especially in the South, they arrested freedmen after that just for hanging out on the street and enslaved them in chain gangs, but it was still a big change. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:10, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, but it was in a larger sense the result of the victory of an abolitionist party, the Republican Party. The abolitionist movement wasn't called the civil rights movement, but the right to live free is one of the most fundamental civil rights of all. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:28, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely there were two main times in history (excluding modern times) when civil rights, in particular for African-Americans, were significantly improved/expanded. Ironically, there were both in the '60s: 1860s and 1960s. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 03:33, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Still, though, it's somewhat amazing to think that we are actually closer to 2060 than we are to 1960. But still too many years away to look ahead that far in that direction with ease. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 13:41, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi SelfieCity, just wanted to let you know that I started the Greenland section in Indigenous cultures of North America since you're interested in Greenland. I also agree that we need to split the article up eventually into perhaps the USA/Canada/Greenland and Mexico/Central America. I'm not sure where the Caribbean will go. It can probably have its own article as it's a distinct sphere. Some native Caribbean cultures were in fact influenced by South America. Gizza (roam)04:08, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that that's where the articles should be divided. By the way, I think for Greenland there are some interesting maps in relation to the Viking-dominated and Inuit-dominated parts of the region over a period of about 600 years. It's probably on Wikipedia. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 04:39, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, man. At this point, I'm definitely ready to vote for you for Admin if you want to try for it again. You've made yourself very valuable to this project, and I think you've also proven your trustworthiness. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:44, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Probably best to ask the most active admins Andre or Ikan what's the appropriate thing to do with the talk page; I guess it should be kept. ϒψιλον (talk) 18:03, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No, just leave it there. Anywhere else and it's of no use (though the only possible use I can foresee is as justification for not recreating the article in the future). --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 18:12, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am taking bets on how long it will be before the power and prestige of this appointment goes to his head and he runs amuck through the project smiting anyone who has slighted him in the past. 24 hours? 48 hours? Congratulations nonetheless. Ground Zero (talk) 18:09, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there! Firstly, let me start by congratulating on the recent upgrade. I understand that goats are now a common means of celebrating achievements, so have some travelling goats from me!
I'm moving this here because also discussing this in the pub will interfere with the ongoing discussion. Would you mind running me step by step through what you're doing to get {{Pagebanner}} to redlink? I may not have an answer or explanation, but I can always give it a shot.
Thirdly, I promised a while back to make some video tutorials on making static maps. I am just letting you know that due to some technical difficulties I didn't manage to record audio the first time around, and gave it a few more shots after, but I haven't got a satisfying result yet. I'll have to record audio in post production, but I hope to still get a video tutorial up someday. Just keeping you posted, since this is a promise after all :) -- Wauteurz (talk) 20:46, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, now by the way, you were the person who did the North Dakota static map for me, right? And this is how long you said it took:
15:51; Looking for source material (3 minutes)
15:54; Designing layers in Inkscape, general preparation work (1 minute)
15:55; Improving and stitching source material (14 minutes)
16:09; Mapping highways and Interstate routes (35 minutes)
16:44; Mapping waterways and lakes (33 minutes)
17:21; Labelling cities and highways (14 minutes)
17:35; Saving, interrupting for a break (4 hours, 25 minutes)
22:00; Continuing, mapping tertiary roads (34 minutes)
22:34; Drawing frame (1 minute)
22:35; Drawing regions (45 minutes)
23:20; Labelling unlabelled infrastructure (31 minutes)
23:51; First export and evaluation (2 minutes)
23:53; Annotating regions and frame elements (13 minutes)
00:06; First final export (3 minutes)
00:09; Files uploaded to Commons
Thanks for what you've done so far to help out with the static maps. I intend to upload my own static map in the near future; it's not very good but it is a start. I don't know how long it took though; maybe a couple hours or so, maybe an hour and a half, I can't say for sure.
So about {{pagebanner}}: Basically, what I do sometimes when I create an article is that I create the article as usual but at the top instead of using {{pagebanner}} or whatever, I use just {{pagebanner}} with nothing added to the end. It works, but in the code it implies that it doesn't work. It's hard to explain because the source mode editor I use is, for some weird reason, the 2003 version or whatever, so things show up in source mode a little differently than they do for most people. It works fine but makes it hard to explain some things.
Yes, the North Dakota map was made by me. There are quite a few maps that I made over time that never made it out onto Commons just because I wasn't satisfied with the result, which means that I have a load of unfinished SVGs across what now would be three different PCs, but so long as I enjoy drawing those maps, I don't intent to stop drawing them.
I've never encountered the 2003 source editor, so I haven't a clue how you turn that on and off, but I know as much as that you can enable the editing toolbar, better known as the 2010 wikitext editor under Special:Preferences > Editing. As for the template itself, its switch functions are designed a bit weird and have one too many pipes consistently. This might be what is causing it to mess up in your case, but I can't be sure. Essentially what it logically would do, is accept a blank parameter as a pre-set, as for Pagebanner default.jpg to appear, the presets "none", "Europe", "North America", "Pagebanner default.jpg", "Pagebanner_default.jpg" and " " are accepted. Half of those presets (the ones listing the filename) are useless too, I'm pretty sure. I would only expect it to fail as soon as you enter {{Pagebanner|}} instead of the fully blank template (without the pipe). It's mostly speculation from my end here. What I can do is edit {{Pagebanner/sandbox}} as soon as I have the time to not have some of these parameters, at which point you could see if it gives you the same results. Wikitext templates are often written without directly addressing the issues, but turning around them a bit. Pagebanner is no exception, even though it is a well-written template. I'll let you know as soon as the sandbox version is changed, which will most likely be later today :) -- Wauteurz (talk) 07:37, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing was ever failing; it was just that it seemed to imply that it was failing. When I was in code, it came up as {{pagebanner}}, which I assumed meant it was signalling an error message. But it always worked. Yes, sorry for the confusion. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 23:32, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I must have misinterpreted what you meant. The actual issue sounds very much like a fault in whatever add-ons you're using in your editor. There's not really anything I can do with that aside from suggest that you turn whatever is causing the issue off, but that's up to you to decide. In any case, as for the maps: I've just updated Requests for maps, so if you need a map to create, there are a few there that have been ignored for 12 years in some cases, and I might on short term add a load more to the list. If you ever run into any issues when drawing static maps, you're free to reach out to me or send me an email. I could also give some pointers if you give me a heads-up when you do post that static map, should that be something you'd like. I'd be happy to help regardless! :) -- Wauteurz (talk) 20:27, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
About the static maps: in the near future I'm going to upload a static map of mine. (It's not as good as yours by any means, but it's something.) How do you do it with the credits, you know, the copyleft. For example, I traced my map from a screenshot I took of an OpenStreetMap. How would I give credit when uploading to Commons? I assume you just say so in the description, but if that's not the case, is there some other way to do it? --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 03:22, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please refer to my latest map. I have been pretty hands-off when it comes to rights, but it is only fair to reference OSM if that's what was used as a base. I'm now updating the few maps I based off of OSM data to fit this template:
{{Information
|description={{en|1=Static SVG map of the Sydfynske Øhav (South Funen Archipelago), intended for usage on Wikivoyage.}}
|date=2018-11-09
|source={{own}}, based on OpenStreetMap data.
|author=[[User:Wauteurz|Wauteurz]], OpenSteetMap contributors
|permission={{ODbL OpenStreetMap}}
|other versions=[[:File:Sydfynske Øhav Wikivoyage Map.png|Sydfynske Øhav Wikivoyage Map.png]]
}}
I have only used OSM base sets for a few maps, so I can't say that I have a lot of experience with this template, but if it ends up failing, I'll have you know. According to the used templates, it is at least correct when it comes to placement and usage. Work does not have to be published under the same license as the OSM data is according to the content of the template. Licensing it under CC-BY-SA 4.0, as I do, should therefore be a-okay. -- Wauteurz (talk) 16:13, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If you take a look at the deletion log, you will see that I "deleted" some pages to make way for a redirect. (e.g. it says on "00:07, September 2, 2018 SelfieCity (talk | contribs) deleted redirect Western Valley by overwriting".
That's fine except for one thing: I'm not an admin. And only admins can delete pages. Is this some kind of malfunction, or an error message not working or something? Or can anyone delete redirects in the process of making way for another one? --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 03:04, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There is one very small loophole... it's possible for a non-admin to move an article over top of an existing redirect if that redirect has no history and points to the article being moved. This exists so that non-admins can revert page-move vandalism, effectively reversing a move so that the redirection points in the opposite direction. It's rare, I don't think I've ever done it, but the one narrow exception technically does exist. K7L (talk) 04:53, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I always add a space after headings if I'm editing the source. Do you have to do that? I thought I read that somewhere in the manual of style, but that might have not even been on Wikivoyage. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 19:25, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A space character after last equal sign (=) - No; if you are talking about a newline after a heading, for readability it would be nice to do - not necessary though as needed newline is taken care of... A newline after listings is ok to do as well for visual editorial ease and listing separation but also not necessary when using the mediawiki editor. -- Matroc (talk) 05:06, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think newlines are nice around templates and images, to separate them from the text. If the lines happens to be the same length it is otherwise easy to miss, especially frustrating when you see something in a diff or the article itself and cannot find the right place in the section when you try to edit it (on WP the typical problem is the end of the fact box template, here I think the problem is smaller, but I still like the newlines for clarity).
For list items there is a problem: if you put a newline between items MediaWiki starts a new list. The break is usually not visible, but speech synthesizers usually make it audible. If the listings end with "}}" on its own line, that is enough for separation.
Newline should note be between listings, as LPfi point out, it starts a new list which for people using browsers for the blind could cause unnecessary complication when being verbalised. --Traveler100 (talk) 08:45, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
By adding this post to my talk page, I will reach 5 digits of contributions, less than a week after becoming an administrator. Thanks to everyone on Wikivoyage for what you've all done in making this a great travel guide for us. It's an uphill battle against the vandals, etc., but we're doing it.
Thanks, although there are some bureaucrats and admins around here who have several times as many contributions as I have. I haven't thought of my number of contributions as particularly many, really, at least not as much as 10,000 seems. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 00:59, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to take a Wikibreak for about 1 week, maybe a little more. It is due to a few things, but mainly problem users and edits recently. I think everyone will understand. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 21:56, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Today, my Wikivoyage account is one year old (December 15, 2017). --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 7:05 PM, 15 December 2018 (Pacific Time)
I see in watchlist a change in visibility by you to my talk page. However in the page history I cannot work out what you did today, rather than some other time. What did you do? --Traveler100 (talk) 17:14, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
We clearly had consensus for it to become official policy, and frankly, leaving the discussion open was doing more harm than good, if you know what I mean. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 07:29, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I assume you will be moving England (and another article back to their appropriate locations?) —The preceding comment was added by ShakespeareFan00 (talk • contribs)
Regarding this edit - WikiVisually is a site that reuses our content (AFAIK with proper attribution per the copyleft license). If you saw something on Wikivoyage that "looked similar to a phrase on WikiVisually", it's almost certain that the text originated here, not there. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 05:38, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The rewordings attempted elsewhere in the article were so that 'flooding' in general could be covered. Not all flooding is 'flash' in the technical sense, but to a traveller, all floods are a potential issue, and trying to travel through flooded areas has related issues regardless of the type of flood. The rename suggestion was prompted by the comments in the pub, and on the section someone added to York. Floods in York aren't 'flash floods' as such.
Per the comments in the pub there are three types of 'flooding' mentioned :
Rapid flash floods - which we have an article on.
Storm surges, which typically affect coastal, tidal areas, as a consequence of a "sea swell" during a heavey storm..
The 'winter' inland flood caused by prolonged rainfall, in an upland region which then travels downstream above the nominal cpacity of a river to cope with it.
To a traveller there are related risks associated with each, and I'm not sure they are that different, hence a query about widening the scope of the guide.
ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:47, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's just that it's the kind of thing I prefer to be careful about saying behind closed doors because I don't want to offend or harm any new users with good intentions — for example, if a user found out about text in an abuse filter that seemed mean or whatever. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 15:42, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I still oppose any use of the abuse filter notes to discuss anything but activities of long-term vandals, as I have said in the pub. If the scope of discussion expands beyond that, I will oppose the new anti-vandal measures when the "trial period" ends and discussion is renewed. ARR8 (talk | contribs) 16:55, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
About my actions on the filter, I got blocked to make any edit to any page (including my own talk page), and my adjustment got me unblocked. Now I can think it's funny but half an hour ago it was extreme anger. What a relief to be able to write again. Ibaman (talk) 20:57, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your nominating me, but looking at where we're at, I think I'm going to remove myself from consideration. Honestly, I can understand that people would want to see more involvement in policy discussions and so forth to demonstrate broader knowledge before making an admin. While I would have sought to very cautious at first and rely on advice on other editors ( and I'e tried to read a good bit of policy and discussion)... it's clear more is needed. Based on the thoughtful feedback from a couple longtime contributors, I think it's clear where this is going. Please feel free to tell me if you think I'm quitting too soon, but otherwise, I'll make it official on the nominations page shortly. JakeOregon (talk) 01:41, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I understand your concerns, and I think if you feel this way about the nomination, it's best not to go ahead with it. I'd say, in that case, you should wait a few months and participate in the pub, dotm, dotm banners, and vfd pages. If you do that and revert vandalism (use recent changes) and I think you'll make fast progress toward a second nomination.
@JakeOregon: I've now archived the nomination per user decision. But I hope you stay with us; as long as we know you are actively participating with other users, it will be clear that you are a future administrator. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 01:51, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like a reasonable decision. Just keep on working, and maybe take some of the objections into account, and we can revisit this toward the end of the year or next year. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:44, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Uploads
Hey SC, great job on the banners you've uploaded so far! If you have any basic GIMP or ImageMagick questions, you can ask me in addition to the usual contributors. I wanted to remind you of our Wikivoyage:Non-free content#Exemption Doctrine Policy, in case you forgot, which says that freely licensed works and their derivatives aren't allowed here, but should instead go on Commons. Some banners do get copied here, but only, I believe, if they are selected to go on the main page, as an anti-vandalism measure. There's a FileExporter under Beta tools to easily copy local images over to Commons, if you don't want to go through the hassle of reuploading. Thanks, ARR8 (talk | contribs) 03:22, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've fixed the vandal problem. On your original point, we upload Destination of the Month banners directly to Wikivoyage, as far as I understand. I am not uploading any other pictures directly to WV. I believe AndreCarrotflower uploads them here as well. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 04:21, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You're right. The philosophy is that such highly visible images should be under local control, rather than subject to deletion by the whims of Commons admins, which happens with depressing frequency. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 15:10, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You brought up a good point here. You wrote, we use {{eat}} rather than {{listing|type=eat}}. Not sure if you've seen the discussion, but I'm trying to change that. As you use the visual editor, I believe, the change wouldn't affect you, but, since you would see the markup produced on every page, care to weigh in? As far as I can see, there are some technical reasons to prefer the |type= forms over the alias forms, and I can't think of any downsides to the change, but I'd like to hear them if there are any. Thanks, ARR8 (talk | contribs) 15:47, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This is only for the default for new listings; the alias format will still be supported. Though, if we were to ever phase it out, the change should be relatively simple with a bot. ARR8 (talk | contribs) 17:46, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If you ignore the "but" and consider the rest, you must admit that removing "except" changes the meaning. (I don't know about English, but in Swedish "men utom", i.e. the literal translation of the two words, is often used, so I suppose I understand what was meant.) --LPfi (talk) 17:55, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Tap water is drinkable throughout the country, but except in certain towns that use mountain water for their municipal supplies, such as Spoleto, mineral water (acqua minerale) is universally preferred,
means that in most of the country mineral water is preferred, but that this is not the case in some mountainous areas, while
Tap water is drinkable throughout the country; but in certain towns that use mountain water for their municipal supplies, such as Spoleto, mineral water (acqua minerale) is universally preferred
I see. I thought it was double, as in the passage accidentally included two words that mean the same thing. Has this been corrected yet? If not, I can do it. Sorry for any inconvenience. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 22:11, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like we have a consensus at dotm that Jazz needs to wait a little longer than a month before being featured. I've replaced it on the schedule with Southern Ridges Walk. As for the banners, I didn't want your work to go to waste but also didn't want the page to be cluttered, so I took the liberty of moving them over to your userspace, along with the user votes underneath. They can be moved back once we find a place for Jazz on the schedule.
Pancho Villa's raid was an invasion as it happened with military troops carrying military weapons targeting what can by some stretch be described as a military target. Of course the goal of the whole thing was to provoke the US into (over)reacting - which worked like a charm. The only problem was that Villa still couldn't quite capitalize on President Caranza's resulting unpopularity and the rift between Caranza and the US. By the way, I specifically mentioned "mainland" and maybe I should have mentioned "land" (as in "forces arriving by land, not airplanes or watercraft") as there was some isolated fighting in Alaskan islands during WW 2 and of course that thing... that date that shall live in infamy... You know what I mean. Hobbitschuster (talk) 00:25, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Right, but the Pearl Harbor attack was not the mainland... anyway, I see your point. Since then, ARR8 has removed the whole section, so probably that's also relevant at this point, and I've brought it up at User talk:ARR8 because I think he may have misunderstood an edit summary of mine. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 00:27, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sir and ma'am in the South
Re this edit summary, I've never been to Mississippi, but the advice to use "sir" and "ma'am" is right for other parts of the South that I've been to. Of course there's variation between small towns and cosmopolitan cities, but overall it's good advice, which is why I added something similar to South (United States of America) a while back. —Granger (talk·contribs) 01:35, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've been to the South a bit, but mostly the bits I've been to are city areas, where things are more northern in culture. I'm just surprised that 1) this is still the case considering modern culture in other parts of the U.S., and 2) tourists would be expected to use this same language. But as long as it's true, by all means keep it there. I have no objection to the text as long as it's accurate. Thanks for the explanation! --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 01:55, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
From now on, I have decided that I am only going to do administrative work on this project, and perhaps some work on articles, like city articles, where I know that my work will not be deleted. After all, I’m an administrator, and the primary job of an administrator is a different kind of work than regular contributing.
The way I feel is that I cannot, and will not, contribute to a project or wiki where my contributions are deleted, or removed in some other way. Since I see Wikivoyage as a way of presenting my work, and showing it to the public, I see deletion of that same material as a complete waste of time, and effort, on my part. Honestly, I’m tired of seeing my hard work get removed completely, on one or two people’s basis that it’s not “travel relevant,” and somehow these people see efforts to improve a wiki, or to have clear discussion about what we should or shouldn’t do, as “not good faith” and “leaving a bad taste in my mouth.”
It has been said that such controversial articles can be merged, but I know that’s not practical. What will happen is that most content will simply be removed in the merge process, again resulting in work being deleted. The result is absolutely no value of the individuals who write the articles, and no value of the articles themselves. It’s not human. Unilateral decisions like one contributor writing, “the work [of creating this article] shouldn’t continue” completely go against the foundational principles of wiki sites in general.
If a wiki doesn’t value its contributors, it should not expect to grow.
This is not meant as an attempt to attack Wikivoyage, but just a decision I’ve made because of a very limited number of contributors (to be exact, most of the time one) who create an appearance of good faith but actually don’t seem to have the interests of the website’s growth in mind. In particular, this user and I can’t contribute together if we don’t believe each other’s intentions are made in good faith.
I thank many of the website’s contributors who’ve helped me become a better contributor and human being. They’ve defended me often and helped me get to where I am. Unfortunately, I’ve done the same kinds of things to others, like welcoming users, making admin nominations (well, only one, really), etc. and the fruits of these labours have not been productive; in fact, they’ve worked against my interests and, in my opinion, those of this Project.
I believe there are some among us who, though they act like they are the same as the rest of us, may be wolves in sheep’s clothing. They do not have the same motivations and loyalties as the rest of us do, but are determined to enforce their views, which may or may not be in our best interests, upon the rest of us. Just because someone appears to be civilized, does not mean that they are with us. Do not let those past individuals, who wrote offensive messages in all caps, become a stereotype for all problem users. There could be more sophisticated, yet still troublesome, individuals in our midst.
In all, I hope for the best in Wikivoyage. I hope that Wikivoyage doesn’t get undermined by those who don’t have its best interests in mind. Therefore, I’m going to try to take a different role, so I don’t have to combat those whose methods and motives are too complex for me, and so I’m not in a role where I cannot be sure that my work is preserved. I see it as very important, personally, that the material I post on Wikivoyage remains on Wikivoyage, not necessarily as I originally wrote it, but that it stays up there. If that’s not possible, then I can’t contribute here.
Contribute wherever you are comfortable. I've seen some good stuff from you & nothing awful, though I have not followed closely. I want to encourage you.
But "I cannot, and will not, contribute to a project or wiki where my contributions are deleted, or ..." does not work. I've sometimes deleted or rewritten other people's text; that is how wikis work. I've been on the receiving end as well:
SelfieCity, it's really not acceptable for you to impugn the motives of other excellent users, just because they disagree with you. I forget where I read this, but somewhere, there is or used to be a note saying something like "Do not edit this site unless you consent to having your work be deleted, completely rephrased, moved or disfigured in any number of ways". We're all volunteers, so participate however you feel like, but I hope you will be able to achieve a little distance and put some of this indignance behind you. No-one's contributions are inherently inviolable or immune from deletion or disfiguring edits on a Wiki, and being an admin in no way privileges your edits over anyone else's. You just have been trusted with certain tools other users have not or not yet been entrusted with. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:18, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@SelfieCity: I'm sorry to lose your contributions to articles. I understand that disputes with particular editors can be frustrating -- I have an ongoing dispute with a long-time editor who reverts my edits without providing a reason and without being willing to discuss the edits. But that is part of life in a collaborative project, and I encourage you to look at this as an opportunity to develop your skills in dealing with difficult people. I have to echo Ikan Kekek's and Pashley's comments: your contributions, their contributions and my contributions will be edited. And sometimes they will be deleted. That is how a wiki differs from a blog. No blog is ever going to provide information as comprehensive and up-to-date as Wikivoyage. That's why I use it and contribute to it. I hope that you will reconsider. Ground Zero (talk) 16:09, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the kind words, guys. As I touched upon a little in my letter, I'll do some work on city articles where, while the content may be edited, it is unlikely to be outright deleted. So, for example, city and park articles in California will still get some of my edits. But I'm no longer going to work on those long-scale projects, especially on travel topics. Maybe that makes my stance a little clearer. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 17:21, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Your contributions have been valuable. It is sad to see users quit over conflicts. I hope that these kinds of disagreements can get resolved in the future. /Yvwv (talk) 15:53, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I am familiar with that document, but it's important that I clarify that I'm not leaving: I'm simply changing my role. I have also deleted User:SelfieCity/Projects and other content of mine to make it clear that I really do plan to go ahead with what I'm saying. Those who are sorry to me go, it is entirely their decision to say that. Thanks, though, for mentioning the document; I agree that it's very related to what's going on, and I think contributors should be familiar with it. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 19:51, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've taken a closer look, and the picture is less than 1,800 pixels wide; it's recommended that banners are at least 2,100 pixels wide. Would you still like to use that banner? --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 01:31, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we don't have any other picture, and given the size and remoteness of the community, it seems unlikely that we will get another one any time soon. Our choice seems to be between the less-than-optimal picture, or the blank banner. What do you think? Ground Zero (talk) 01:57, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
With reference to the comments you added then deleted on my talk page, my understanding is that listings on the Grand Old Hotels page need to have been operating as luxury hotels before World War II, with a few exceptions that can be decided by consensus. A very old building that was used for other purposes but only recently converted to a luxury hotel does not qualify for listing. Of course, if you disagree, I'm happy to have a discussion on the article's talk page. The dog2 (talk) 01:18, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Patrollers' edits are not automatically patrolled without them also being autopatrollers. I would have assumed the same as you, but ויקיג'אנקי's edits were showing as unpatrolled.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 19:45, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Over the last couple months I have not been contributing much to articles and focusing on elements of the project. I plan to resume contributions to city articles and related articles, though I'll probably not edit travel topics (besides adding banners). --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 15:17, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Your contributions to the project over the last couple of months (and before) have been very helpful. I'm looking forward to your contributions to destination articles. Ground Zero (talk) 16:04, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Where do we have a rule about not deleting stuff from your user talk page? It isn't here. I don't think that's a rule, but if it is, i'd like to know where to find it. Thanks. Ground Zero (talk) 17:25, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hm. Do you think it might be a bit harsh to roll back a new-ish user's edits on the basis of a rule that doesn't actually seem to exist? The user is making good contributions to articles that could benefit from the knowledge of a local. Ground Zero (talk) 18:29, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think it might be a bit harsh to undo a new-ish user's edits quoting a rule that doesn't actually seem to exist? The user is making good contributions to articles that could benefit from the knowledge of a local. Ground Zero (talk) 18:35, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Not that I'm going to do this, but if I just deleted this thread, would you be very happy? I don't think so. Again, I'm not concerned about this user or his conduct. I reinstated a discussion and provided an explanation. The user, as far as I know, had no problem with this. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 18:44, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Also "Unlike everything else in Wikivoyage, it's considered bad form to change someone else's posts on a talk page – even to correct spelling or grammar." --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 18:49, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, that's helpful, but there is a difference between a rule and etiquette. Bad etiquette is not something you undo. It's something you point out to someone and hope they choose to change. Deletion is not the same as changing text. You should never change someone's comments as it changes the meaning of what they wrote. That's really bad. If that section were intended to include deletion, it would have :included deletion specifically. Ground Zero (talk) 18:55, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Not to be overly blunt, but I think you're nitpicking here. I didn't do anything to make this user upset. (We're not perfect, but we do our best to do what is in the best interests of the site.) I don't think this user's day is going to be spoiled by my reversion. If his day is spoiled, then tough, because I haven't done him any harm. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 18:59, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I never suggested that this would ruin his day, but there is a principle of being gentle on newbies. It's a good principle. I don't think it is nitpicking to point out that you made a mistake and suggest that you correct it. It is not a huge deal. This is why I noted that everyone makes mistakes. It is an important away of learning. I felt that bringing it up with you and letting you handle it was better than telling the newbie "SelfieCity is wrong: this isn't a rule." When I make mistakes, I take responsibility and correct them. I don't just leave them there. While I don't understand what is the big deal about correcting your mistake, it's up to you to decide what you want to do. Ground Zero (talk) 19:31, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) If this isn’t a hard-and-fast policy, it should be. The user at issue here was obviously operating in good faith, but overall, a lack of any formal prohibition on editing talk page conversations after the fact is exploitable for too many bad-faith ends to be allowed to stand. The only circumstances under which preexisting talk page discussions should ever be edited is 1) altering one’s own comments before they have been replied to by other users (another important principle of Wikietiquette that IMO is worth preserving is that such comments are treated as having been “taken back” and are not acknowledged going forward) and 2) transferring old discussions in overly lengthy talk pages into archives that are clearly labeled chronologically (i.e. “Archive 2016”, “Archive 2017”, “Archive 2018” rather than “Archive 1”, “Archive 2”, “Archive 3” as you sometimes see on Wikipedia) and linked prominently on the original talk page. — AndreCarrotflower (talk) 19:34, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think this is a big deal. However, I think it's common sense to revert an edit that's not right. That's all this is, and that's all it should ever be. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 19:44, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If this were proposed as a policy, I wouldn't oppose it, and I might even support it. That's neither here nor there. It isn't policy, and it is wrong to undo a deletion from a user's talk page made by that user, and it is wrong to claim that it is policy. It is not policy. And if I am mistaken about that, then I will retract these statements. I think it is bad etiquette not to correct your mistakes. But that's just me. Ground Zero (talk) 19:54, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's the difference between policy and etiquette. It is etiquette to sign your comments, but we don't delete comments posted without signatures. Ground Zero (talk) 20:33, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's etiquette to sign comments. If someone does not sign his comment, someone else signs the comment for him. Also, it's etiquette not to delete discussions. So when a discussion is deleted, we restore it. Common sense. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 20:57, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
So what is the difference between etiquette and policy then? "Common sense" is not an argument. Clearly we do not have this opinion in common, even though I respect and admire your work and participation in Wikivoyage, and look forward to continuing to work together. But I disagree with you on this. Ground Zero (talk) 21:05, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think undoing the deletion was a "mistake", and I don't think the explanation provided was anything but courteous and helpful. Talk page content should remain in situ or be archived; that's always how it's been done, with no problems before, and it's already written down as a guideline. To help avoid this sort of discussion in future, then we could draft a new policy (if we really must), but I personally find this to be making a mountain out of a molehill.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 22:08, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm perfectly fine with writing a policy, as long as the creation of it is a low-key affair. I do not want to create a policy on this if it is going to cause a significant number of disagreements within the community. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 00:35, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ For future reference, my edit summary on that edit was typo-ridden! I wrote, "on Wikivoyage, deleting discussions is not allowed unless you planning to move than to an archive page. Thanks" I believe I was intending to say, "on Wikivoyage, deleting discussions is not allowed unless you [are] planning to move than [them] to an archive page. Thanks" --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 00:37, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
We had a similar discussion at sv-wp's village pump. The consensus was that explicitly allowing deletion of user talk page threads (other than vandalism and off-topic personal attacks) would be abused, while actually deleting borderline cases is unproblematic. I don't think Selfie City made any big mistake here in enforcing the non-policy rule, and undoing the undoing might send confusing signals, but removing a half-year old thread in good faith was not a big deal, so one could as well have left the deletion alone. A key is that if not deleting is etiquette rather than policy, one should not rely on complaints remaining, and for a good faith user them remaining is probably not saving anybody's time. --LPfi (talk) 16:04, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Selfie. You might want to take a look at this edit, describing your reverts as "vandalism". I've been away, on vacation, and am not sure about the context. Ibaman (talk) 14:21, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Actually, consensus was to restore the IP user's edits, even though they are likely AC's. However, my edits to that page are of course not vandalism. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 15:38, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
When I was still new to rollback, I decided against editing WV on mobile to avoid pressing the wrong buttons. Now, I think I have the experience to use the tools without making many mistakes, so I have resumed editing on mobile. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 14:10, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for updating Wikivoyage:Requests for comment. It would however be even more helpful if you used the edit summary. As I watch the page, I see when you make changes, but I have to click the diff link to see what was added, once for each change. Otherwise it is mostly useful for checking what is going on when one has been away for some time. From the summary I'd see if it was a discussion I missed or something I already am aware of through other means, and avoid clicking in the latter cases (and in the former, repeating the link in the summary would be a nice shorthand, although I understand it is sometimes a bit complicated to get it there). --LPfi (talk) 08:48, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes, I forget to add an edit summary, but when I remember, I add one. I'm doing my best and hopefully I'll soon be into the habit of writing edit summaries. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 17:51, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
pagebanner suggestion
hi! I have been focusing on the article Mannar and i've been thinking that it would need a better banner (besides the temporary banner i've put up.)... care to suggest one? Arep Ticous10:32, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This is regarding the hovercard of Mannar. It currently diplays an image of a train taken in Jaffna. (I used it as an example image for lankan train service) Is there a way to change it or is it not necessary? Arep Ticous18:06, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Im sorry, but i cant do it right now, my battery is running low and i dont have an extra power port left, can i run by this tomorrow? Arep Ticous18:15, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I do not think I said you were Telstra. I saw connections and said it was possible. In fact, I remember saying in an email (which you would not have seen) that the user is not Telstra. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 23:19, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Birmingham
Just wanted to say that your comments on the Birmingham Alabama nomination don't make you look stupid. Far from it - they show you have a brain and are capable of independent thought. I neither agree nor disagree with your arguments there as I tend to be neutral on the USA, but you are fully entitled to your view, and even if no-one agrees with you doesn't mean your opinion wasn't worth expressing. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:37, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
My explanation is that, while I may have been right in my earlier vote, my motivations were wrong — I was trying to push my own nominations against his, while knowing that postponing his nomination would see go far into the future. As it turned out, I still had trouble with the nomination when I re-voted a few days ago, but for genuine reasons rather than personal motives. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 18:53, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Also, thank you for updating the Alexa rankings for us and the predecessor site. I find that comparison to be fascinating. But you shouldn't stress over it. The numbers aren't changing that much every day, so if you don't update them daily, it's okay. You could probably even update them weekly, and it would still be very informative. Of course, if you enjoy updating them daily, go right ahead. Regards, Ground Zero (talk) 21:18, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for bringing along the matter to your Talk page on Wikioyage, but i have been working on this meta-project, named Wikihistoric [[3]], can you give me your opinion if it's no trouble... Arep Ticous18:09, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have a few comments which I'm putting here, because they're more personal in nature.
First, it is standard English capitalization that "I", when it is a word on its own, is capitalized. Saying "i went here and i went there" could imply that you can't be bothered to follow English capitalization rules and will be looked down upon by some Wikipedians/Wikivoyagers/Meta-Wiki users. You use "i" quite a lot in your submission and unfortunately, it could give the wrong impression.
Second, you need to make very clear exactly what your proposed website would be. Wikivoyage's "free, worldwide travel guide" gets across the message very clearly using very few words. You can be more detailed if you wish, but that is what you need to say.
Third, I notice an IP address has supported the nomination, along with votes on a few others. That's not you, is it?
Lastly, if your idea makes a lot of sense and is different from Wikipedia, WikiJournals, Wikibooks, and Wikiversity, I would willingly support it.
Thanks for the tips... i'll modify it ASAP. And no.. that was not me, i am very serious about the sock puppetry rule. That user had supported several other proposals as well... Arep Ticous14:26, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
He's so serious about the "sock puppetry rule", that an independent CheckUser has found at least three-four individual socks on Meta and several others on en.wiki. I don't mean to stir up drama but truthfully this IP's contributions generally follows his previous socks' behaviour.
Arepticous, I probably don't need to say this. A few votes from single-purpose accounts does not amount to support. I think that's pretty simple. Hiàn (talk) 19:15, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Hiàn: After my block in en.wikipedia i have been trying to go back and edit in good faith, i dont do sock-puppetry anymore for such reasons and nor am i willing to act as such. and to add to that... can you please help me with the proposal... i could really use some help. Arep Ticous16:19, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikivoyage and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.
Unfortunately, I have experienced that some of our contributors here massively change the (new) pages of other authors and thereby prevent further development of a page (current example Anastasiopolis). If the person making the changes knows the area well and can contribute important knowledge, that's ok. But in my (old fashioned?) opinion such a thing should be discussed before the change are made in the respective discussion side. I find that a matter of polite interaction with each other. What do you think, what is common behavior here? DocWoKav 15. Sept. 2019
Are these edits what you mean? Those edits are not destructive; there's nothing "massive," as you say in the title of this discussion, about moving content from one article to another, if that change is sensible. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 12:22, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, if you've placed a "See" listing in a city article for a nearby location and then someone moves it to "Go next" because that nearby location already has its own article, that's pretty much an open-and-shut case per our policy on geographical hierarchy and there's really not much to discuss about it. My suggestion is rather than getting defensive about the content you've contributed being altered or demanding that every little change be litigated on talk pages - which would grind the development of our content to a halt - you should instead get comfortable with the fact that this is a wiki, and people's contributions are subject to redaction or deletion at any time. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 17:30, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Strange? block
You just blocked User:DennisLowelle14 indefinitely for "vandalism" & I cannot see why.
He or she has made exactly one edit, which you correctly reverted since part of it removed a town from a list for no apparent reason. However, the other thing that edit did was add a wikidata link for another town. The link was correct (I checked) so I've put it back. So part of the edit was constructive & the rest may not even be vandalism, just new user clumsiness,
Yes, when looking at Recent changes, it's not hard at all to see which users are (highly likely) Telstra's alter egos, even without examining the individual edits. Ypsilon (talk) 05:09, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
User:Pashley, that's also a very typical Telstra sock name. Whether it's worth blocking these often single-use accounts is another question, but they're certainly not worth a welcome message, and the patterns of their usernames and edits are quite undisguised. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:26, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Reminder: Community Insights Survey
Share your experience in this survey
Hi SelfieCity/archives,
A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.
There are only a few weeks left to take the Community Insights Survey! We are 30% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal!
With this poll, the Wikimedia Foundation gathers feedback on how well we support your work on wiki. It only takes 15-25 minutes to complete, and it has a direct impact on the support we provide.
Done - Anytime you want it undone, just let one of us know. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 15:26, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
.jpg)
goat? Just kidding. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 03:53, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
