User talk:Wauteurz

From Wikivoyage
Jump to: navigation, search

Hello, Wauteurz! Welcome to Wikivoyage.

To help get you started contributing, we've created a tips for new contributors page, full of helpful links about policies and guidelines and style, as well as some important information on copyleft and basic stuff like how to edit a page. If you need help, check out Help, or post a message in the travellers' pub. If you are familiar with Wikipedia, take a look over some of the differences here.

And thanks a lot for your edits to articles about the Netherlands!

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:26, 29 June 2016 (UTC)


Thank you for the little reminder, Ikan. I am already familiar with the rules on Wikipedia itself, and I recon the rules to not be too different, but I'll take a quick read through it to be sure :)
> Wauteurz (talk) 06:24, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
There are a lot of similarities but some important differences, as you'll see. Thanks again; glad to have you aboard! Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:19, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi Wauteurz, perhaps you could specifically glance through our policies on Wikivoyage:What is an article?. I saw you wrote in the Hindeloopen article that it's not possible to sleep there and travellers would have to stay in Sneek. I'm not sure how you determined that, but perhaps you're under the impression that "sleep listings" can only be large hotels? As you'll see in the policy, any type of accommodation counts for the article criteria - as long as there's enough other content to fill an article, of course. There are plenty of places to sleep in Hindeloopen. The town's tourist information site is a good place to check. Another useful policy page is Wikivoyage:Geographical_hierarchy, which gives some background information concerning the conversation we had about Drenthe. Keep in mind that dividing regions is not at all a goal in itself. Dutch tourists often visit "Drenthe" or "Zeeland" - including day trips to all corners of the province and beyond, due to the short distances. The more fine grained our structure is, the more clicks and articles visitors need to get a good impression of their options. If there is indeed too much information in the articles, an extra division (like South Limburg) is fine, but otherwise travellers are better served without extra layers.
One more quick request; it would be nice if you could use the listings format when listing sights, and if possible, include an address. Directions to the main attraction are required for an article to be lifted to usable status. Thanks! JuliasTravels (talk) 11:15, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
Hey Julias, I'll read through the linked articles ASAP. I've tried finding hotels through Google Maps by right clicking on Hindeloopen, searching nearby for hotels. It initially didn't bring anything up. The Hindeloopen article however, is one I rushed a bit at the end. Searching for hotels now, I have found a hotel in Hindeloopen, so my initial searching wasn't that thorough.
As for the Geo. hierarchy, the reason I posted Talk:Roden#Why would anyone visit Roden? is because I wanted to know if the regions could be defined before I added content for the existing redlinks. I don't really like spending my time on something to have it merged with something else and start over. It was mostly my thrive for efficiency showing.
So far, I've been meaning to revisit most my articles to do what was needed to lift them to usable, but as we both know, this hasn't come to be yet. I'm thankful for your additions to them, but to keep work off your hands, I'll do my best to make the pages as complete as I can.
Thanks for the feedback! :)
-- Wauteurz (talk) 12:14, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

East Frisian islands and Helgoland[edit]

Hi. I don't know how concrete your plans are to visit either of them, but I have (it may well be a decade ago already) been to Borkum, Langeoog, Spiekeroog and have made a day trip to Helgoland when I was younger. My personal preference is for the car-free islands (Borkum has cars on it), but that is of course your choice. As for getting in, Borkum has direct ferry service from Eemshaven in the Netherlands as well as Emden, but the ferry ports to reach the others are a bit awkward to get to by public transit (Norden-Norddeich being the one big exception [look for "Norddeich Mole" in schedules]). Intercity buses in Germany are certainly an option, if you can live with the reduced comfort, probably awkward connections from the Netherlands and the reduced comfort (seat pitch, possibility to move around) compared to a train. Booking early should go without saying, we are talking about the country that invented the term "Frühbucherrabatt", after all ;-). At any rate, whether your trip to those islands is now or a few years hence, it would be great if you could add a bit of your experiences to the articles. Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:50, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, Hobbitschuster. I most likely can't visit the islands before summer 2017, and I have no concrete plans to visit them either. The logic behind wanting to visit them is the vague idea in my head of wanting to visit all Frisian islands. When I do visit though, Wikivoyage will get to know everything I learnt about the region, just like the vacation to the Luxembourgian Grevenmacher district, which I'm going on today.
-- Wauteurz (talk) 07:19, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Müllerthal or Mullerthal[edit]

Which one of those is the local spelling? Judging by it being a German (or possibly Luxemburgish) word, I would say the former. In that case, there is no reason to spell it with u instead of ü. At least if I understand policy correctly. Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:54, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

The correct spelling in Luxembourgian is Mullerthal (without the U-Umlaut), the German spelling is Müllerthal (with U-Umlaut). The correct way of spelling therefore should be the Luxembourgian way, i.e. Mullerthal. The folders I've taken home from there use both the Luxembourgian and German version for English-written folders. Of the 19 related folders I've got, 7 list Müllerthal, and the other 12 list Mullerthal, even though the local spelling, i.e. Mullerthal should be used. This is why I keep on using both the U and Ü versions, even though I don't mean to.
In a nutshell: It should be Mullerthal as that is its name in Luxembourgish.
-- Wauteurz (talk) 08:46, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
Pretty sure that you've seen by now, but since the folders list both options as viable (though in my opinion, Mullerthal is the only correct option), I ended up making Müllerthal a redirect to Mullerthal. I am convinced that this is the best option, seen the local spelling.
-- Wauteurz (talk) 18:39, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
All right. That looks reasonable. Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:52, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Country codes and brackets[edit]

Hi there. You probably couldn't have known it (I myself only found out when I switched on the extension), but I have an extension activated that tells me when the format of a phone number is "wrong" and it usually gives me "NOCC" (no country code) for a variety of reasons, one of them being that the country code is put in brackets. So therefore, please do not put the country code(s) in brackets for phone numbers. Thank you. Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:17, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Heya Hobbit, I know 99% sure that this edit is what you're referring to. This was a quite hasty reaction of mine on one of your edits that I, for some reason, mistook. I saw that you had updated a listing for the Preshistoric Museum, and, seen it was an update in phone numbers, thought I'd give you a hand. In the process, however, something managed to not go right in my brain and I ended up doing the totally reverse. It wasn't my intend, it was only meant as an helpful assist, yet in the process, I only created more work.
Eitherway, I am aware of how phone numbers should be listed. I've seen several articles and listings I contributed get changed for it, and I do it automatically now. Again, sorry for the mess-up.
-- Wauteurz (talk) 18:37, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
No problem. Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:52, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Star ratings for hotels[edit]

Hi, Wauteurz, and thanks for adding all this content! One detail: The practice in this guide is not to treat hotel star ratings as part of the hotel's name. Instead, where star ratings are meaningful, they could be included in the "content".

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:58, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, Ikan. I believe this problem only applies to my Luxembourg articles, which I'll go ahead and change.
-- Wauteurz (talk) 10:00, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:41, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Removing zip codes on Remich page[edit]

Hi Wauteurz,

I noticed you undid my edit that removed the postal codes on the Remich page. I want to notice you that I applied the Wikivoyage standardized formats for address listings, which states that postal codes should not be listed, except for listings in the UK. Also, it is recommended not to include the city if it is the same as the page title. All these recommendations are clarified on Wikivoyage:Listings.

Looking forward to your response, Podrozniczek (talk) 10:27, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

@Podrozniczek: I was not aware of that. Most of the pages I've made and edited here are for cities and their greater surroundings, so I just did it by default, as many listings I've made are around and not in the article's location. My apologies for undoing your edit and thank you for the heads up.
-- Wauteurz (talk) 12:30, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Page banners[edit]

Awesome work on all the new page banners. Just thought it should be said so you know your work is being appreciated. --Traveler100 (talk) 12:18, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! I found out how much I liked making banners during the half-week last month in which I made as many banners for the Benelux as I could, and I figured I would take that a step further :)
-- Wauteurz (talk) 12:26, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

[edit]

Not sure it should be speedy link as other articles link to it. Have added to Wikivoyage:Votes for deletion. --Traveler100 (talk) 05:05, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Vlaardingen[edit]

Nice work! Ground Zero (talk) 14:23, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! I was slightly bothered by Dutch destinations that told a reader no more than "This place exists". I've been planning for a while to finally plunge forward and up the quality of these articles, starting with the smallest articles. There's more to come! :D
-- Wauteurz (talk) 14:29, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
We now, however, have the somewhat paradoxical situation that some Dutch destinations have a better en-WV article than nl-WV. This is by no means a huge problem, but it might lead to Dutch speakers who aren't all that confident or competent with their English (and yes, those do exist) being less likely to contribute and ultimately a healthy community in other language varieties helps us at en-WV as we can translate articles or harvest listings. That said, I feel more comfortable at en-WV than de-WV so I understand if you don't want to spend all that much time writing basically the same stuff again in Dutch. Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:11, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
I understand the problem, and it is by no means the case that I've never translated my articles to Dutch. I may at some point take time to pick this back up, but to say the least, I'm not really bothered to do so. I'm more certain of my English skills than my skills in my native language, as is the general problem with my generation. Perhaps the two active users on nlWV that I know of (@De Wikischim, FredTC:) are also willing to translate some articles to Dutch.
-- Wauteurz (talk) 17:28, 19 November 2017 (UTC)