To help get you started contributing, we've created a tips for new contributors page, full of helpful links about policies and guidelines and style, as well as some important information on copyleft and basic stuff like how to edit a page. If you need help, check out Help, or post a message in the travellers' pub. If you are familiar with Wikipedia, take a look over some of the differences here.--ϒpsilon (talk) 08:49, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions!
There is however a problem with your edits concerning Finnish taxis: information on a company should be limited to one or in some cases a few articles. Having information on the same taxi company on a dozen pages will cause much more updating work, and more or less ensure it will get outdated on some of them.
I am also concerned whether the listed companies really are of use in all the towns for which they got listed. Are these the main companies in all those places? Does the aggregator app check the local taxi companies? – And we generally do not list aggregators.
I started a discussion at Wikivoyage:Travellers' pub#Finnish taxis.
- Please note this discussion. There is a lot of wasted work when the changes are made afterwards.
- Listing the same taxi companies in every destination article is no good. They won't be updated everywhere – and it is against our policy. And I note that e.g. for Kaarina, you do not list Taxidata, which by large margin is the dominating call centre.
- Adding the same company to hundreds of pages is against policy. Where and how the taxi apps should be added can be discussed, but without that discussion the general rule should be followed. --LPfi (talk) 12:23, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Ypsilon: Yes. We don't want to have to update a zillion articles when their names or urls change. I have still been reluctant to outright delete them, other than in places where there are a few local businesses that could all be listed instead, as the apps cover only part of the country and it may be useful to know that a particular one works for a certain destination. Without talking, however, I have no idea whether the additions are done for places where the app truly works, or whether there are places where the business claims it works, but where it has a minuscule market share or only has taxis that have to come from far away. --LPfi (talk) 14:24, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Please address the messages on your talk page
As a former sysop at Finnish Wikipedia, you know full well the importance of collaboration with your fellow editors. Accordingly, you have now been blocked from editing for three days per Wikivoyage:How to handle unwanted edits#Escalating user blocks due to your lack of communicativity. You will continue to be blocked for increasing lengths of time every time you edit until you respond to the concerns raised in previous messages on your talk page. In order to continue editing freely, please do so. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 16:26, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Traficom says it does not any more cover purely commercial coach services (the wording is vague), and is scheduled to be maintained "at least to the end of the year".
Do you know anything about how good the coverage is? That should be described in Finland#Get around and Matka.fi should probably not be mentioned anywhere else, except perhaps where it is usable with specific instructions.
- Thank you for noting. Google Transit is better these days, but is it okay to mention it instead of Matka.fi? I can add more info how to use matka.fi in places where I have added it. Sometimes it is the only place which has timetables, for example between Ingå and Kirkkonummi it is a good way to find bus+train connections to Helsinki. --Vkem (talk) 21:29, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you for replying.
- There are several problems.
- By policy we keep aggregators out of most articles, so Google Transit should be mentioned in Aggregators, not in every destination guide. If there is some special reason we might make an exception for individual pages, but that should be explained, and discussed if needed, on the relevant talk pages.
- The information should be kept in as few places as possible, to ease maintenance. Sites such as matka.fi, vr.fi and matkahuolto.fi should be discussed in Finland. The latter two have stable domain names and hardy go out of business any time soon, so there is not much harm in linking them from other places, but I think readers can be supposed to have found and bookmarked the links when reading about the country (and they are "official sites" rather than aggregators).
- When one of the normal search engines does not work by default, such as when you need to search for "Ingå apotek" instead of "Ingå" on the VR pages or "Kemijärvi ABC" instead of "Kemijärvi railway station" to find connecting services on the Matkahuolto pages, or when Matka.fi finds regional services not found at Matkahuolto, that's when these national engines need to be discussed on individual destination pages. Local transport, such as the municipal bus pages of Hämeenlinna, is always relevant.
- So yes, when there are local quirks in how to use the best route planners or timetable engines (or some usually good one does not work well), by all means tell about them. "Public service obligation traffic" should be explained in Finland#Get around. But the information for Finland needs not be repeated, unless not doing that would give undue weight to a site needed only for special cases.