Wikivoyage:Travellers' pub

From Wikivoyage
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to the Pub

The Travellers' Pub is the place to ask questions when you're confused, lost, afraid, tired, annoyed, thoughtful, or helpful. To start a new topic, click the "Add topic" tab, so that it gets added at the bottom of the page, and sign your post by appending four tildes (~~~~)

Before asking a question or making a comment:

  • Have a look at our Help, FAQ and Policies pages.
  • If you have a question or suggestion about a particular article, use the article's talk page to keep the discussion associated with that article.
  • If you'd like to draw attention to a comment to get feedback from other Wikivoyagers, try Requests for comment.
  • If you are wanting travel advice on a specific matter see the Tourist Office.
  • If you have an issue you need to bring to the attention of an administrator, try Vandalism in progress.
  • If you are having a problem that you think has to do with the MediaWiki software, please post that on Phabricator instead.
  • If you want to celebrate a significant contribution to Wikivoyage by yourself or others, hold a party at Celebrate a contribution.
  • Discuss issues related to more than one language version of Wikivoyage in the Wikivoyage Lounge on Meta.

Pull up a chair and join in the conversation!

Click here to ask a new question

Experienced users: Please sweep the pub

Keeping the pub clean is a group effort. If we have too many conversations on this page, it gets too noisy and hard to read. If you see an old conversation (i.e. a month dormant) that could be moved to a talk page, please do so, and add "{{swept}}" there, to note that it has been swept in from the pub. Try to place it on the discussion page roughly in chronological order.
  • A question regarding a destination article should be swept to the article discussion page.
  • A discussion regarding a policy or the subject of an expedition can be swept to the policy or expedition discussion page.
  • A simple question asked by a user can be swept to that user's talk page, but consider if the documentation needs a quick update to make it clearer for the next user with the same question.
  • A pointer to a discussion going on elsewhere, such as a notice of a star nomination or a request to comment on another talk page, can be removed when it is old. Any discussion that occurred in the pub can be swept to where the main discussion took place.
Any discussions that do not fall into any of these categories, and are not of any special importance for posterity, should be archived to Project:Travellers' pub/Archives and removed from here. If you are not sure where to put a discussion, let it be—better to spend your efforts on those that you do know where to place.
QA icon clr.svg

Contents

Cross wiki notifications will be released by default on May 12 at 23:00 UTC.[edit]

Hello

Cross wiki notifications will be released by default on all wikis on May 12 at 23:00 UTC

During the beta phase, the cross-wiki notifications feature was enabled by over 18,000 accounts across more than 360 wikis. We receive great feedback from a lot of very happy users. After that 3-months long beta period during which we made adjustments and that feature is now ready for a release by default.

Users who don't want to receive cross-wiki notifications will be able to turn them off on their preferences on each wiki. If you haven't activated Cross-wiki Notifications during the Beta phase, you may receive old unread notifications from other wikis.

More information is available on the documentation. The talk page is still open for any questions or feedback, in any language.

All the best, Trizek (WMF) (talk) 16:50, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Statistics for most read articles?[edit]

Are there statistics for how often different articles are read? And which articles are the most read during a period? /Yvwv (talk) 13:36, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

I vaguely remember having looked at such statistics somewhere two years ago or so, so I googled "wikivoyage statistics". [1] seems to have statistics for WMF projects including Wikivoyage, however they seem to have some problem there right now. Nothing loads, including the Wikivoyage stats page. ϒpsilon (talk) 14:56, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
We used to discuss (official?) statistics in unregular intervals, but they have always produced questionable results if you ask me... Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:11, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
Pageviews at https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews, eg, https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews/#project=en.wikivoyage.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&range=latest-20&pages=New_Zealand. Nurg (talk) 10:44, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata again[edit]

Working with Wikidata is an idea that's been kicked around since 2013, but never quite caught on. So far, it's used widely for pagebanners and interwiki links, but not much else. Retrieving info for individual {{listing}}s or {{quickbar}} fields has been proposed but not implemented; a couple of languages (de, fr) provide a d= or wikidata= field in their listings (which might display a clickable link) but don't seem to use it to run database lookups.

Pity. Ultimately, the idea was that Wikidata could be used to look up listing fields (lat, long, name, address, image...) by some automated means (maybe a 'bot script or a listing editor function; they also might be of use on dynamic maps).

I've made an attempt to update the list at d:Wikidata:Wikivoyage/Resources#Properties for listings to match Wikidata properties to individual {{listing}} fields in various languages. (Some have extra fields we don't use here, like star ratings 'estrellas' in Spanish or wi-fi availability in French. I haven't looked at any of the languages with non-Western character sets. Certainly, now that these are templates instead of WT-style tags, new fields are popping up in many individual-language editions and they don't always match across languages.)

Many of the most common fields already have a corresponding Wikidata property. The rest have been proposed for creation and are stranded at various points in the process. Our hotel/motel/B&B checkin/checkout times are stranded at d:Wikidata:Property proposal/Pending#Awaiting time type with precision second, seemingly for want of a Wikidata data type for a standalone "time of day" with no date attached. Many of the other fields (hours, pricerange...) are languishing at d:Wikidata:Property_proposal/Sister projects#Wikivoyage either for lack of examples or because someone wants to force a structure on an item where the underlying data is widely variable (such as hours= which are different every day of the week, vary seasonally and are different for different pieces of the same establishment (hotel with restaurant and bar might keep pouring drinks long after the kitchen closes for the night).

These need feedback while they're still open for discussion. Could you look at d:Wikidata:Property proposal/Sister projects#Wikivoyage and d:Wikidata:Property proposal/Pending to comment or add any information that's missing from the proposals? K7L (talk) 20:10, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Migrating quickbars to Wikidata doesn't seem to be that complicated. One of the reasons for the lack of progress is the out-dated Module:Wikibase. I think we should import w:Module:Wikidata and all its dependencies. Does anybody have experiences with mass-importing lua modules? -- T.seppelt (talk) 20:32, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Some notes:
wikidata= as a field in Template listing - already exists
The interworkings of a Lua Module either standalone or with templates etc. can be very tricky - Lua Modules generally get processed after a page has been processed... In many cases it is necessary to use "safesubst:" which forces the Lua Module to do its work and finalize results before the page gets processed. (The #invoke for the Module essentially no longer exists - just the results)
It is generally possible to build initial template codes we all know and love which in turn would require being edited further by hand.
Lua Modules have been used to create "geo" templates - retrieving lat/long coordinates etc.
Agree that Lua Modules have not been used or implemented in wikivoyage to a great extent.
Wikidata itself is incomplete and its properties wanting -- ie. description property for an article in Wikidata for example is "a city" - hardly enough for a listing or quick box - Larger content descriptions for listings would not exist - many properties one might desire for a quickbox are also missing such as electricity.
Who (bot?) is going to find and add the Wikidata identifier (Qnnn) for each listing's "wikidata=" field.
Lua Modules do have machine processing limits - something else be aware of.
Though many things could probably be accomplished with Lua Modules and Wikidata, I would suggest achieving one goal at a time. Matroc (talk) 17:01, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
The list of Wikidata fields to match the most common WV templates (listing, marker, quickbar, fr:Info Ville, Info Parc, Info Region, geo and mapframe) is d:Wikidata:Wikivoyage/Resources#Properties for listings. Many already exist; fr:'s version of quickbar (Info Pays) already defaults a few fields to the Wikidata record if they're not specified locally. Electricity (as a quickbar field) is missing but has been proposed at d:Wikidata:Property proposal/Sister projects#Wikivoyage, along with many of the other "missing" fields. That still leaves the issue of how to populate all of these fields, if and when they're created; "hours" and "price" are likely to be the problem children as they're currently unstructured free-form text which won't translate easily. Much of the information currently in Wikidata was copied there by 'bots, usually harvesting it from template fields in the corresponding Wikipedia article's info box. Certainly {{listing}} is going to be more difficult, largely because d:wikidata:arbitrary access is "expensive" in server time and much data in our existing listings is in plain-text fields which would need to be translated before they could be re-used elsewhere. It might be possible to add the Wikidata item with some sort of automated script if there's a unique identifier which could be used to match the entries; for instance, a local telephone number matches a number in a listing in the same city in some other-language Wikivoyage, which has wikipedia= linked from its listings, and from that language's WP we can find a d:Q##### record. Not easy, and most of our listings simply don't have (and won't have) Wikidata entries unless and until they get enough notability to get an article in at least one Wikimedia project (likely the WP for that country's home language). That makes using this for quickbars much easier than getting the listings. Then again, many of the same arguments could have been made to state that getting (lat, long) co-ordinates into individual listings is a mammoth task and we're nowhere near having a locator map for every destination. Indeed, but one must start somewhere. K7L (talk) 15:46, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
I'm working on a Wikidata lookup that could be integrated into the listing editor that would work the same as the search typeahead (type a few letters, suggested results show up). As you've noted there is concern about having too many Wikidata items in use on a page as improper usage could result in excessive lookups and parsing, but I would expect lookup performance to improve as Wikidata is more widely used, and we could do some basic testing to see if something like lat/long lookups using {{#property:P625|from=Q3699364}} was currently feasible. -- Ryan • (talk) • 17:07, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Wonderful! Really looking forward to that Wikidata lookup field in the listing editor :-) Syced (talk) 07:21, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Maps with extra layers on en-Wikivoyage[edit]

Some cities in India

Thanks to the amazing work by JGirault (WMF) (talk, contribs), the new <mapframe> and <maplink> maps on English Wikivoyage now support external layers and all other wikivoyage article links just like the wmflabs-based maps! I saw some cool maps experiments done by Matroc (talk, contribs) on their page, and copied a portion of it above. I will now try to adapt current community's templates (without modifying the originals just yet), so that the {{see}} and others can be used directly with the new map. As always, feedback is highly welcome. --Yurik (talk) 19:25, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

CC from previous relevant conversations: AlasdairW, Andrewssi2, Atsirlin, FredTC, Ibaman, JamesA, JuliasTravels, Matroc, MaxSem, Mey2008, Pnorman, Seav, Shaundd, Syced, TheDJ, TheTrolleyPole, Torty3, WhatamIdoing, Wrh2.
Thank you! Yurik - Adding the external layers has made that map look 100% better... - It is also very nice to allow multiple maps on an article page (definitely something various users wanted) - The hard part will be to adapt current templates to go probably through some POI script. - Some of the maps on my home page were created using a Lua Module and data from Wikidata, saved and then edited... I am sure there is more to come that will make life easier and cause little code confusion - again, Thank you for these milestones and your hard work. -- Matroc (talk) 22:39, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

P.S. Take a look at the first migration attempt. I only changed the underlying templates, and left the page same as original. Some minor styling is still required, plus at some point I hope it will be possible to add an item from Wikidata. Feel free to modify it if needed. --Yurik (talk) 06:24, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Some remarks:
  • There seem to be two full screen buttons (one top-right and one below the +/- buttons).
  • The layers-button shows "Mapquest open" and just "MapQuest". This last one displays nothing (when zoomed in).
  • When using the top-right "Full screen" button, the map is displayed full screen. However there is no indication about how to leave the full screen mode.
The close button is behind the layers button - just the edge of it shows for now -- Matroc (talk) 16:07, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
--FredTC (talk) 12:09, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
FredTC, we just need to fix the popup text. The button shows nearby wikivoyage articles. --Yurik (talk) 19:21, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Yurik, it's awesome. What is the source for Mapnik and Mapquest? --Alexander (talk) 14:32, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Alexander, those layers are exactly the same functionality as exists at the moment at Wikivoyage, so it was simply copied from the wmflabs that was created by the community. This data is not under WMF control, and moreover, users have to agree to expose their browsing activity to the 3rd party. --Yurik (talk) 19:21, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Very interesting. Can this display type-specific Aiga restaurant.svg or Aiga bar.svg map symbols for points of interest, like our current fork-plate-knife for eateries, martini glass for drink and house for lodging? Do we have control over what's displayed in the pop-up bubble when the POI's are clicked, perhaps using a template? If a {{listing}} has a corresponding Wikidata item, can clicking the POI marker trigger a lookup to display information extracted from the item? K7L (talk) 15:04, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
Yuri can correct me on this, but I believe that the default icon set we have available at the moment is the public domain licensed Maki icon set made by Mapbox. As for pop-up content, templates can be included (see my goofy mockup), but I'm not sure on the Wikidata part. Yurik! :) CKoerner (WMF) (talk) 18:57, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
At the moment we can only show pushpins with any of the maki icons as Chris mentioned above, in 3 different sizes and any color. Eventually I hope we will be able to show other marker symbols, but sadly for the moment that's the limitation. --Yurik (talk) 19:21, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
The button called "Show in full screen" actually is a button that shows all POIs, I guess the button's name should be changed to "Show all listings" or something similar? Thanks a lot :-) Syced (talk) 06:36, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Syced, It does not show all POIs, it shows all Wikivoyage articles. I think we should hide all other layers when the user clicks that button to reduce confusion. --Yurik (talk) 19:21, 23 May 2016 (UTC)


We have fixed a number of internal bugs, and I think it is ready for the roll out. Are there any objections if I switch the marker & map templates to show it like on my test page? (Note that the color of the links does not match the one on the map for the next 12 hours, after which it will be identical). The new map will allow far greater customization by the community, and will allow us to progress further. Obviously I will be listening to any feedback and suggestions. Thanks! :) --Yurik (talk) 02:08, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
I say go ahead. Switching to a new framework with greater support and flexibility should be a win for everyone. -- Ryan • (talk) • 02:27, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes Done

New map functionality[edit]

Help expand and translate Kartographer help page

  1. Templates like {{see}} and {{eat}} add items to their own separate groups
  2. {{mapmask}} adds data to the "mask" group
  3. Both >maplink< and >mapframe< can be configured to show just selected groups
  4. Each maps on the same page can be configured to show different group(s)
  5. By default, the {{mapframe}} shows these groups: mask, around, buy, city, do, drink, eat, go, listing, other, see, sleep, vicinity, view (in that order)
  6. Setting text="" for <maplink> does not show the link, but still adds link's data to the specified group (this is what's used by mapmask template)
  7. maplink - if you use text="" or text="Click me!" and marker-symbol is -number-xxx you will get back-ground color (marker-color) a small colored space or the text with that back-ground color.
  8. if no text parameter is entered and marker-symbol is -number-xxx then you would get numbered box with back-ground color. (you can use the <sup> before the maplink and </sup> as well is you wish for a different appearance..
  9. maplinks of the same group will appear when you select "Click me!" and not just the single entry. This is one way to have multiple locations shown on a single map when selected that might not be otherwise shown on a visible map or a grouping of significant or special grouping.
  10. if text="" is entered and marker-symbol is not -number-xxx then geographical coordinates will appear as link.
  11. maplink - if you use marker-symbol such as -number-see (used for common listings see,sleep,go etc.) - it will offset all the numbers displayed in those visible listings on a page that use that same group counter. (Be careful)
  12. maplink - if you use a maplink containing the same coordinates and also a member of a common group (or same group ie. see) - it will overlay the symbol on top of the normally numbered one such as created by a listing. (depends on order of listing or maplink entry)
  13. using <mapframe> and <maplink> - if you want a different symbol on a distinct map then that is also possible using maplink. This can be done by using such symbols as a bed for sleep or knife,fork and spoon for eat and a suitcase for next instead of numbers. The basic trick is to keep track of the group name (I prefer a disctinct group name) you want to display on a map and keeping those groups distinct from the normal ones.
  14. maplink - one advantage to using the maplink description is being able to add an image, adding more descriptive text, shutting off the link to commons and use of alt field. - another is to be able to add something to a map that is not normally found in listings. This added information allows for a slightly different, informative and useful map.
  15. maplink - these can be separate by themselves or the same effect can be by using a number of features within a single mapframe.
  16. I have tested several of the items discussed above HERE decided to pass this on. To create all maplinks that are not seen on that page, I ran the page through a module test function looking at listings and created the maplinks. I also did some minor editorial work.
  17. Avoid using double quote marks (") for description etc. as this will result in a JSON error in maplink -- Matroc (talk) 21:30, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
    @Matroc: double quotes work just fine with geojson, but they do require escaping. The module:Map does that automatically. --Yurik (talk) 03:20, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
    @Yurik: - But it appears not to be the case if you use <maplink> directly - Kartographer extension -- Matroc (talk) 04:01, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
    @Matroc: try escaping the double quote, like here: 37°48′5″N 122°23′56″W
    . --Yurik (talk) 05:07, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
    @Yurik: Tested \" comes out fine in <maplink> description - was just reading up on the escaped characters that JSON uses: \",\b,\f,\\ etc. - Thanks! -- Matroc (talk) 05:36, 12 June 2016 (UTC) - ps Thanks for closing the ticket!
  18. At this time Mapbox icons are available marker symbols and Maki icons have not replaced Mapbox icons yet for <mapframe> & <maplink> - Matroc (talk) 22:02, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
    I presume you mean that Mapbox has released additional maki icons, and the new ones have not yet been made available? --Yurik (talk) 03:20, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
    @Yurik: - I believe that is correct! -- Matroc (talk) 04:01, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
  19. If you use <maplink> with a description but no image - the text will come out in an ugly narrow width grayed out area... to overcome this use a blank image with a height of 1 px before the description -- Matroc (talk) 00:28, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
    @Matroc: Please file this as a bug, with the extact geojson or template invocation showing how to produce it. Also, please check if it works if you also set the geojson's "title" value. --Yurik (talk) 03:20, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
    @Yurik: - Can ignore for now -- appears to have cleared up so no ticket needed! -- Matroc (talk) 04:15, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
  20. Be careful, test and enjoy! There should at some point be a good discussion as to when to use <mapframe>, {{mapframe}}, <maplink> and {{marker}} -- Yours Matroc (talk) 04:17, 10 June 2016 (UTC) --Yurik (talk) 13:18, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
    • @Matroc: I am a bit worried about too much magic in the params. I think we should change it to a bit more direct and straightforward way, especially with when things get autostyled (colored), hidden, etc. A better design is welcome :) --Yurik (talk) 05:47, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
      @Yurik: I agree and that is why I thought that we should all discuss and maybe come up with a possible set of polices for wikivoyage - (develop Help pages, dos and donts, and how to keep this as simple as possible for all editors/users). -- Matroc (talk) 06:29, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  21. {{geo}} was migrated phab:T137364 --Yurik (talk) 00:42, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
    • undone until more bugs and regressions in functionality have been addressed. --Traveler100 (talk) 12:43, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
  22. {{PoiMap2detail}} was migrated phab:T137656 --Yurik (talk) 00:42, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
    • undone until gpx is fixed as this is mainly used in itineraries. --Traveler100 (talk) 12:43, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
  23. {{PoiMap2}} is now obsolete, and should not be used. {{PoiMap2raw}} is used instead in a few places, but even that should be fixed. --Yurik (talk) 01:23, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
  • ... (add your own above)

Geoshapes service and other updates[edit]

Dear community, this week we launched geoshapes service. So if Open Street Maps community has defined a region and assigned it a Wikidata ID, you can draw it on the map with that ID. Or you can use Wikidata Query Service (via SPARQL language), to query for those IDs and draw them on the map, coloring them and adding popup information. See documentation.

Governors of US states with their party affiliation

P.S. We also enabled <maplink> support on all Wikipedia and sister projects. Our next big step is to add an informational sidebar to the map, similar to what is being shown on the "geohack" page (map link in the upper right corner of most location articles). Check out proposed screenshots.

--02:18, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

  • GeoShapes service just got support for lines (roads, rivers, and everything else that has been IDed with Wikidata ID). For an example, see help page. --Yurik (talk) 21:40, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Bugs and comments about the new maps[edit]

New maps have been enabled on en-wikivoyage. Please add your comments here, or create Phabricator tickets. All layers code is at MediaWiki:Kartographer.js, so either experiment there or do pull requests at GitHub. Once the code is more stable, I will move it into a proper MW extension, so that it can be localized and shared for all other languages (please don't copy it to other langs just yet).

Done[edit]

  • Yes Done {{mapmask}} does not seem to be implemented for the new maps - see Culver City for an example of an article that should include a mask. Is there another way to implement this functionality with the new maps? -- Ryan • (talk) • 21:35, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
  • check out the new and greatly improved {{Mapmask}}. Some documentation help is needed. --Yurik (talk) 03:40, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
    • Thanks! -- Ryan • (talk) • 04:09, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes Done I'm not sure if this is temporary or not, but Kern County no longers shows any markers on the map. -- Ryan • (talk) • 21:35, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
  • A new version of Kartographer was deployed today, and we forgot to add a config flag. Thanks for the heads up, it is now fixed. --Yurik (talk) 23:21, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes Done When editing Helsinki/South about an hour ago, I was wondering why someone has put a superfluous sleep price range box above the dynamic map. It doesn't show up anywhere in the article's wikicode either. Then I noticed the same thing in all other Helsinki district articles. And in every article with a mapframe from Nashville to Nuclear tourism. Perhaps it has something to do with the new map?
  • Sorry, must have accidentally copy/pasted an extra line from somewhere. It was already reverted (thanks @Doubleplusjeff:) --Yurik (talk) 15:32, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes Done Also, the mapmask doesn't seem to work any longer. ϒpsilon (talk) 06:58, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Technically the mapmask is incorrect because the last point has to be the same as first (at least according to my reading of the geojson spec). But it seems to work ok without it, so i removed the validation. --Yurik (talk) 15:17, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes Done Would you also consider adding a parameter to {{mapframe}} so that user can select which group(s) ie. |groups=go,sleep,do| go on a map as well? otherwise use default list? -- Matroc (talk) 16:19, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure if it's necessary to be able to switch on/off different types of labels individually. In the former version of the dynamic map it was possible to either see all POIs or no POIs and I didn't find it problematic. ϒpsilon (talk) 17:44, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • @Matroc: the parameter is already there - show=... Please help with updating the docs. --Yurik (talk) 02:07, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
  • @Yurik: - I tested {{mapframe}} with parameter "show=see,do,city" and the result was only those 3 groups will show on a map and in layers dropdown - if you do not have a "show=" parameter in {{mapframe}} then the default list appears -- will leave a note in Template : mapframe talk page for this to be added when things quiet down a bit??? (nice to be aware of) -- Matroc (talk) 04:38, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes Done 169 pages with script errors - Lua error in Module:Map at line 89: Polygon's first and last points must be the same. (coordinates issue) -- Matroc (talk) 15:22, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I suspect this was due to most mapmasks having non-standard coordinates. See my answer above. I removed the verification, so all of them should be gone. --Yurik (talk) 15:38, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • P.S. There were tons of bad markers with trailing commas. I fixed them. --Yurik (talk) 02:07, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes Done Some of the problems noted above can be resolved using <mapframe> and <maplink> directly. I see the process and issues of trying to pack (program) the functionality of these 2 into existing templates (which is probably preferable) than having to learn the Kartographer extension outright. -- Matroc (talk) 17:14, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Agree, that's what i have been doing. Thanks for the note. --Yurik (talk) 02:07, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes Done Itineraries are no longer numbered correctly. Previously a route would list POI in sequential numbers irrespective of type of listing. It now creates number sequences for each listing type. See for example Rheinsteig and Wales Coast Path. Not as easy to read. --Traveler100 (talk) 12:30, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks, should be relatively easy to fix with an extra param to use the same numbering group. I will have to think how to change the templates for that. --Yurik (talk) 15:47, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
    • Might also consider adding color as an extra param as well. -- Matroc (talk) 16:19, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
      • I see you have added a counter parameter to listings. This is not going to work. I add a new listing in the middle of a route with 100 POIs, how many editors are going to manually edit all the existing listing to keep it sequential. This experiment that has been made active before fully testing has broken the listing numbering system of itineraries. --Traveler100 (talk) 14:18, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
        • Traveler100, you misunderstood the meaning of the word "counter". This is the "name" of the counter, not the "value". The new maps can do counting just fine on its own, but they need to know WHICH counter variable to use. So you can have multiple counters on a page. As long as all the items (see, go, listing, etc) have the same counter parameter, they will share the same sequence. In short, take a look at Rheinsteig. Itineraries are now done. --Yurik (talk) 14:47, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
          • Ok my misunderstanding, looks good, thanks. --Traveler100 (talk) 21:38, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes Done A minor question (not a priority and may not be applicable for us) - listings and markers in general are numbered on an article page and show as such on a map .... in the future, will we also have the capability of outputing a letter (A-Z) (similar to using -letter in Kartographer. -- Matroc (talk) 01:35, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Matroc, You already have that capability, exactly as you described -- with "-letter" or "-letter-<countername>" (same as with -number). Also, you can always just set it to the value you want, e.g. "x", or any number, e.g. "42". --Yurik (talk) 02:10, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes, this is possible using <mapframe> or <maplink> directly -- what I was trying to ask: "Is there to be a parameter in {{listing}} (see,do,sleep,eat etc.) templates to accomplish this?" (perhaps a parameter "countertype=" with values of 'number' or 'letter' ).... Thanks! Matroc (talk) 03:17, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
From Buffalo/West Side. This is not 300x650px!
From Historic Churches of Buffalo's East Side. What's the deal with the dead space on the left?
  • Yes Done mapframe had broken width/height. Original reports:
  • Trans-Siberian Railway#Go. In addition to what has been mentioned above, the whole map is split in half, both the GPX tracks and POIs are gone on the map, and the originally red markers in the text are now pink. ϒpsilon (talk) 12:49, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • The split map seems to be a problem related to the width/height parameters: the box around the map uses them, but the map in the box ignores them. This is also problematic when the width is so small that the control buttons on the left side get hidden: {{Mapframe|59.32502|18.07083|zoom=14|height=370|width=320|layer=|staticmap=|align=|name=}} Xsobev (talk) 14:43, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • @Ypsilon:, @Xsobev: I will look at width/height. The labels are missing because they have type=color, e.g. type=blue, and do not fall into one of the predefined groups: mask,around,buy,city,do,drink,eat,go,listing,other,see,sleep,vicinity,view. We could reduce the number of groups to make it easier to show in the layers picker, and simply add all others to "other" group. Would that work? Which groups do you think should stay? --Yurik (talk) 15:45, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • @Yurik: I can confirm that width parameter of mapframe now works. Thanks a lot for fixing this. Xsobev (talk) 13:47, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Pinging Yurik. I'm not sure if this issue has already been brought up, but it looks like there are some bugs when it comes to mapframes with custom dimensions. See screenshots at right. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 01:29, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
  • AndreCarrotflower This seems to be an issue with the {{mapframe}}, not the Kartographer. Seems like the width/height are not being passed to Kartographer. Investingating... --Yurik (talk) 02:21, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes Done Map images (photos) are no longer displayed when one clicks on an icon. –StellarD (talk) 17:56, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • @StellarD: could you give a link to a page with the problem? Thanks --20:31, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Valencia has many map images, none of them now visible, even though they are still shown in the listing editor. –StellarD (talk) 20:46, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • @StellarD:@Traveler100: image support is done, please verify they are the right size. The "description" field could be any wiki markup. --Yurik (talk) 03:52, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
  • @Yurik: Out of several dozen map images for Valencia, three only now appear: those for the bus station and the two train stations. The map image for Estació de València Nord is the correct size; the other two are too large. –StellarD (talk) 09:03, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Correction: when one clicks on the map icon in the upper right and opens the map in a new tab, the map images do appear and are the correct size. When clicking on the icons within the mapframe on the article page, the map images do not appear (except for the three mentioned above, two of which are sized incorrectly). –StellarD (talk) 09:56, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
@Yurik:, I think it is not completely done yet. Most of the images have the right size, but the red marker #1 (train station) in Valencia displays a much smaller image (not 300px). I see the same problem in other articles, where some images are smaller and some are bigger. Why? --Alexander (talk) 20:35, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes Done layers - different layers should be lined up on the left - now they are ragged left ... Matroc (talk) 03:03, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes Done layers - scrollbar not working - or present ... -- Matroc (talk) 03:03, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes Done groups - in layers - is there a way not to have a select box for a group if that group does not have any any markers on the map? -- Matroc (talk) 03:31, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes Done multiple {{mapframe}}s are now allowed on the same page. --Yurik (talk) 15:37, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
  • @Yurik: - that is great! -- now can create extra maps with using the show parameter for different sections etc. -- Matroc (talk) 00:28, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes Done Yurik, and one more thing, which is really strange. Mapframe behaves in a very weird way when placed inside a div environment. Check here, Открыть карту. Same bug happens when I remove the wrap/unwrap part but keep any kind of div around the mapframe command. --Alexander (talk) 20:22, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Tracked in phab:T137815
  • Was seeing similar issue as I had a mapframe etc. within a collapsible div... Evidently some change has occurred fixing the issue - perhaps a .css or javascript refresh was added after the map is opened to insure height and width etc... I tried Atsirlin's Открыть карту (open map) and I could see it working - it also seems to do a (slight pause) refresh - just a passing note -- Matroc (talk) 00:59, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Merged and already live. JGirault (WMF) (talk) 22:29, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

GPX discussion[edit]

  • Could you explain what these template do? I am a bit confused. Or point to a doc. Thanks! --Yurik (talk) 03:40, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
    • @Yurik: The template is used to add a boundary or track to a map. There is some documentation of the process at Wikivoyage:How to use dynamic maps#Adding boundaries and tracks. -- Ryan • (talk) • 04:09, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
      • @Wrh2:, I played with them a bit. I seriously doubt that we would want to invest into full GPX support at this point simply because I think it can be easily converted to GeoJson and hosted right here on the Wiki. See on the right. Yurik (talk) 04:59, 9 June 2016 (UTC) P.S. Btw, that GPX file contains an error it seems - it has 3 segments, but the first two only contain one point each, making it impossible to draw a line. I removed them. Also I used an online conversion tool and some simple regex to get this. Yurik (talk) 05:15, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
  • How do you switch on the GPX plot for the article? --Traveler100 (talk) 12:36, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
GPX routes no longer visible on the in page map style and option not available on the map you get when you click on a listing number icon. --Traveler100 (talk) 21:44, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • @Traveler100: Yes, GPX is broken at the moment. I could try to implement a GPX parser in Lua, but it might take considerable efforts, and I think it's a dead end technology - geojson has much more descriptive language for this data, so I think we should migrate to it (see an example above). --Yurik (talk) 02:07, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
So what is involved in migrating from GPX format. Not there are many tools to generate GPX and a number of web site offering such data. --Traveler100 (talk) 13:57, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Traveler100, depends on how many there are. If English WV is the only wiki that uses them, I see there are about 20-30 of them, might not be worth writing an elaborate script (will take much longer, and can only be done by a developer, thus preventing that developer from doing something that community cannot do easily). I would suggest converting the data using this tool (make sure you select GPX in the dropdown), and copy/pasting the resulting geojson into one big wiki page somewhere, wrapping each geojson in <mapframe>. This way everyone can look at them easily, and move them to the needed artiles (or make templates out of them). Eventually I hope we will have a proper geojson storage on commons. --Yurik (talk) 14:59, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
P.S. Seems there are over 70 GPXs on enwiki alone, I will try to migrate myself. --Yurik (talk) 19:15, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Semi-done - all data has been converted, see User:Yurik/Sandbox/Gpx1 and User:Yurik/Sandbox/Gpx2. The task is tracked at phab:T137677. I suspect some of them were exported from OSM and stored as a page, which we shouldn't do - instead maps service should provide a way to export that data on the fly into the map that needs it. See phab:T134084 - a service to get an outline of a city, etc. --Yurik (talk) 01:01, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

General map questions[edit]

  • Yurik, I need your comment on a related issue: this set of coordinates is geojson, isn't it? How can I integrate it into the new mapframe technology? Note that same boundaries will be used on multiple pages, so we need a way to store the boundaries somewhere, not on the page itself, as {{mapmask}} is currently doing. I believe that this requires some tweaks of Module:Map, but I am unable to do this myself (and I have no idea what you had in mind when writing Module:Map in the way it is written). --Alexander (talk) 13:49, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Alexander, yes, they look like geojson coordinates, and in theory can easily added to the mapframe/maplink by simply doing a search/replace into a 59.4318956570169,24.736855030059814|59.43198295738759,24.737563133239746|... sequence (notice that lat/long order is reversed). Then the data can be used as {{mapframe|geotag=Polygon|data=values|59.43...}}. In the long run, my goal is to enable geojson storage on commons, similar to the (phab:T120452). Those pages will store raw geojson, and will be accessible from maps (or Lua) everywhere (i already have it working on my machine). I wouldn't want geojson to be stored as wiki markup - not stable, breaks in many ways, cannot be easily previewed, and many other issues. This Wednesday there will be an RFC discussion about the tabular data, but most of the technology is the same. --Yurik (talk) 18:13, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Styling <maplink>[edit]

  • The style of the squares with numbers in the text is different - is there a reason why this was changed? Thanks again for all your work. Xsobev (talk) 17:23, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
  • @Xsobev:, I thought our links in text were exactly the same style as before. What changes and on which pages do you see? Thanks! --Yurik (talk) 22:25, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
  • You can see the difference if you compare an older WV page on archive.org with any current page (the changes are not page-specific). The main difference I could see is the grey border and the larger font size in the new version. In the old version, the border has the same color as the background of the box, and font size seems to be set to 0.85em. Obviously, this has low priority. Xsobev (talk)
Xsobev, this can be changed in Common.css, as shown here. You can find suitable parameters by playing with the code in User:Xsobev/commons.css. Then I will copy it to Mediawiki:Common.css, in order to apply this style globally. --Alexander (talk) 19:50, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Yurik, I am not sure what the outcome of phab:T136260 is. Your Module:Map has no style= parameter. Does it mean that we are not supposed to pass any style information to maplink, or how should it work? It would be awesome to adjust the in-text map marker using standard CSS styles. Note also that the current style of map markers is very different from what was used before. --Alexander (talk) 10:19, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Alexander, <maplink> uses mw-kartographer-autostyled CSS class for all automatic links. I thought it was identical to how it used to be, but lets configure it in Common.css to the way it should look - I think someone else also commented about it above. (You can try it in your own css user file until you like it, tell me how it should be changed) I do not want to introduce "style=" attribute (mediawiki plans to remove it outright in other places), but maplink/mapframe do support "class=" parameter so that styling can be consistently controlled with the CSS. --Yurik (talk) 18:26, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
See here for the CSS style optimized for Russian Wikivoyage. Thanks! --Alexander (talk) 19:50, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

@Xsobev: @Atsirlin: I updated the style for this wiki based on the above. Is it acceptable? If there will be no comments, i will mark this as done. --Yurik (talk) 19:56, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

  • @Yurik: The style of the marker boxes is almost the same again. The only missing part is a 1px border in the same color as the background of the box, for example: "border: 1px solid forestgreen" for the general green "listings" type marker. Old examples of marker styles can be seen here for example. Thanks a lot for your time. Xsobev (talk) 14:02, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Update: I spoke with our other engineers and our UI specialist, and it seems we need to slightly adjust these links. They might be okayish from the design perspective for desktop, but they may need to be adjusted for the mobile - they may be too small for the touch screen. I propose that we establish guidelines for these markers, and create a set of predefined classes that are global to all Wikivoyages (part of the maps code), and appear good on desktop and mobile. The community will then establish a set of additional classes, such as "kartographer-link-see" or "...-eat". Templates like {{see}} and {{eat}} will add corresponding classes. The classes will only modify the background color, and won't touch any other aspects. This allows us not to hardcode the color of the link, but instead use a much better CSS system, while also maintaining good UI and cross-language consistency. Thoughts? --Yurik (talk) 00:02, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Does this then force wikivoyage to only use templates in order to create links/maps? Is the use of <mapframe> and <maplink> to be avoided when they may be used for some condition that the templates don't provide for (such as creation a different group, different color other than the default color for type other, or even the use of various marker icons)? Or will the changes in maps code apply to both situations. Just wondering! -- Matroc (talk) 01:11, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
  • @Matroc: well, its not forcing anything - because you can still have <maplink class="my-class-name" .../>. But templates make it more consistent. After all, the backend code only affects the <maplink> and <mapframe> tags, not anything done in templates or modules. That said, I think it is better to use classes defined in MediaWiki:Common.css - like create a maplink-eat (or whatever other name community wants) class. This provides for consistency across pages. --Yurik (talk) 01:21, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I checked the mobile version and I don't see any problems with the markers. Do engineers want to make them bigger, or what?
From previous experience we know that getting something decided across all language versions of Wikivoyage is next to impossible, so I would at least keep the option of CSS customization in the same way as it works now. If someone thinks that defaults should be different, well, let's see how these new defaults look like, and whether they fit into Wikivoyage articles. --Alexander (talk) 07:46, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Questions from Developers[edit]

I agree that it is redundant. --Alexander (talk) 20:09, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Category:Has_mapframeis not redundant, is used in statistics and status pages. Also useful when using boolean cat scan such as which articles in a country do or do not have map frames. As for Category:Pages with maps, not sure what this is saying, where is it generated? --Traveler100 (talk) 09:50, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Traveler100, Category:Pages with maps is a Special tracking category, automatically populated whenever you have a <mapframe> or <maplink> on a page. How is that different from the Category:Has_mapframe, which gets populated by the {{mapframe}}? If someone inserts a map via some other method, like directly using <mapframe>, it won't be in the old category, but it will still show up in the automatic one. Plus there is a page to track broken maps (something that you cannot do from wiki markup). --Yurik (talk) 12:59, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi @Yurik:, I think you just explained it yourself, Category:Has_mapframe is a subset of Category:Pages with maps, which is indicated by 2000+ pages in one category and 7000+ pages in the other. Whether a maplink is sufficient, since it opens up a full screen map (not a big fan actually), or that a mapframe should be inserted into articles to make maps more obvious could be further discussed. -- torty3 (talk) 09:20, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Or rather, I think map links are great for mobile phones, but not so much for desktop experiences. And the other way around for mapframes. Nice to see the progress on everything though, and thanks for that. -- torty3 (talk) 09:24, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
@torty3: that was my point - if you simply want to know "what links to the mapframe template", use this search - special page, if you want to find all maps, you can use the automatic tracking category. If you want two tracking categories - one for maps and one for links - create a task, and we can discuss it. But it makes no sense to me to have a category that duplicates "what links here". WRT full screen on link - that was the behaviour before - we simply made it much faster, more stable, and with some new features. If you think link click should do someting else, make a proposal and lets discuss. --Yurik (talk) 13:20, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
@Yurik:, the key is equivalent functionality. Perhaps if WhatLinksHere had an actual count and ability to be used in a tool such as CatScan, yet right now it does not. I'm not sure why it was decided not to have two different categories since they aren't the same in the first place. The speed and stability is definitely very much appreciated, but again opening full-screen maps is another use case that doesn't have equivalent functionality. Maplinks are not actually links that can be opened in a different tab/window. If I want to have the wiki page on one window and the map on another (and I didn't realise how much I used it in this manner), I have to do it in a roundabout fashion. I guess it's fairly minor in the scheme of things, but still irksome to me. -- torty3 (talk) 15:34, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
@Torty3: yes, the ctrl+click has been asked before - see tracked tasks. --Yurik (talk) 18:30, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
  • if the reason why it is needed can be solved with a better solution then sure we can discuss an alternative methods. It was initially introduced to provide readers with a POI map for a section of a long itinerary, for example in Trans-Canada Highway. We could not work out a method of displaying more than one map on a page at the same time. If you can work out a way to display more than one map in an article that would be an improvement. --Traveler100 (talk) 04:49, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I migrated some of the pages that use {{PoiMap2}} directly to use {{PoiMap2raw}}. This is not a good solution overall, so maybe its usage should be rethought? --Yurik (talk) 01:24, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Marker/pushpin-related issues[edit]

  • Symbol shape. The lack of distinctive shapes for each type of listing makes it more difficult interpret what the POI is unless you are very familiar with color scheme. --Traveler100 (talk) 12:33, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Not having different shapes for different types of listings is a step backwards. --Traveler100 (talk) 21:52, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Yep, its a TODO - see phab:T131618. I will try to get it soonish. Any help is greatly appreciated (like designing the icon in SVG, per bug comments) --Yurik (talk) 02:07, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Update: we could use some help on this one (no image designers on the team) - please create an SVG image for each of the needed icons just like these two files: [2] and [3]. The second one is for the shadow and an outline. Do not change the colors of the SVG - they are changed dynamically. Also, unless really needed, keep the same position of the images as in the examples. Please license the images under CC0. Thanks! --Yurik (talk) 18:26, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
  • This turns out slightly more complicated than anticipated. Apparently "pin" is hardcoded into the map, and might require some additional investigation. We are still investigating this one. --Yurik (talk) 10:57, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
  • @Yurik: When requesting a marker with a different style, for example "circle" instead of "pin", then the parameter gets accepted. The error seems to be returned only because there is no circle*.png image. So at least the makizushi code doesn't seem to contain any hardcoded values. Could you please give more details? Xsobev (talk) 13:50, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Bug report: There seems to be an area below each pushpin (with a similar width & height as the pushpin itself) which reacts to a single click in the same was as if clicking on the pushpin, which means it shows the name of the listing. Expected behaviour: The label should only be shown if clicked on the pushpin, but not on its surrounding area. Xsobev (talk) 12:12, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
    • @Yurik: Ok, I found the answer to why this area below the pushpin exists on github: The pointy bit of the pushpin has to be the centre of the image, so that it is positioned correctly on the map, which seems like an unfortunate limitation. Luckily, if we can use the marker symbols previously used on wikivoyage (see example), where the centre of the image is also where the marker should be placed, then the empty area below the marker won't be necessary anymore. Xsobev (talk) 13:42, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Fit map to all markers[edit]

  • In the previous mapframe version, there was a button ("Map center - all markers") which allowed to zoom out & center the map so that all markers of a page are visible in the mapframe (with one click). Would it be possible to add this feature in the new version? Thanks a lot. Xsobev (talk) 17:23, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
  • If you look at the old map, for example here for Stockholm, you can see a button with four arrows (with a tooltip that says "Map center <-> all markers") in the top-left corner (in the new map this button is now used to show the map in full screen mode). If you click it once, the map zooms out so that all makers on that map are visible. If you click it again, the zoom level goes back to where it was before. (Feel free, to copy this description to a new Phabricator ticket.) Xsobev (talk) 14:33, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Cannot fit map to all markers. --Traveler100 (talk) 20:10, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Other maps issues[edit]

  • I noticed that there are about 30 pages that use a color instead of the proper marker "type", for example California#See. Is that needed, or can we switch to named types? --Yurik (talk) 05:20, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I would prefer to use named types everywhere - it will be confusing if someone decides to use the "eat" color scheme for "buy" listings, so rather than providing the ability to specify a color as a type value I think it would be better to add more types with distinct styles as needed. -- Ryan • (talk) • 15:28, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • There seems to be something weird about the numbering too. For instance, in United States National Parks, all POIs with a number larger than 99 are numbered 99, both on the map and in the article. ϒpsilon (talk) 07:27, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • This is a limitation of the labeling system - it can only create numbers 0..99 and letters A..Z, but in any color and 3 different sizes. Also for maps like that I think it makes sense to simply use some icon instead of numbering? Its not like anyone will be trying to locate a park number #42 on a map among 300 other markers. Also we could set different colors, one per state? --Yurik (talk) 15:32, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I believe the numbers are needed as reference to numbered text on page... I believe marker doesn't have color or an icon option as parameters. -- Matroc (talk) 16:39, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • @Matroc: I really doubt anyone would look at a map with 500 markers, and try to find that index on the page. I think we should add all the relevant information about the mark into the mark itself - this way user can simply click on it and get a popup with everything. If you still insist on the numbers, lets differentiate numbers by some region colors (should be better than to pick a different color for each state) --Yurik (talk) 02:07, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
@Traveler100: I think Roman Empire map should be broken down into multiple maps - there is very little use to add all POIs to the same map while the actual item is far below on the page. Instead, I think it would be much better to have multiple maps, one for each region, with its own POIs. What do you think? --Yurik (talk) 10:02, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
You may have a good case for the Roman Empire article. But could you please point me in direction of documentation for the counter parameter. Made quick test at Roman Empire#England but does not achieve quite what I was expecting. Also still think numbers larger than 100 are going to be needed for long hiking trails. For example Wales Coast Path and Rheinsteig are still work in progress projects, listings are going to increase. --Traveler100 (talk) 11:07, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
@Traveler100: The main doc is at Kartographer help page (please help improving it). For WV, Module:Map has some docs, plus the {{listing}} & {{marker}}. More specifically, each listing has to be marked with the right group, plus the map itself should be set to only show that group. I think we will need to cleanup the marker & listing templates, because currently they accept the type, group, and show, arguments, but don't work too well with them. I will see what I can do in the next few days to clean it up. Or feel free to poke at it yourself. --Yurik (talk) 18:50, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
@Yurik: I started to write something, see User:Traveler100/map-listings-explained but having difficulty understanding how counter influences groups on the map or the symbol used for the poi. See comments at Template talk:Marker#using multiple counters. --Traveler100 (talk) 17:30, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
@Traveler100: from the <mapframe/maplink> perspective, counters and groups have no relation with each other. Any data marked with the same "group" value will be shown for all maps in that group, plus it will be shown whenever the group is listed in the "show" parameter.
{{marker}} sets two values that are used in the Module:map: marker-symbol=-number-{{{counter|{{{type|listing}}}}}} | group={{{type|listing}}}. The module does not modify either of these two params, it simply passes them to the <mapframe/maplink> tags. Also, I think it is a mistake to set any params in the {{marker}} because the module can pick up params from the template that uses {marker} - this way marker template could become much simpler, and templates like {{see}} and {{do}} can set all the needed arguments. --Yurik (talk) 18:40, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
sorry but that explanation has not helped. What do mean by "will be shown for all maps in that group"? Also where can you set the show parameter if you have other types or is this hardcoded? For example why is only the group listing being show in Roman Empire, how do you show different counter groups? --Traveler100 (talk) 18:52, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
@Traveler100:, first, take a look at help page - groups, I tried to explain it there (please help fix it if you have a better way to explain it). In WV maps mode, each map (either a link or a frame) could belong to a group. All maps with the same group name share their content (geojson). So if you have two maplinks with some geojson content (like a POI or some mask), and both maplinks have "group=magic" parameter, their geojson content gets combined, and clicking either of these links will show data from both. That same data can also be shown in other maplink or mapframe that belong to a different group - by simply setting their "show=magic" parameter (more than one group can be listed). All this is about the raw <maplink> and <mapframe> tags. But in WV land, we use templates that hide those tags. The tag itself is created by the Module:Map. Template {{marker}} calls it with some parameters. Templates like {{see}} and {{do}} use the marker template, also with some parameters. We should clean up these parameters to simplify the whole system. The counter and group and show parameters are being either passed as is, or set from the "type" parameter. I will try to clean it up a bit, to make it simpler (suggestions are welcome). --Yurik (talk) 20:40, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Maybe we are going about this the wrong way. Rather than trying to explain mediawiki code and trying to get non programmers to understand the technical side. Maybe the development team should write a simple user guide? What functions are being delivered, what will not longer work, which parameters will be available and what options can be used and how they will appear on the maps? --Traveler100 (talk) 06:17, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes Done When I add geo coordinates via the listing editor and then click on the newly created marker in the text, the map opens, but the new marker is not shown on the map. After reloading the page, the marker then shows on the map. Xsobev (talk) 11:31, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes, I think I saw this bug appearing somewhere. Could you add a Phabricator ticket (with the above link), and describe the exact steps to reproduce it? Thx! --Yurik (talk) 15:32, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • This seems to be fixed now. Marked as done - Thanks to whoever fixed it. Xsobev (talk) 14:11, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
  • In the original examples like the one at start of this section there were all the display options such as Destinations (nearby articles) and Boundaries. These options are not on the articles style map only on click through and geo map styles. --Traveler100 (talk) 21:52, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  • @Traveler100:, could you elaborate, I'm not sure I understand this and the next request. Thx! --Yurik (talk) 02:07, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
  • How do you get an icon marking the goe cordinates of other Wikivoyage articles onto the map? In previous map tool or in the tool you get when press the map icon top right on a page there is a tick option "Destination" this is useful when looking at high density areas were you want to see nearby suburbs or when working on Go next section. The Boundary option to display district, counties and so on is also very useful when working on region articles. --Traveler100 (talk) 14:03, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
  • In click through map style when you display destinations you have to proactively click on location tags to see the article thumbnail image, on previous style a mouse over was sufficient. --Traveler100 (talk) 22:03, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
    • I will use Wales Coast Path again as example. Click on the map icon top right to get the standard map function. Switch on POI destinations (left side icon or right hand option). Move mouse over destination markers, will see thumbnail if image on page or Wikivoyage icon if no image on page. Back on article page Click on a point of interesting listing number, you get the new style map. Click the Explore Nearby Destination icons. You need to proactively click on a location marker to see the image. --Traveler100 (talk) 14:14, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
  • If you click on a listing number in an article is only shows other POIs of the same type (i.e. see or go or ..) it is not possible to see or even switch on other POI types. --Traveler100 (talk) 09:30, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
  • This functionality would be quite important to have. For example if you plan a trip and read the listings in "see" and want to find out if there are (a) any restaurants or (b) anything else at all near the see listing you are interested in. Xsobev (talk) 12:24, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
  • If you add a mapframe to a page, all existing markers on that page should be shown on the map preview. Currently only the markers of the section where the mapframe is added are shown. Currently it is not possible to test a good geo coordinate setting with the preview, so that for example all existing markers are visible. It's even more problematic if the section (for example "Get around") where the mapframe is added doesn't have any markers yet, because then no markers are shown. Xsobev (talk) 13:13, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Can the zoom level be shown on the new map. In the old map it is displayed on the top left corner. That way one can easily figure out what zoom level to the the zoom parameter to when adding a mapframe to a page. Xsobev (talk) 13:13, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes, this is a todo. In the mean time, you can see both the zoom and lat/long by making the map full screen, and looking at the URL - it has both. --Yurik (talk) 19:28, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Currently in the old map, when you right-click on any position, the geo coordinates are shown. That's useful for example to find a good set of geo coordinates when adding a mapframe to a page. It's even more important if you want to add geo coordinates to a listing. Xsobev (talk) 13:13, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
  • This is still under discussion - we want to cater to both readers and editors, so working on the design. In the mean time, you can see both the zoom and lat/long by making the map full screen, and looking at the URL - it has both. Also, Visual Editor allows an interactive adjustment of the map (granted that this is not applicable to templates) --Yurik (talk) 19:28, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Why under discussion, this is a very useful functionality for adding or correcting coordinates of listings. Why make things difficult for editors? --Traveler100 (talk) 07:09, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
I too find it frustrating; without this functionality I've no idea how to add coordinates for new listings. Google maps, maybe? Luckily the old map is still accessible, by clicking on the icon in the upper right corner of the article. From there it's possible to get coordinates, just as earlier. ϒpsilon (talk) 08:32, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
@Traveler100,ϒpsilon: it is embarrassing that long-time Wikivoyage editors are unaware of the service that was specifically created for this purpose. --Alexander (talk) 16:36, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
I am aware of this, in fact it is on my main bookmarks. However it is easier to use the existing article map, particularly as for many locations the GeoMap method request a couple of attempts to find the correct location for a specific name. Yes there are other way to do this, was just highlighting a regression in the new map function. --Traveler100 (talk) 16:49, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Well, I didn't remember that the GeoMap thing existed (it's more than a year since I used it), because I've got used to taking the coordinates from the article's dynamic map which is just one click away from the article. Guess I have to add it to my quick links right away. ϒpsilon (talk) 17:01, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
  • With the new map in a mapframe: if you double-click, the map changes to full-screen. In the old map it would zoom one level in, which is also the behaviour I would expect. Xsobev (talk) 13:13, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I'm not yet sure about the best design for this. We will try to do some A/B tests on what behavior users tend to use more, and possibly allow for per-user customization. --Yurik (talk) 19:28, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
  • This seems to be the behaviour with embedded maps from Google and Bing: double-click zooms in. Since many people use these embedded maps, they probably expect a similar behaviour. Xsobev (talk) 14:39, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
  • The problem occurs on Russian Wikivoyage, but I am sure that it can happen here as well. The {{marker}} template adds linebreak after the map marker. Example here, check the section with the list of cities. A few listings on this page produce the same problem (for example, #8 in See). Those are the listings with the empty address= or name= parameter. --Alexander (talk) 12:26, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Yurik, the problem has been solved here, but it remains on the other page. I noticed that map marker produces this unsolicited linebreak when placed inside a span, div, or table environment. Do you know why it happens? --Alexander (talk) 20:08, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
  • PoiMap2raw, does not open in new browser tab. --Traveler100 (talk) 05:03, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Would like to have link in mapframe to open map in new browser tab. Yes you can on PC right mouse button to get option to open in new tab but I find doing this on mobile devices a little more tricky. Also when using mobile devices, particularly when download is slow or expensive, it is better to keep multiple tabs open (I sometimes keep tabs open when I have a network connection so I can use where no connection is available later in the day). --Traveler100 (talk) 05:09, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
  • When you edit a section of an article, the geo map symbol is no longer shown, so cannot check lat long values until you save the edit. --Traveler100 (talk) 07:03, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Cannot right mouse click or ctrl click on listing number to get map in new tab. --Traveler100 (talk) 07:04, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Feature request: Zooming in with a double-click does not work if there are pushpins at the location where you double-click. It would be great if a double-click on any part of the map (with or without pushpin) zooms in. Xsobev (talk) 12:12, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Not sure how related this is to the new map extension: Currently, when exporting a page to PDF, all the listings with geo information start with a "1". It might be better to show the actual geo coordinates, so that they can be used to find the location of the listing with for example the OsmAnd Openstreetmap app on your smartphone (or any other app/device that understands geo coordinates). Xsobev (talk) 12:36, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Migrating {{geo}} to new maps[edit]

Wikidata support[edit]

  • I would like to propose deleting {{geo}} template. Or more specifically, moving it into some template that every location page uses, and pulling coordinate data from the associated Wikidata page. This way you will no longer need to add geo to every article, but instead simply update the Wikidata coordinates, and it will show up automatically. Magic! Is there a template that is used on every location page? --Yurik (talk) 01:30, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
  • there has been a general convention on this site not to complicate one template with too many different functions. Makes it a challenge for new contributors to understand what is going on. Wikidata particularly is not easy to understand from reading the contents of a page and if you are not familiarly with the concept not very discovered. Again making editing for insiders only. (Wikipedia can afford declining contributors, this site cannot). If was merged we would still want to keep maintenance categories for tracking things like which articles have all templates but no coordinates. I would also be a little concerned about simply taking Wikidata information, many have corrected coordinates here or sometimes the Wikipedia coordinated are not exactly what you want for this site. Propose a method but do not make changes for change sake. Do not touch a running system.--Traveler100 (talk) 04:58, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
I think that inexperienced users should not touch things like geo-coordinates of an article, so that's not an issue at all. The question is how the system understands geo-location of an article. For example, does tools.wmflabs.org/wikivoyage/w/data/en-articles.js retrieve up-to-date information from Wikidata? Or does it work from the dump, as PoiMap2 did? --Alexander (talk) 07:50, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
@Atsirlin: That is actually the biggest concern I have at the moment with the "show nearby" - the new maps still rely on wmflabs to get a list of all articles, which is problematic in many ways (stability/security/maintainablity/...). The way system is designed now is "okayish" for the near term, but it will break soon - currently the user downloads the entire list of all articles on click. As the number of articles grow, so will the data size. Imagine having the same system on Wikipedia - and downloading coordinates for 2 million articles - that's over 1GB of data. So yes, this is to be discussed. Who is maintaining that script? --Yurik (talk) 16:53, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Honestly, I don't know, but I ping Joachim as someone who should at least know how it works. --Alexander (talk) 18:03, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I have found some of the coordinates in Wikipedia inaccurate or off a bit and in a few cases, the envoy article is linked incorrectly to the wrong Wikidata item which in turn gives one coordinates that are also incorrect. In some cases, I know I have created {{geo}} for pages that don't have (and probably will never have) a corresponding Wikidata item or Wikipedia article. The concept of using Wikidata as a source for many things is a wonderful concept; however, it too is not quite ready for prime time players. (Just one of my minor pet peeves). -- Matroc (talk) 15:02, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
  • @Matroc:, @Traveler100:, @Atsirlin: I do not mean Wikivoyage MUST use Wikidata. Instead, I only propose that {{geo}} uses Wikidata coordinates by default unless coordinates have been specified by hand. This way if you are not happy with the value in Wikidata, you simply provide your own (like you do now). And if you are happy, simply don't provide any. And if there are no coordinates in Wikidata - it might make sense for a user or a bot to add them (by copying them from the article) - thus benefiting all other smaller language projects who might not have enough resources to manage their own coordinates. Also, if there is no corresponding item in Wikidata, easy enough to add it (possibly by bot). The benefit from this will be automatic coordinates for all articles in all languages without any manual work. Lastly, I think Wikidata community will be very happy to get direct contributions from all projects, so they might eventually even introduce some onsite coordinate editing (ability to edit Wikidata without switching to it). Oh, and don't forget that Wikidata will hopefully be synced up more with OSM database - only increasing the quality of data. --Yurik (talk) 16:41, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
@Yurik: - I will go along with that. I am NOT opposed to using Wikidata but just get concerned about missing and inaccurate data that has been corrected in wikivoyage. -- (Would there be string formatting of the coordinates to lets say 4 or 6 decimal places or will it just import as is in Wikidata?) -- Matroc (talk) 00:11, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

{{geo}} migration blockers[edit]

Geo template (link to map in the upper right corner) is the only major feature that has not yet been migrated. Please help us figure out the absolute must-haves (blockers) to enable this feature. Each item has to be very clearly defined and actionable. Also, please do not add "nice to haves" here - they are clearly important for your workflows, and might be a temporary inconvenience that I hope we can fix very quickly, but check if it is a blocker (like it no longer shows critical data) or if it is something that can be re-introduced soon thereafter (like some styling inconvenience). Thanks! --Yurik (talk) 14:48, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

  1. limit on indexing above 99 listings for itineraries of long routes and larger travel topics like Roman Empire and Wales Coast Path --Traveler100 (talk) 06:34, 12 July 2016 (UTC) , --Traveler100 (talk) 13:26, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  2. when clicking on a listing need to be able to switch on all groups. For example I click on a see or do attraction, I want to see what places are to eat in the area. --Traveler100 (talk) 06:34, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
  3. the current map function has a fit option, which zooms in or zooms out until all listing POIs are displayed. As well as being useful to see all attractions of interest it is also a good method of checking if coordinates have be entered correctly or if listing should be on another article. --Traveler100 (talk) 06:34, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
  4. GPX paths plotted for trail routes. Click on one of the Detailed map links on Rheinburgenweg for exmaple. --Traveler100 (talk) 11:10, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
  5. Printing a full page map with the new map (expanded from a mapmask) results in a 7 page printout - looks like seven identical copies of the same map, but get a one page map when printing the map from the geo template. AlasdairW (talk) 22:58, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
  6. When printed in black and white different symbols are the same - eat and buy both are a mid-grey, sleep and drink are both black. We need to get the something like the symbols that the geo map has. (When I am printing at home I will generally print in colour, but in an internet cafe / hotel reception there can be a big difference in costs.) AlasdairW (talk) 22:58, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Unusual travel activities...[edit]

Posted this a while back - https://en.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=Wikivoyage:Travellers%27_pub&oldid=2888733#.27Fantasy.27_activities_for_the_traveller

And never got any feedback :( ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:46, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

I think these "unusual activities" should be added case-by-case in the relevant geographical article. Make sure the activity is always available, for instance getting in a movie production as an extra is interesting if the opportunity is available most of the time and not too difficult to get into. Cheers! :-) Syced (talk) 02:23, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Already added a comment about the British "shoot" in recreational shooting for example, but some of the other things might need the assistance of other contributors, Like for example
  • how much Silverstone costs to do a lap on and so on?
  • Do classy US hotels do the full Afternoon tea , at a price?
  • Do you need an insurance waiver for a rodeo weekend?

(and so on)... Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:15, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Balochi phrasebook[edit]

Anyone with the knowledge to expand this article, at least make it an outline? New user started but failed to continue the work. --Traveler100 (talk) 18:04, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Switching {{Quickbar}} to Wikidata[edit]

Hello everyone,

I'm working on a replacement (on the right for Andorra) for {{Quickbar}} which uses Wikidata instead of locally entered information. It's almost ready, I'm only waiting for a property proposal related to the electricity field. What do you think? Could it be deployed like this (after we have the electricity property)?

Warm regards, -- T.seppelt (talk) 14:50, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Full support from me, seems like a great idea. Thanks for working on this. -- Ryan • (talk) • 15:25, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Had done something similar about a year ago though I had added flag, image, bordering countries and description - this I like as it is simpler and less cluttered. -- Go for it! - good exercise. -- Matroc (talk) 19:02, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Quickbars used to be standard on this site, didn't they? Why did we get rid of them in the first place? Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:54, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
We didn't. They should still be on every Country article. Powers (talk) 21:13, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
250+ articles have quickbars (template) - Matroc (talk) 22:04, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
However compared to other language editions they contain much less detail. And some language editions also have them in every city article as well... Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:36, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
It looks great, but I prefer the smaller locator maps we currently use. We've found the quickbars often push more appealing visual content down, so we've kept them as short as possible vertically. Powers (talk) 21:15, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Hmmm! -- Unfortunately what is in Wikidata is what you will get; be it a map, banner or an image, perhaps it could be resolved by passing arguments to override the map image etc. that is found in Wikidata... Just a thought -- Matroc (talk) 22:25, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
And so raises one of the major issues with using Wikidata for visual information rather than factual information: different projects have different aesthetic and layout needs. Powers (talk) 23:55, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Local parameters are stil supported. We will be able to decide step by step which information we want from Wikidata. --T.seppelt (talk) 04:22, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I prefer the map in the Andorra example above as it conveys more information than the map currently in use at Andorra, and I like the idea that our locator maps would be consistent with those used at other projects. Insofar as the argument against Wikidata is that it reduces local control, I think the benefits of having the data kept up-to-date and in sync across projects outweighs the disadvantage of not having that info directly editable here, particularly since we can override it locally if needed. -- Ryan • (talk) • 15:14, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Having it "automatically" updated is a bonus as long as the vandals do not find their way to Wikidata. I, at least, have a hard time figuring out which Wikidata edits one should check and which one can trust. I also think pluralism is good, in the cases there are resources to maintain different versions. It is often valuable to be able to check something on other projects, which may use a slightly different definition or other sources, or be more easy for me to understand (cf the two locator maps – I have no problem recognizing Spain, but others may have). --LPfi (talk) 17:54, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
It's all well and good to prefer the large map aesthetically, but fitting it into our articles in a harmonious manner is a different story. As for commonality among projects, English Wikipedia uses a different set of locator maps; these are primarily used in German Wikipedia and a few other low-population Wikipedias. There are several other sets of locator maps, as well. Powers (talk) 20:13, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Could be a good timing to steal this additional piece of German technology: "It also picks the qualifiers on wikidata for population and it compares your own data with wikidata. So you can activate Wikidata Tools do get a bigger quickbar with additional information like "different altitude on Wikidata" or something like that, including tools to edit Wikidata/the article." https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikivoyage/Summit#February_2016 Cheers! Syced (talk) 08:17, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Is it worth adding Driving Side? -- WOSlinker (talk) 10:20, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

I added it. I'd like to keep the quickbar as simple as possible. If you want to travel to a country you don't need information about GDP, the president or the unemployment rate. All of our country articles are connected to Wikipedia articles. This is the place we one can get further information. –T.seppelt (talk) 14:02, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
The Plug Type that you were waiting for is now available. -- WOSlinker (talk) 15:34, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
I know. I am actually waiting for d:Wikidata:Property proposal/Sister projects#mains voltage because I'd like to have both the voltage and the plug type in one row as it is in Andorra. Your input would be appreciated at the property proposal discussion, I guess. -- T.seppelt (talk) 07:53, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

@Wrh2, Matroc, LtPowers, Hobbitschuster, LPfi: I actived the new version now. Please have a look at Andorra. I'm going to move the data of other country articles also to Wikidata and remove the local parameters. Warm regards, -- T.seppelt (talk) 07:26, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

T.seppelt, I'd suggest you wait a bit. It doesn't look to me like Powers is convinced this is the best course of action. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:33, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
I agree. We should come to a conclusion first. -- T.seppelt (talk) 07:39, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
The only concern raised was about the map image, right? Since the local param will override Wikidata, as long as the map is left as-is (for now) I think it should be fine to defer to Wikidata for other fields, and we can continue to discuss whether to use Wikidata maps or the current maps in the interim. -- Ryan • (talk) • 17:22, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
That's right. I can leave the overwrite for the map image even though I'd prefer to keep it consistent. -- T.seppelt (talk) 17:42, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Consistent with what? As I pointed out above, a variety of locator map sets are used throughout WMF projects. This particular one is used on a handful of Wikipedias, most prominently German, but it's far from universal. Powers (talk) 19:29, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
If you use quickbar on a WV page that is not found in Wikidata you will get a Lua error because you are trying to build an edit link to an entry in Wikidata (which doesn't exist). In this case the item.id which would be nil. (I am not suggesting that a wikidata item be added as a parameter to quickbar; but rather, to skip the creation of the Wikidata edit link in such cases.)
I have to say that I am still a bit cautious and express the need to address everyone's concerns. - Matroc (talk) 23:27, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
@Matroc: the latter is fixed now. The module doesn't create the edit link in these cases anymore. -- T.seppelt (talk) 06:35, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
@T.seppelt: -Thank you.... -- 18:24, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
So, the United States of America article now has a much longer quickbar than it did before. I'm not convinced this is a positive change. Is there an advantage to listing each time zone on its own line instead of just listing the range of timezones? (I shudder to think how Russia will look.) Why include a Euro conversion but not a Canadian dollar, British pound, or Japanese yen conversion? Is the exact date on which the population was estimated important, or is only the year important? Powers (talk) 02:40, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
@LtPowers: I see your point. In general the template just looks up data at Wikidata and displays what it gets (for USA look at Q30). This means that all these information can be edited there. But there is of course also the option to manipulate the output locally. Let's take it step by step:
  • Timezones: It's going to be hard to summarize all this timezones to "UTC−4 to UTC−10". We could either only display a couple of timezones ("UTC−06:00, UTC−07:00, UTC−08:00 and 5 more" or "UTC−06:00, UTC−07:00 ... UTC+12:00, UTC−05:00") but this not really appealing I guess. Or we use the local parameter to overwrite the Wikidata value.
  • Currency conversions: The currency conversions are always based on the data in the currency's item (for USD Q4917). Feel free to add more conversions there. See Ukraine as an example.
  • Date in the population field: If there is consensus for displaying only the year, this can be changed.
The module is pretty much at the beginning. Let's find ways to improve it. Warm regards, -- T.seppelt (talk) 08:00, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Just wondering with the currency conversion if there is a need to show so many figures. Rather than 1 USD = 0.888375605 Euro, perhaps rounding the values to 4 might be better 1 USD = 0.8884 Euro ? -- WOSlinker (talk) 11:21, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Two decimal places should be enough, at least for Euros. But that conversion rate is from February anyway. It apparently has to be manually updated, and that isn't happening regularly. I don't think we should show it at all. Powers (talk) 17:35, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

For the timezones, could you loop through the values to workout the MIN and MAX time zones and just show the "MIN to MAX" values? Also, with times such as Hawaii–Aleutian Time Zone, could you then go to that data item d:Q3241537 and see if P460 is set and if it is get the UTC time zone? -- WOSlinker (talk) 11:28, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

I implemented now a new format for the conversions and for the date in the population field. With the timezones it's more complicated because Wikidata doesn't store the offset of a timezone in a structured way. The only possible way would be to parse the offset based on the label of the timezone item which is not error-proof I think. An idea would be to propose a new property "timezone offset" -- T.seppelt (talk) 16:19, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm stunned such a property doesn't already exist. I can't think of any reason we should outsource our data display formats to Wikidata; we should be getting raw data from WD and formatting it *our* way, which is going to be different from the way Wikipedias format it. Powers (talk) 17:35, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
As I said before, what you see in Wikidata is what you get. Editing Wikidata to meet one wiki site's needs is not necessarily the way to go unless Wikidata is completely incorrect for all intents and purposes. I can foresee some future project Wikidata edit wars which we don't need or want ... Using local parameters (overrides) is a better option for those parts that are in question or yet another property could be added to Wikidata.
As far as currency goes, I would want to see a "rupee" symbol rather than "INR" or a "dollar" symbol rather than "USD". That is just me I guess.
The capital listed could possibly be made into a voy link by drilling down and checking if a wikivoyage page exists for that capital. (though this is not 100% perfect either).
The quickbar module is a work in progress and going through transformation - it is good to have these conversations now. I think it is also important to remember that one shoe size does not fit all. Some flexibility has to be made available.
An aside - WOSlinker - wow - I have seen your name pop up many times before and I just remembered that I tested your Module:IsLatin in 2013 on Mediawiki, time flies -- Matroc (talk) 20:40, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
I apologize, I thought I had made it clear that I wasn't suggesting that Wikidata should store our preferred presentation of the data. My point is that Wikidata should not be storing any sort of presentation/formatting at all. It should store raw data, which individual wikis then format as necessary. I'm fine using Wikidata's data; but in no way should we be beholden to Wikidata's choice in how that data is represented. Powers (talk) 21:09, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
I agree - it is what we can do with the raw data that counts most -- Matroc (talk) 21:47, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Okay. Thank you for your input. I'll try to transform it into some improvements. Firstly the module already works like a formatting unit for raw data which comes from Wikidata. The fields for currency, population, electricity and emergency use advanced formats which are applied locally. And of course this formats can be changed. I didn't intend to say that we should edit Wikidata according to one project's needs. I just said that Wikidata is the place to add, correct and remove information in case information is missing, incorrect or wrong. Let's improve also Wikidata through improving this module. Now:

-- T.seppelt (talk) 06:10, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

  • I think showing "USD" is more important than showing "$", as that is what you will use at the exchange desk. The symbol will be shown in Buy regardless. For the exchange rate, we should have some way to guarantee up to date values or otherwise not show anything (if we want an approximate rate, it can be given in Buy).
  • The timezone is a problem only for a handful of countries, overriding manually is no problem.
  • I would prefer radical rounding of any numbers. USA having 320 M inhabitants is exact enough for any visitor – and with such rounding there is less need to update yearly (and exact numbers are meaningless without date and method of counting, which are better left to Wikipedia).
--LPfi (talk) 16:47, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
The timezone problem should be solved in one week when the property proposal is approved. The rounding can be easily implemented. I'd stil like to see some more comments on this since it's a bit of work. The discussion on the Wikidata Project chat about currency symbols got very deep. I think the ISO abbreviation solution is the best we can get for now. --T.seppelt (talk) 19:11, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
My two cents   ;-)
  • I prefer "USD" to "$", because multiple currencies use "$".
  • Rounding is good. But does "radical rounding" mean three significant figures ("320M" for the US, "331K" for Iceland, "2,910" for the Falklands), or does it mean "320M" for the US, "300K" for Iceland, and "0" for the Falklands? WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:12, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
@T.seppelt: For the rounding, you may want to check out make_sigfig and format_number in Module:Convert. -- WOSlinker (talk) 07:04, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm thinking 3 sigfigs is good enough (although it risks looking deceptively precise for places like Pitcairn Islands, I don't think rounding "67" to "70" is necessarily a better idea). I appreciate the dialog we're having here. Powers (talk) 11:06, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

one large or many small articles[edit]

I would like some input on recommendations regarding whether it is best to have a number of small location articles or have a single good sized one? This is not a policy discussion but more aesthetics and usefulness to the reader. Take for example Beer, Branscombe and Seaton, all close to one another, is enough attractions to make each a usable article but there is never going to be more than a couple of listings per section. Or Grantchester, is this far enough outside Cambridge (England) and enough information to be its own article? No debate all these settlement are in their own right valid destinations but it is useful to the traveller to click through lots of small articles? --Traveler100 (talk) 12:23, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

I think it's hard to tell if you don't know the place... Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:59, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
One thing to consider is if you sleep in one place would you have dinner in the other. Beer is 1.5 miles from Seaton so walking to have dinner in the other is quite possible. Branscombe is 4 miles away, and some buses between the two go via Sidmouth, which is about 5 miles from Branscombe. So my thought is that Beer could be merged into Seaton. With the name Beer, it may be worth considering how many readers would be looking for an article about the drink, and would they be confused reading about Seaton? I think that I would leave Branscombe as it is, mainly because it is midway between two places it could be merged with, and the distance is probably a little too big to merge in a place with multiple listings. AlasdairW (talk) 22:37, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
I've been struggling with this with Australian articles recently. I guess the question what would you find more useful when visiting? My preference is for a large article covering many smaller places, but not precluding splitting off a smaller location if the quantity of material is large enough. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:26, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
I like the idea of where you would go for diner from where you are staying, useful concept/guideline. On the specific of the example I was thinking of making Beer a disambiguation page. --Traveler100 (talk) 08:04, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
On that topic, I can't find any policy guidance on how to disambiguate between places and topics that share the same name. All of our guidelines assume that naming conflicts are only for one place against another place. Powers (talk) 15:40, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Copy and paste detection[edit]

Hey All We have been successfully running a bot to pick up copy and paste issues on En Wikipedia per [4]. Would WV be interested in a bot running here? It is about 60% accurate and we see copyright issues in about 5 to 10% of substantial edits. Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:40, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

I don't think it could do much harm... And it good help getting rid of that google penalty... Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:10, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
That bot has already been set up on Wikivoyage, although it hasn't made any edits in a while: Special:Contributions/EranBot. -- Ryan • (talk) • 16:36, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Ah perfect. Will see about activating it again if people find it useful. Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:40, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Please run it. I've been detecting a lot of these manually, but I can't always be here. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:01, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Informal hiking trail - how to document?[edit]

I'm travelling Yunnan in Southwest China at the moment. In the Xishuangbanna region, a popular activity is hiking through the tropical forests and tea plantations, passing through minority villages. While the possibilities for routes are almost endless, there seem to be two multi-day treks that are commonly done by western travelers (I have no insight into the Chinese scene, unfortunately). Most documentation on them is jotted down in the guest books at Cafe Mei Mei in Jinghong, one of them made it to old editions of the Lonely Planet (but is no longer present in current editions). Wikivoyage currently has no hiking information for this area.

Now, how would I best document these on Wikivoyage? I've considered just adding a "Hiking" section to the Xishuangbanna page, but I'd like to make the instructions quite detailed ("turn right at the Temple [...] hike up the hill, cross the road, [...] pass the lake") and maybe add a map with a GPX track. Is this an acceptable use for an itinerary page, even though this isn't any sort of official or marked trail? LeonHandreke (talk) 11:50, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

I think you should create itineraries. Here are a couple of hikes I have started to document: Rheinsteig, Rheinburgenweg. Not saying this is the only way to document such a topic. It would be interesting to see a more detailed trail description with directions. Do not think that has been tired yet, give it a go an lets see how it looks. --Traveler100 (talk) 13:11, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Yes. I think established routes are not a problem. It becomes a problem only if there are many possibilities and people de facto choose their own route, and people start making itineraries based on random choices. --LPfi (talk) 14:10, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Some limited branching in an established route is also fine. See Orient Express for one example. In general hiking trails are sadly somewhat underrepresented here and it would be great to see that change. Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:56, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Existing itineraries in the region are Tiger Leaping Gorge and Yunnan tourist trail; either might give you some ideas but the Gorge article is closer to what you want to do. Three Parallel Rivers National Park also discusses trekking. Pashley (talk) 11:23, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

GPS coordinates in China[edit]

I remember some time ago a conversation on coordinates being a little out of place with China locations. Can someone point me the information? Trying to understand difference between different map apps results. --Traveler100 (talk) 10:38, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

I remember there was a discussion on this topic, looked at a few Travellers' pub archives but did not find it. If I come across it will pass that info on. -- Matroc (talk) 19:25, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Listings with same name in same article[edit]

Is it considered OK? Syced (talk) 07:53, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Absolutely yes on "Brooklyn Public Library", which is the name of the entire public library system in Brooklyn that has numerous branches. Every branch is useful to travelers because of the free computer time you can use there, as well as other services. I'll let someone else address "Family Dollar". Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:59, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
This looks to be finding duplication of the same listing into multiple sections. For instance, "Sportsman Inn" and "Killarney Mountain Lodge" each appear in at least three sections of Killarney (Ontario) ("eat", "drink", "sleep") while some pizza joint in Kabankalan has listed itself once in "eat" (fair enough) and twice in "sleep" (which is spam in a can, really, can you sleep there?). We do need to distinguish between multiple locations in a chain (which may be legit) vs. duplicate listings for the same location (such as the same motel location listed in three different parts of town, or a hotel arbitrarily listed again for its restaurant and bar). There's also the question of when these become boring and repetitive - do we need every McDonald's? every grocer in a chain? every dollar store? McDrivel usually has wi-fi, but they look a lot alike after a while. K7L (talk) 15:44, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
In a place like the East Side of Buffalo, it's an unfortunate reality that dollar stores fill a niche left empty by an absence of other places to buy food. More importantly, I have to ask what is the pressing need to upset the apple cart. Duplicate listings don't, for example, cause any problems with the dynamic map; there've been no examples cited of unrelated businesses with the same name that may be confusing for travellers; listing multiple locations of the same chain gives travellers options to choose from in determining what fits best with their itinerary. The question of "do we need to list every McDonald's" has been posed, but no examples have been given of an article where every McDonald's is listed. So, is there an actual, specific problem with the status quo, or are we seeking one out that doesn't necessarily exist? Do we need to overlegislate and overregulate every aspect of this site, or can we just leave certain things be? -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 16:45, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
I think arguably if there are more than 8 or 9 listings in a single article for the same chain, it's worth looking at to see if we can just say "there are a bunch of Chain X outlets around" or something similar. If there's that many of them, they can't be hard to find. Powers (talk) 18:09, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Yes, but this whole thread strikes me as meddling for its own sake. We're still talking about duplicate listings as an overall concept rather than real-world manifestations of why they are a problem that needs fixing. One of the things that I like about Wikivoyage as opposed to Wikipedia - and I know I'm not alone on this - is that on this site there aren't pages upon pages and reams upon reams of policies and regulations governing every word and paragraph we write. At Wikivoyage, there are certain common-sense parameters within which we work - there are standard section headings, for example, and a manual of style that serves as a good solid framework without being overbearing - but in general the author of a given article has free rein to develop it mostly as he or she sees fit. And I can't help but get a bad taste in my mouth every once in a while when some user comes in the Pub talking about a phenomenon he or she seemingly chose at random, apropos of nothing, with the assumption that it's a big issue that merits our attention. In my opinion, either show me a specific article where not only do duplicate listings exist, but their presence negatively affects the article from a user's perspective - or better yet, show me a widespread pattern of articles where that's the case - or else it's a nonissue that doesn't merit being worried about. And in my opinion, you can substitute for "duplicate listings" any other concept or phenomenon that might conceivably become a problem. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 19:59, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
The duplicate list is useful as it can be used as a starting point for some tidying up. In some cases the duplication is fine and in other cases they can be merged into one listing. One example is the Wrolen Pin Cafe in Hodgenville which could be merged into one listing. Otherwise, what's the point in having any of the maintenance categories? -- WOSlinker (talk) 20:16, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Exactly, my intent was not to launch a witch hunt. I was just playing with the database trying to find interesting facts about it, and this one stroke me as something that might catch someone's interest. The statu quo is fine for me, and by the way there is no special technological reason which would require uniqueness, don't worry. If we have real (unintended) duplicates, they are in this list. Syced (talk) 04:50, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

"WV talk" link?[edit]

It's often handy when writing to use shorthand, so instead of writing [[Wikivoyage:Name of page]] I sometimes use the abbreviation [[WV:Name of page]], which works the same way. I've just found out, however, that [[WV talk:Name of policy page]] does not link to [[Wikivoyage talk:Name of policy page]]. Could someone familiar with the coding needed please fix this? Saving keystrokes is great for the hands! Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:51, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

I don't remember if such an animal actually exists; however, I think that a shortcut of Wikivoyage design could probably be accomplished through a REDIRECT? - just a thought -- (There is Shortcut template that creates a box - also a Wikivoyage page on shortcuts - maybe something could be garnished from that discussion etc.) --Matroc (talk) 02:41, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
I don't think that this could be realized using normal redirects. As far as I know it's a matter of the MediaWiki configuration. I'd try to open a phabricator ticket. Could anybody do that? –T.seppelt (talk) 05:52, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
I agree that it's a configuration issue and that redirects aren't appropriate. But we should discuss whether it should be "WV Talk", or "WT" like on Wikipedia. Powers (talk) 20:25, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
I am opposed to WT meaning anything other than that other site - even in wiki syntax. We will at some points in time have to mention them (before that one company shuts them down) and WV talk makes much more sense imho. Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:03, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
I agree with Hobbitschuster on this. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:33, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
This isn't a shortcut, but if you're working on multiple projects or multiple languages, it's handy to know that you can always reach the local equivalent of the "Wikivoyage:" namespace via "Project:". This English label, and its matching "Project talk:", works everywhere. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:14, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Ghost hunting...[edit]

Whilst there's no empirical scientific evidence for the existence of ghosts, I was wondering where I should put things like Ghost walks in UK cities, or the better know alleged haynted houses and sites. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:23, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

You could create an itinerary if it's a specific self-guided tour or a travel topic if you just want to highlight so-called haunted sites in a specific country/area. I would focus on the places though and not on how to hunt ghosts. How to hunt could briefly be covered in one heading, but focusing specifically on the how is not travel-related, while focusing on haunted places (where it is, who is said to haunt it, what sort of things do people either see or experience that "prove" it's haunted, etc) makes an excellent topic. If the building/place is of enough fame or there are other reasons to visit, you can of course also list it in the city article. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 13:47, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
I had simmilar queries about crytpzoology tourism, casual Nessie hunting is a known thing for some visitors to the Highlands :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:17, 1 June 2016 (UTC) (This is my alternate account)
I might create a general topic of "Paranormal tourism" , if there is someone that's able to cover stuff beyond the UK. In any case I'd like to get started on it so it can be brought to a usable staus by the end of October :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:31, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
I've started an outline at Paranormal tourism , it would be appreciated if the other Wikivoaygers were able to assist, or help put in things that are nationaly or internationaly well-known ones. I've linked a few existing articles that seemed to be relevant, and depending on how the article expands, might consider splitting off the "Ghost" aspect.Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:32, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
We need a better banner. Is there some mysitcal looking stone circle that could be used? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:55, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikivoyage listings with articles on Wikipedia[edit]

Does anyone know a way of seeing how many listings on Wikivoyage destination articles have an article on Wikipedia? Wondering about the amount of data to be created if we do links in both directions. --Traveler100 (talk) 15:20, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

I recently counted that for 2 random articles. Each article had about 3 listings with an equivalent Wikipedia article. So I guess the total number would be around 50,000.
Counting listings with a Wikidata property might give a better approximation... but we only have 46 on the English Wikivoyage haha. The French Wikivoyage has 8675 Wikipedia+Wikidata attributes for 56504 listings, so if we reach the same ratio we could have ~40,000 for our 273871 listings. Syced (talk) 06:38, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

You can switch between wikitext and visual editing[edit]

Hello, everyone.

This is just a quick note to point out that editors at this Wikivoyage have access to both the wikitext and visual editors. You can switch between the two systems in the middle of an edit. These images show where to find the button to do this:

So: why am I telling you this? It's because I've asked the devs to turn on an option in Special:Preferences for all of the Wikivoyages. They will probably do this on Monday, 6 June 2016.

For people who use both editing systems, this preference setting will let you choose whether to have two tabs (how it works today) or just one. I like having two tabs, but many editors want just one, to always open their favorite editing system. They can use these buttons to temporarily switch to the other whenever they want. This option works well for most people. However, experience on other wikis shows that a few people who are used to two tabs usually get "stuck" in one and can't figure out how to switch to the other editing system. So please look for these icons the next time you open an article to edit; they're available to you today, and they'll help if anyone gets stuck next week.

Here are the three things that I want you to know about this change:

  • If you haven't enabled the visual editor, then you already have just one "Edit" tab, and this change should not affect you.
  • If you have two editing tabs now ("Edit" and "Edit source"), then on Monday, you will only have one. (Don't worry!) As soon as the second editing tab disappears, the new prefs setting will appear. You can go to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing, find the drop-down menu named "Editing mode", and choose whatever you want. (You won't see this option if you have the visual editor disabled.)
  • If you get stuck, remember that you can use those two buttons to switch to the other editing system.

There is more information about this feature at mw:VisualEditor/Single edit tab. I'll be around Monday when this happens, so please ping me if you encounter any unexpected problems.

By the way, for those of you who want to try out the visual editor, please remember it will be easier to add templates in the visual editor if you've added TemplateData information to their documentation pages.

Happy editing, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:16, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

BTW, this happened on schedule, almost 8 hours ago. If you ran into any problems or weird things, please let me know. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 22:53, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Desert Safety[edit]

Do we have an article? was wanting to link something in an article I recently created. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:42, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

No we do not have that yet (I think I'd noticed), but I think having it would be good. If you know something about it, you are welcome to create an outline. I think it would be quite easy to write enough for it to be useful. The general guidelines of Hiking in the Judaean Desert could be used as a starting point. --LPfi (talk) 18:43, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
As the furtherest abroad I've ever been is Paris, I'm probably not the best person to write a 'desert' article. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:00, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
But you might be the right person to start it.  ;-) If you can get the page created and a couple of sentences into it, then {{ping}} me and remind me to help. WhatamIdoing (talk) 14:37, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Arid_region_safety - Went with this, because it would also cover some areas that aren't strictly true desert, but where

a similarity of advice might be applicable. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:58, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Winningpeg Immigration Programme[edit]

Please house I will like to know if the programme is still running. Thanks (Gernal8 (talk) 14:25, 4 June 2016 (UTC))

Which programme? While this is outside our scope, a provincial nominee program for Manitoba immigration is available at http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/newcomers/pt/mb.asp K7L (talk) 19:11, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Wu phrasebook[edit]

There have recently been a handful of edits to this. Is anybody here who can check their accuracy? Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:40, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

There seems to be a mix of romanization formats throughout the article. If it were an important language (such as Mandarin) to the traveler it would be worth correcting that but Wu is more for curiosity than any practical application. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:12, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
It is useful but not essential to know Wu if you're in Shanghai. Gizza (roam) 13:04, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
In other words, it's a damn sight more useful than Esperanto and worth correcting it or making it consistent, if anyone would like to do so. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:57, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Request to lock an alternate[edit]

Per some comments on another wiki, I was informed that there's a move to eliminate alternate accounts. I have an alternate account at User:Sfan00_IMG, and thuslly would like to request that User:Sfan00_IMG gets locked. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:17, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Confirming from alternate account. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:20, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Re-confirming from main account. 13:21, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Unless there's a button I've missed, no one on Wikivoyage has the ability to lock an account - you'll need to request a steward to do it on meta. -- Ryan • (talk) • 17:45, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Admins can do it, locking an account is essentialy the same as applying a block (albiet the reason being a "user iniated request" as the reason. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:56, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
"Lock" is now a bit of jargon for stewards preventing someone from logging in. (If you're "blocked", you can login, look at your watchlist, and usually edit your talk page. If you're "locked", you can't do any of that.) See m:Lock for more details.
I am dubious about this report that "there's a move to eliminate alternate accounts". It seems far more likely to me that someone is hoping that he can change the policy. I won't believe that until I see it, to be perfectly frank. Too many admins use alternate accounts for perfectly legitimate reasons, such as not wanting to type the passwords for their admin account into a public/library/university computer. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:07, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Botanical tourism[edit]

Anyone got a good flowerbed a banner could be made from? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:08, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

How about tulips? Danapit (talk) 19:07, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
That works, Do you also know where the major tulip areas are ? :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:57, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
The Netherlands. Lots of history, and still the leading bulb exporter. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:51, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

need redirect for old WikiTravel userpage[edit]

Problem with the new Quickbar[edit]

I noticed on Australia in the {{Quickbar}} that the Great British Pound is a valid currency, which might surprise many Australians :)

The reason is because Wikidata [5] accurately records the GBP as a previous currency of Australia (which it was until 1910), but the Wikibar is picking it up as a current currency.

T.seppelt : Are you able to fix this? Thanks! --Andrewssi2 (talk) 10:07, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

@Andrewssi2: I fixed it. Please see d:Help:Ranking. -- T.seppelt (talk) 10:14, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! --Andrewssi2 (talk) 10:36, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
@T.seppelt:- Module Quickbar produces an error in Portugal article -- "Lua error in Module:Quickbar at line 120: bad argument #2 to 'insert' (number expected, got string)" -- Matroc (talk) 08:14, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
Appears to be working correctly now - system cliche? -- Matroc (talk) 09:36, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
I think it was a caching issue since it works now. -- T.seppelt (talk) 17:49, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Labyrinths[edit]

Another 'unusual' travel topic, but one that could be greatly expanded. The intent is that this should include important early Labyrinth sites as well as attraction Mazes, which is a natural split if the article gets too big. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:47, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps somebody could look at the Wikidata entry for this, as "In Other Projects" links to w:Labyrinths, which is about a book, not mazes. AlasdairW (talk) 23:05, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps it's been fixed, but Labyrinths currently links to w:Mazes (in 'Related sites') and to w:Labyrinth (in 'In other projects'), not to w:Labyrinths. Powers (talk) 20:44, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Another overview topic[edit]

Amusement_parks

I have some questions, namely when did Coney Island and others actually start?

The early ones I can recall from memory are Coney Island, Blackpool, and Luna Park (which is either Sydney or Melbourne not sure which).

I'm also not sure where to draw the line between formal park gardens ( probably more suited to Botanical Tourism), Pleasure Gardens ( which are not necessarily floral), and what would be considered the modern amusement park. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:06, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

According to the English Wikipedia article on w:en:Amusement parks, w:en:Dyrehavsbakken, open since 1583, claims to be the world's oldest; Blackpool and Coney Island date to the mid-19th century.
It looks like the oldest "modern" type (fully enclosed) was Sea Lion Park at Coney Island in 1895. WhatamIdoing (talk) 14:51, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Arid region safety[edit]

Do we have a docent from an arid region? I started this outline, but wasn't sure what it needed, what's in it so far is based on my very limited knowledge. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:14, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Until someone who knows more about arid regions finds this, there is perhaps a thing or two worth bringing over from the Stay safe sections of articles of the places mentioned in Arid region safety#Understand. ϒpsilon (talk) 20:00, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

US National Parks[edit]

Are any at "featured" ready level?

I ask because 2016 seems to be the centennial of the NPS- https://www.nps.gov/subjects/centennial/index.htm.

I assume we have an an item on Yellowstone ? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:22, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

There are a number of United States National Parks at guide level, such as Glacier National Park (which I could probably add at least some more photographs and hike trails to) and at least one (Yosemite National Park) at star level. --Traveler100 (talk) 23:30, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Yosemite has already been DotM. Glacier has not. Powers (talk) 23:45, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

The visual editor for this wiki[edit]

Hello,

I'd like to talk to you about setting up the visual editor for contributors to this wiki.

Side-by-side screenshots, showing the visual appearance of both editing systems

The visual editor allows people to edit Wikivoyage articles as if they were using a typical word processor. If you're not familiar with it, then please try it out. Going to https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/User:Whatamidoing_(WMF)/Sandbox?veaction=edit will let you see its current state. (Feel free to edit and save; it's just a sandbox.) Or click on the picture there to enlarge it, if you just want a quick look. If you want to see more, then there are some screencasts on Commons.

If you want to keep using it here, then you will need to enable it for your account. This is quick and easy: Go to "Beta Features" in your preferences. Choose "VisualEditor" and click save. When it is enabled, press the "Edit" button to edit an article. When the visual editor is open, you can switch to the wikitext editor any time you want. Just click the [[ ]] icon in the toolbar, next to the "Save" button. Inside the wikitext editor, click the pencil icon (Edit icon.svg) in the upper right corner to switch to the visual editor. (If you prefer having two tabs, or if you want to change the editing system that opens first, then go to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing and choose your favorite option for the "Editing mode".)

On the tech side, this could be done at any time, but we've got a couple of requests in the system to customize this software for Wikivoyage. The first (phab:T133725) is to move the big "Cite" button into a the "Insert" menu, since you probably don't want Wikipedia-style citations. The other (phab:T96710) is to add the popular listings templates into the toolbar. You can access them easily now (Insert > Template and search for See, Do, Eat, etc.), but this would make them even quicker. My suggestion is to wait until the first is done, but not to wait for the second.

There is a short guide at mediawiki.org that has some tips about getting the best value out of the visual editor for your project, but the relevant bits are this:

  • It's much easier to add templates if you've added TemplateData information. This has already been done for the listings templates.
  • For more information about how to use the visual editor, see mw:Help:VisualEditor/User guide.
  • Let me know if you find any problems in either editing system. You can report issues in Phabricator or, for the visual editor, on the central feedback page on mediawiki.org. Also, you can always leave a note on my talk page.

Please let me know what you think about the idea of setting up the visual editor here. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:46, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm a bit confused. I was very sure that this wiki already has the visual editor and I have used it before. However if I check now (and thinking of it, it has been like this for at least 2 weeks) I can't access it any more. Has there been a recent change on this? Drat70 (talk) 09:26, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
If you want to use it now, then you have to enable it (and set your prefs so you can find it, if you want), or switch to it after opening the wikitext editor. See #You can switch between wikitext and visual editing for more information (and {{ping}} me if anything's unclear). Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:55, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Since no one has raised any particular concerns about doing this, I have asked the team to schedule this for next Tuesday, 28 June 2016. Please ping me if you would like me to change this. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 16:59, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
This will probably happen in about 22 hours. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:26, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Phrasebooks[edit]

I think we have had discussions about the two (three) possible ways to visualize pronunciation more than once now... There are in short:

  • pseudo-phonetics using an English based system - very inaccurate prone to being misunderstood, arguably the one English speakers understand the best
  • IPA symbols - not ambiguous, not English based - arguably unlikely to be known by many people
  • Audio files: Hard to do (we'd need a bunch of native speakers), hard to get out in a pinch (e.g. the check comes in a restaurant and you want to know what to say now), difficult to make portable; cannot be printed - Upside: everybody understands it and it is the least unambiguous.

Now we will most likely not get to any solution, because we did not the last time around, but maybe some combination of two of the three or all three might be a good idea?

Alternatively, we might seriously consider whether phrasebook are / should be part of our mission with the "others do it better by default" argument. I don't know whether this has merit, but a lot has changed since the first phrasebooks were written on this project... Hobbitschuster (talk) 13:00, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

@Hobbitschuster: Since the traveller comes first, we should employ the most usable option which is some psuedo-phonetics. Small and unintrusive icons for audio which are excluded in print would be helpful but as you point out, it will be awhile before we have recordings of everything. —Justin (koavf)TCM 22:42, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Every voyage begins with single step. But we have to take that step if we want to get somewhere... At any rate, you oppose IPA? Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:47, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
@Hobbitschuster: Not at all! Just think of what's maximally useful. We could even have IPA in a chart at the beginning alongside the more intelligible pronunciations and then just use the non-standard but easier to understanding pronunciations throughout the guides. —Justin (koavf)TCM 22:57, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
You see, I think IPA is easier to understand. Because while some sybols are hard to grasp, they always mean precisely the same thing in any given context. No system based on the incredibly illogical English letters to sounds system could even come close to that. And that is before you fogure in sounds English does not have. I understand that some people will not know or understand IPA, but as debates about whether Spanish e sounds like "e" or "ay" (the latter being a sure telltale sign for a broad American/English accent imho) have shown, English is ill-equipped to show how other languages are pronounced. In some cases those pseudo-pronunciations might even confuse people unnecessarily. Spanish or German letters to sounds relations are pretty straightforward, but if it says "bwaynous dee-ars", even people who have understood the Spanish pronunciation logic might get confused.... Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:25, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
It would be "BWAY-nohs DEE-ahs", which, rendered by a native speaker of most English dialects, comes out close enough for most native Spanish speakers to understand (or so I would think). IPA is great for accuracy, but unless you have a good majority of the hundreds of symbols memorized, useless for rendering foreign sentences on the fly. Powers (talk) 20:29, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
We have to explain what sounds exist in a given language at the beginning of the article regardless. And some sounds are impossible to represent by English letters because they don't exist in English. And most languages we would have phrasebooks on don't have hundreds of sounds but a more manageable number somewhere around fifty or lower than that. So it may make sense to explain the sounds at the beginning (meaning the readers can make sense of the IPA symbols) and then give them the IPA symbols with the words. Because quite frankly "bad is good enough" should not be a motto, not even in the crutch we give people trying to pronounce our phrasebooks... Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:13, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
I cannot talk for native speakers, but for me, with a quite phonetic writing system in my own language(s), the IPA codes often really are much more readable than the English approximations. Most sounds in the languages I know have IPA symbols that look like the letters used for these sounds (a or ɑ for a, e or ɛ for e etc.), thus one can concentrate on the odd ones, or nuances of the quasi-familiar ones. --LPfi (talk) 18:54, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Same here. I think part of this debate is whether we should address English native speakers first and foremost (soodou founeticks) or speakers of all languages who read English (IPA) Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:54, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Considering there are no other phrasebooks accessible to monolingual English speakers except for these, while polyglots have (at least theoretically) the option of using phrasebooks in their native languages, I should think we would have to target English native speakers as the primary audience. (Also, if a language has sounds in it that aren't present in English, how exactly does IPA help, unless the reader also knows a language that does have the sound?) Powers (talk) 21:10, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Connections in Riga[edit]

In about a week, I and my girlfriend are going to Riga, Latvia. Our hotel is very near the centre of the city, at Kaleju iela, almost right next to the railway station and close to the river. How do we get there from Riga airport? JIP (talk) 19:37, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Reposted at the tourist office. JIP (talk) 20:26, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Listing syntax change - minor edits needed[edit]

Requesting a little assistance to tidy up image parameter of listings. The command no longer requires or will accept the full Commons address of the image, just the image name. Also the type File: is not required or accepted any more. This is an improvement but has broken the link of a number of the references to images created. I think it best to fix the link name than change the listing code. See Category:Pages with broken file links for list; best to go into edit mode and search for text string image to find the culprits. --Traveler100 (talk) 05:24, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Fixed one - in processing of checking more -- finding names of images that do not exist in Commons at this time. I think that is yet another case for red link -- Matroc (talk) 05:56, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Is see what you mean, fixing the syntax only solves some of the image issues. Looks like the change to the code also means these image references are also been checked, which is good. Another positive is that the the use of images in listings are now showing up in the File Usage list on the image page.--Traveler100 (talk) 06:48, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
  • In a Sandbox, I scan an article page with a Module and produce a gallery of images (.jpg,.svg,.tif and .png) (about 95+% accurate) -- generally those names that do not produce an image are evidently not in Commons (names of images not found appear in gallery which has been helpful!) - I have been removing those that do not have a match in Commons after checking them a second time and fixing those that I can by editing the image name. - List of pages is now down to about 62 from 120 something. -- Matroc (talk) 04:03, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Down to 18 articles that need to be checked - some errors also include: image=image= image=File: no extension on image name - recently added .tif images to check and broke apart the routebox template to get images found there... Also some of the images can be found in Wikipedia but not in Commons - That's it for me at this moment -- Matroc (talk) 05:39, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

It is a little difficult to find the listing with a broken image link in an article, is there a way to have it highlighted the same way we have done with url dead links and phone format with the ErrorHighlighter preference? --Traveler100 (talk) 07:34, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Not all articles with listing redlinked images appear in the Pages with broken file links -- came accross 1 article with 3 such images -- (maybe because they havn't been touched since various changes in maps? -- Matroc (talk) 19:12, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Completed except for several User pages and 1 talk page - Matroc (talk) 04:52, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Cities to usable[edit]

Here's something to do if you're bored/looking at random Wikivoyage articles. If you're looking at a city article that is tagged outline, check if there's information for how to get there, at least one attraction, one place to eat and one place to sleep, each with directions/contact information. If the article has all these, tag it as usable.

Unlike other statuses and articles where you have to read the article more carefully, this takes only a few seconds. About half (13,633) of all the articles we have (27,340) are outline cities, and I stumble upon outlines that can be upgraded to usable almost every day, so it means there's a lot of them left and you can help out. ϒpsilon (talk) 08:26, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikivoyage:City guide status is your reference for city articles. What ϒpsilon says is accurate, but I would also say that the requirements for Usable status include the requirements for Outline status, so it should also have an introductory paragraph (or at least sentence) and a standard city article template (basically as shown at Wikivoyage:Quick small city article template or other quick city article templates, or at the very least one with at least Get in, Get around, See, Eat and Sleep sections). Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:46, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Just check the listing are still valid first though, some places could have closed since the article was created. And if you want to add a little more quality to the article take a look at these suggestions and go to the next level. --Traveler100 (talk) 12:29, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Some time ago I did that for (at the time) all outline districts... I also tried it for outline airports, but they are a somewhat tougher nut due in part to WV:sleepthere and the decision not to list hotels outside airport grounds... Generally reducing the number of outline articles is a very worthwhile and good idea and perhaps the single most efficient way to improve google ranks readership and writership... Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:28, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
As a suggestion, pick a region. Here is an example how to get a list: outline that could be usable by region. --Traveler100 (talk) 12:34, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Spanish phrasebook: Edits on WV/sv[edit]

User NeoMaps did some edits on the Spanish phrasebook on WV/sv I reverted it, like we did on German Wikivoyage. I was told you guys have some problems with the User as well. But I am not sure what to do on Swedish Wikivoyage. He reverted it. But I can not need one more edit war. I am admin on WV/sv (maybe the only left). But would like to hear your opinion. Is one of you guys more familiar with Spanish language. Are his edits over there acceptable? What can I do? -- DerFussi 15:19, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

DerFussi - I would advise you to indefinitely ban the user as has already been done here and on es:. The consensus is that NeoMaps is a sockpuppet of Turbo8000, a user who was globally locked some time ago as one of many sockpuppets of a very prolific crosswiki vandal. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 16:41, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
OK, done. Thanks. -- DerFussi 20:10, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
New actions of NeoMaps (BAICAN WWW)? Just saw these edits -- DerFussi 16:27, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Esino Lario on home page?[edit]

Hello. See my comment here? Thank you :) --Elitre (talk) 20:30, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. The quick answer to your question is No, but I also replied with links at Talk:Main Page. The usual place to discuss possible Destination of the Month/Off the Beaten Path nominations is at Wikivoyage talk:Destination of the month candidates, but in any case, Usable articles are not eligible for a feature. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:09, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
With Wikimania about to start it is far to short notice to bring Esino Lario up to guide standard and feature it on the main page. However Wikimania 2017 is in Montreal in August 2017. Maybe we should consider improving either Montreal or Montreal/Downtown with a view to one of these being DOTM in August next year. AlasdairW (talk) 20:29, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Compact Language Links enabled in this wiki today[edit]

Screenshot of Compact Language Links interlanguage list

Compact Language Links has been available as a beta-feature on all Wikimedia wikis since 2014. With compact language links enabled, users are shown a much shorter list of languages on the interlanguage link section of an article (see image). Based on several factors, this shorter list of languages is expected to be more relevant for them and valuable for finding similar content in a language known to them. More information about compact language links can be found in the documentation.

From today onwards, compact language links has been enabled as the default listing of interlanguage links on this wiki. However, using the button at the bottom, you will be able to see a longer list of all the languages the article has been written in. The setting for this compact list can be changed by using the checkbox under User Preferences -> Appearance -> Languages

The compact language links feature has been tested extensively by the Wikimedia Language team, which developed it. However, in case there are any problems or other feedback please let us know on the project talk page. It is to be noted that on some wikis the presence of an existing older gadget that was used for a similar purpose may cause an interference for compact language list. We would like to bring this to the attention of the admins of this wiki. Full details are on this phabricator ticket. Thank you. On behalf of the Wikimedia Language team:--Runa Bhattacharjee (WMF) (talk) 07:45, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

I do not like this feature, nor do I understand the need. On Wikivoyage the language list was short anyway (and on Wikipedia, the long lists are fascinating – I sometimes click odd languages just for fun).
For short lists of languages, those are presented exactly as they were before. For pages available in more languages, the tool provides aids such as flexible search or surfacing your usual choices. The purpose of the tool is to make it easy to find their usual languages for users that often switch between the languages they speak. Finding your language in some articles not only takes time from our users but may prevent them to discover that content is available in their language (e.g., speakers of small languages for which content is not usually available and when it is their language is in the middle of a long list since the topics are covered by many other languages). In our tests we've found the proposer selector makes it easier to find the content in your language. You can still click on odd languages, they will be just easier to access the next time. --Pginer-WMF (talk) 09:58, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Choosing a few languages makes people less likely to click the others – even less likely if the algorithm for choosing languages is good. This makes people miss the would-be-next language, which often could be relevant (I know about five languages well enough to produce simple text, but counting related languages I can probably get some information out of more than a dozen).
This is one of the aspects we focused on when testing the feature with users. For the people we tested with it was clear that there were more languages available than those shown initially, and finding them was easier than scanning a list of potentially hundred of options. Having the option you are looking for in the middle of a long list with mixed scripts is not going to help much with discovery.--Pginer-WMF (talk) 10:12, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
For me personally this makes using iw more difficult. I have to activate a popup just to see what the other languages are, and to choose one I have to "search" by continent (with most languages doubled; scrolling needed). I though it was easy to opt out, but I cannot find where (and the possibility is not mentioned in the posting above).
A specific issue over here is that choice of language very much depends on the article: I will surely check versions in the local language of any destination where I am going, even when I do not understand a word (as in Chinese), and try to find articles in comprehensible regional languages. I think such considerations are not made when choosing what languages to show.
--LPfi (talk) 11:54, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
There is a ticket to consider the languages that appear in the content as another criteria for language selection. This could help in the scenario you mention, since an article about China is likely to contain some Chinese word even in the English article giving a hint that Chinese is relevant in this context. --Pginer-WMF (talk) 10:19, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
I don't like this non-feature. I can't find anywhere to set my preferred set of languages - I could see some value if I could restrict the list to those languages that I know a little of. I just tried it on Warsaw and Polish was not one of the languages shown. If you want to improve the list of languages, adding the article size (or a sort by size feature) would be much more useful.
You can customise the default list of languages. Since previous choices is the highest priority criteria, you just need to navigate to your preferred languages and those will be remembered for future use. That is, just using the feature configures it to better fit your preferences. --Pginer-WMF (talk) 10:02, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
I have just opted out of this - by deselecting the "Use a compact language list, with languages relevant to you." at the bottom of the Appearance tab in Preferences. AlasdairW (talk) 22:15, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
This is a step in the wrong direction, maybe makes sense in Wikipedia where there are many small articles with same topic on many languages but for Wikivoyage if the location is on a number of language sites it will in most case be long enough in length to handle the list. Switch off in preference only improves things for those who know about it, can this be switched off for all readers? --Traveler100 (talk) 05:04, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Not a fan of this too. I don't see why the list of languages has to be shortened. It ain't broke. Gizza (roam) 12:13, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
It's certainly more challenging on pages with dozens or even 100+ links, and people especially at non-English sites do complain about having trouble finding the 'obvious' interlanguage links in a sea of mostly irrelevant ones. I've sent an e-mail message to Runa, to make sure that she sees your comments. However, Wikimania's underway, so I'm making no promises about how soon she will be able to read it (much less to reply). If you've not worked with Runa before, then I think you'll be happy; the Language team in general is responsive and easy to talk to. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 01:57, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Thank you Whatamidoing (WMF). Hello, thanks for the feedback. We did indeed discuss in the team about the already short language list in Wikivoyage and as it has already been mentioned in this thread, compact links are (at the moment) expected to be more effective for projects like Wikipedia than Wikivoyage. Nevertheless, the expectation is that Wikivoyage being a still growing project may soon add more languages and users will be able to use the compact links for easier navigation across languages. I am taking this feedback to the team for discussion. Thanks again for the feedback and please do feel free to contact me directly or on our project talk page.--Runa Bhattacharjee (WMF) (talk) 02:31, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Where is the problem? Proposal for alternative solution: --Traveler100 (talk) 04:18, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
  1. If list shorter then length of article do not compact.
  2. Highlight language(s) selected in reader's browser preferences plus language based on IP address of visitor to site.
@Runa Bhattacharjee (WMF): That's a very naive expectation given the fact that 7 out of 17 language versions of Wikivoyage have zero contributors with 100+ edits/month. --Alexander (talk) 05:20, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Apart from being unnecessary on Wikivoyage, I am finding having to scroll down through the oversized pop-up window very annoying. How can we by default switch this feature off? --Traveler100 (talk) 17:29, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
I am trying to do this for Russian Wikivoyage, but it looks like the developers strongly oppose such requests. I would be grateful if more people write on Phabricator what they think about this useless functionality. --Alexander (talk) 17:39, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
This Phabricator site not exactly open and user friendly to non experts is it. Looks like a good way of alienating contributors to wiki sites. --Traveler100 (talk) 17:54, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Agreed I don't really like Compact Language Links myself and I think they discourage interwiki work. (I have to admit that I am slightly ignorant of how they are sorted though--for instance, someone who knows Catalan may well know French and Spanish, so it would make sense to have those always appear but is very unlikely to know Swahili, so it's more okay if that disappears from the list.) In the case of voy, v:, and n: it's not really necessary to compact these because there will be so few interwiki links anyway. I understand with almost 300 editions of w: and over 100 of b: and wikt: (almost 100 for q:) but even then, I don't really like the idea that much. —Justin (koavf)TCM 18:07, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
The preference
Hello, if it's inconvenient, the feature can be disabled by anyone by using the checkbox under User Preferences -> Appearance -> Languages (see the screenshot). You will find more information about how the languages are being selected in the FAQ page and also how, over time it gets improved to show more relevant suggestions. The project page has more useful information about the tool. Thanks, --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 11:47, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
That is fine for the regular users who are in the know, but not for the causal visitor/reader. Issue is why change the default behaviour to something worse that it was before. --Traveler100 (talk) 14:51, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Current situation[edit]

After making some noise (see here) we managed to elicit response from the language team, and eventually they decided to switch this feature off at Russian Wikivoyage until further evaluation (whatever it means). I don't know how general this solution can be, but, apparently, one has to make noise in order to achieve something. --Alexander (talk) 19:41, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Missing voyagers[edit]

At Wikipedia they've apparently compiled a list of "missing Wikipedians" with editors who haven't edited in a while. While I don't think it's necessary for us to create such a list of "missing voyagers", there are undoubtedly many voyagers who have been active editors in the past but have now stopped (or almost stopped) editing, for instance Sertmann, Cacahuate and Sapphire (and probably many others). How about a little talk page message campaign asking such users if they're OK and hoping they'd have time and feel interested to come back to editing WV at some point? --ϒpsilon (talk) 17:21, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

As long as this sort of thing doesn't turn into an effort to spam or cajole past contributors then I'm all for it. Maybe rather than a "missing contributors" list we could do something similar to a barnstar, but with more of a "we miss you" tone? I'd love to see even a temporary return of some of our past prolific contributors, but everyone has their reasons for leaving so we should be very careful that we aren't doing anything that would even remotely be construed as an attempt to guilt someone into making additional contributions. -- Ryan • (talk) • 17:55, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
With attention duly paid to the caveats Ryan outlined above, I couldn't help but that Peter's name was the first that came to my mind. It would certainly be a long shot to convince him to come back, if there's even any way to get in touch with him, but it's perhaps worth noting that we've long since solved the problem that drove him away in the first place. He's sorely missed. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 19:19, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
I think its worth to contact the users and inform about our recent developments. I should still have Peter's phone number. I was not involved in any way here because too busy with the German version (still don't know what happened here at all). I could try to get in touch with him. I should still have Sapphire's contact information as well. Always wanted to have a drink with him. I did the same years ago with some German users. I got some answers, but not too many....-- DerFussi 06:10, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Agreed, we shouldn't be too intrusive. Something like a barnstar sounds like a good idea. Many users probably get an e-mail when something is written on their talk page, also, if you're active on any other WMF project you nowadays get a message whenever something is written on your talk page in some other WMF project.
I'd be cautious with using "e-mail this user" or calling them, especially users that explicitly have stated they've retired from WV. I was more thinking of people who may have had so much else to do that they've forgotten about WV. ϒpsilon (talk) 08:59, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Will the Brexit have travel consequences?[edit]

Now I don't want to start a political debate here, but I think it is fair to say that the Brexit came as a surprise to many. If I read the news correctly, it could well take as much as two years until the UK actually legally leaves the EU and Britain never having been a member of Schengen or the Euro already reduces the impact on things we cover in our articles somewhat, but what other consequences will there be? Does the Brexit mean duty free shops on both sides of the Channel Tunnel? Will there be a different border regime? What about the "work" section of the United Kingdom article? I hope that within the next weeks and months we can get answers and integrate them into our articles to keep the coverage up to date. Hobbitschuster (talk) 08:35, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

All good questions, but we are in unchartered waters and nobody knows what the outcome will be at the end.
There is currently free movement of EU citizens into non-Schengen countries such as the UK, and that is something that could potentially change (i.e. more formal passport controls than there are today). Quite likely there won't be a UK to 'get in' to anymore, but rather an independent England physically surrounded by EU countries. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 08:55, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
The most immediate effect for travellers is on the exchange rate. According to the BBC (link may only work for UK readers) the pound was worth US$1.50 just after the polls closed last night (10pm) when commentators were predicting a "remain" vote, then fell sharply after that reaching a low of $1.33 at 5.28am. I expect that there will be further unpredictable (to the traveller) swings over the coming months. The movements may be increased by political uncertainty (another referendum in Scotland?, new Prime Minister etc). It will probably be more than 2 years before the UK actually leaves the EU (there is a 2 year period for negotiations, which starts when formal notice is served). AlasdairW (talk) 15:50, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
For now I guess we could only put up a box warning of increased incidence of Boris in the media and perhaps advisory to travellers that his is not a hairstyle normally found acceptable in most circumstances in the UK. PrinceGloria (talk) 19:07, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
"If approached by a Boris in the wild, identifiable by its manic behavior and shaggy blonde covering, drop to a fetal position and cover your head until the Boris tires and retreats to a safe distance." PerryPlanet (talk) 19:43, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Americans will still want to travel to the UK because the Boris bouffant is not as bad as the Donald 'do. Nurg (talk) 02:30, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
So considering it is a cheaper time to visit the UK how about a new Collaboration of the Month: Wikivoyage:England Expedition or Wikivoyage:Wales Expedition? --Traveler100 (talk) 12:37, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
Along the lines of "get there before it becomes impossible"? Hobbitschuster (talk) 13:19, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
Do not misunderstand what this is about, it is a dislike of controls from Brussels and uncontrolled unskilled immigration. Many people from EU counties visit non EU countries, UK will become one more on this list. And anyway there is already passport control into mainland UK no matter where you come from. --Traveler100 (talk) 16:39, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
I thought the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland is/was open and has been for some time? Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:16, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
yes it is, that's why I said mainland. But that may have to change, will have to see what is negotiated. --Traveler100 (talk) 20:40, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
So to ask again, how was travel from Dublin to Belfast, from Dublin to London and from Belfast to London treated until now and how may it be treated if and when the UK (including Northern Ireland) leaves the EU? What if due to some convoluted reasons the UK leaves but decides to treat the land border different from its sea borders? Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:53, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
The UK and RI have had a separate arrangement on simplified border procedures and common ones for those arriving from the mainland longer than many of the current European treaties, essentially ever since Ireland became an independent country. Moreover, British and Irish citizens are not treated as foreigners in either country - it was first a legacy of the previous legal arrangements pertaining to both being parts of the same country, and later actually expressly legalized. PrinceGloria (talk) 21:11, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
So in essence the two countries had what could - for lack of a better term - be described as a "mini Schengen" that is of course separate and mutually exclusive to the Schengen treaty and different in some details. However, given that one of the main driving forces behind the leave campaign seems to have been to get rid of EU rules for free movement of people, it may become more difficult to move from Ireland (EU) to Northern Ireland (soon not to be EU) and work there for example. As of June 1st Irish people could work in London just like English people, right? I cannot even imagine what happens if that changes, not least because of the sheer amount of people possibly affected by this and the very delicate situation in Northern Ireland that seems to have been pacified at least in part due to the EU membership of both the UK and the Republic of Ireland. Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:23, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
I think in the coming months and years you're going to see this decision spiral out in a number of confusing and unexpected ways, given the dense tangle of negotiations and regulations that were put in place over the years of the UK's membership in the EU, all of which now have to be unraveled and renegotiated. All we can do now as Wikivoyagers is to keep an eye on developments and update our content as necessary. PerryPlanet (talk) 21:38, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Tracking category for new Quickbar[edit]

Hello everyone,

I went through all articles in the main namespace which use {{Quickbar}} and removed the old parameters (the location maps were preserved). In order to add missing information to Wikidata I created a tracking category: Category:Quickbar with missing information. Please help with adding the information to Wikidata. Contact me if you have questions.

Warm regards, -- T.seppelt (talk) 13:13, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Flixbus buying out Megabus' mainland Europe services[edit]

According to this press release, Flixbus is in the process of buying out Megabus' route network in continental Europe. Apparently Megabus will keep its routes in the United Kingdom, though. If and when the Megabus brand will invariably be subsumed into the Flixbus brand (just as happened to the "Meinfernbus" brand previously) we should change our articles accordingly. However, thus far there seem to be no major changes if I read the press release right. Prices will likely rise as Megabus has (at least in Germany) tried to undercut Flixbus prices and the market domination of Flixbus will only get worse. Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:16, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Travel guide showdown[edit]

See here It's Fodor's versus Lonely Planet. May be of interest to some of us. —Justin (koavf)TCM 03:01, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for linking this. Yes, it's very interesting. I'll quote a portion that because of the length of the article should easily fall within fair use:
Neither of these will do you wrong when you travel, but each is better suited for a certain type of traveler. Lonely Planet throws more information at you than you’ll ever need, which is a good thing because you’re getting a ton of bang for your buck. Even though Lonely Planet guides can be more expensive than Fodor’s guides, they’re still worth every penny. But that massive amount of information also means you have to comb through it all yourself to plan your trip. It tells you places you should go to, but it doesn’t always show you. So think of it more as a list of suggestions and not an essay exploring the wonders of various corners of the world. If you’re okay with that, Lonely Planet is the best pick, period.
Fodor’s guides, on the other hand, are a more curated experience and better suited for the “show me the way” type traveler. And they’re a lot more fun to actually read. Their books have less information overall when compared to the exhaustive amount found in the Lonely Planet guides, but it’s information you can live without (or could find somewhere online).
So which kind of traveler do we try to appeal to on Wikivoyage, and what kind of writing are we cultivating? It would seem that we are more commonly addressing ourselves to somewhat adventurous independent travelers and leaving people who want to know more details about attractions and places to do more research on Wikipedia and other sites, but there are some very clear exceptions, especially among Star articles and the very best and most complete of the Guide-level articles (I'm thinking, for example, of the Buffalo guides, the Chicago guides, the Singapore guide, some of the guides to hiking and hiking spots in Israel). As for writing, I think that Wikivoyage:Tone is suggesting writing that's less dry and more fun to read, but again, most of our articles aren't there, at least not yet.
What do the rest of you think? What kind(s) of traveler should we have in mind while writing and editing? Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:34, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
I personally try to write for the traveller who wants a deeper level of information and a more holistic understanding of the destination than you'll find in either LP or Fodor's - not just what there is to see and do, but what its significance is in the grand scheme of the place. But I think it would be unrealistic to expect every author to come up with something as expansive as the Buffalo articles. I think the definitive answer to your question is that the nature of the wiki format is such that trying to corral all editors into writing in the same tone or with the same type of reader in mind would be a fool's errand. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 03:55, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
You're right about it being a fool's errand, but it's still good to talk about what our orientation and purpose(s) are. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:58, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek: I don't contribute here as much as I would like but in my mind, I think of our guides being very exhaustive and complete ideally since the difference between a fairly brisk guide to (e.g.) Indianapolis versus a thorough and complete one is honestly not that great: the difference between a 30-minute and a three-hour read, maybe? If our guides were truly exhaustive and someone were just going to a specific locale then it wouldn't be a problem. Someone who wants to visit the United States will, of course have a lot to pour through but that's inevitable. —Justin (koavf)TCM 04:46, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
I gave some thought about what style I've used in the articles I've contributed most to, and then decided to write an "Understand" section for the article about the East Village, where I live. I think it will need subtitles and also should have more names of relevant buildings, which should be bolded. I fear someone may find it too detailed for a travel guide, though, and it's possible that it may have a bit too much of a resident's view. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:23, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek: If you mean this current revision, that is not too detailed: for most readers that would only take a few minutes—a lot could be gained but altogether very little lost. —Justin (koavf)TCM 06:34, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, that's what I mean. I added a few subtitles and some bolding, but I expect it to be edited some. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:42, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
That's an interesting question. I try to aim for somewhere in between LP and Fodors, probably closer to LP as I like to have a pretty complete list of listings if I know the place well. That said, the travel guides I buy have changed as my life has. As I've moved from backpacking on my own to travelling with kids, there are fewer LPs and more Fodors/Rick Steves -- I just don't have the time now to read something something as in-depth as LP (plus young children change the focus of attractions). I agree with Andre that the wiki format will make it difficult to corral editors, but I also think the wiki format and our policies combine to make our guides more about listings and figuring out what appeals to you. I think curation implies leaving some things out and/or ranking attractions, etc. and it would be difficult to come to achieve consensus on that. -Shaundd (talk) 23:27, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
Shaundd:
"I think curation implies leaving some things out and/or ranking attractions, etc. and it would be difficult to come to achieve consensus on that."
It would be difficult and, more importantly, IMO an extremely bad precedent to set. It's very important to me as a Wikivoyage editor that writers not be straitjacketed into working within an overbearing formal structure - forced to choose between a range of preselected attractions or types of attractions, counseled to stay away from anything "unimportant" at the expense of omitting worthwhile but off-the-beaten-path gems that are precisely the kind of things we could use to differentiate ourselves from other travel guides. I think our policies provide just the right amount of structure to keep the whole project from descending into anarchy while preserving editorial freedom as much as possible, and I think the current approach to places with an abundance of coverage - geographical subdivision rather than curation - is pretty close to ideal. I would be extremely dismayed if we started taking a tack like you described above.
-- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 23:42, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
Well, a propos ranking sights, look at how I structured Siena#See. I think that structure for Siena is completely obvious and unassailable, and that we shouldn't be afraid to use it in such situations, though they're somewhat unusual. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:38, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
Just to clarify, I wasn't advocating we take a Fodor's approach and curate our content more. I like completeness in a guide -- so we don't omit worthwhile off-the-beaten-path gems -- but it makes it important to write and structure the guide so large amounts of info can be easily digested. Our best guides do this but many don't (yet). I'm not so against ranking. I often find the Top xx lists useful. Even if not everything on the list suits what I want to see or do, if I only have 2-3 days in a large city I find they're a good way of breaking through large lists of attractions. What Ikan pointed to in Siena works, too IMO. Anyway, I'm not pushing for a change. I think the structure of WV favours completeness (LP-style guides) and we should play to our strengths. -Shaundd (talk) 07:12, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
It looks like we are in agreement. If I were in Siena, I would add more points of interest to the "See/Secondary sights" section, but from New York and 18 years removed from my last trip there, I don't have an easy time adding much more (maybe a loggia here or there). Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:35, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
I would say we should be rather exhaustive, having most points that are of interest to travellers, like LP. On the other hand, our Itineraries should guide the traveller like Fodors. See for instance Three days in Singapore which has your schedule decided for you and tells you exactly where to go, how, what to look at, and what to eat. Syced (talk) 05:58, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
Shaundd's comment about changing interests or needs over time interests me. This isn't exactly a vote for a particular style, but I think it might be interesting to make a list of (strictly optional!) suggestions for article content that target different types of travelers. I'm sure that we could come up with a better list, but here are some ideas I had offhand:
  • young children (a playground with public toilets?)
  • teenagers (cool gaming shop?)
  • backpackers (showers? hiking trail?)
  • wheelchair users (accessible restaurant?)
  • non-drivers (a group of hotels/restaurants/attractions within walking distance of each other? location of bike lockers?)
  • long-term visitors (laundry facilities near a recommended hotel?)
  • larger families/groups (hotel with large suites?)
  • people with restricted diets (Kosher restaurant? Vegetarian restaurant?)
I think if we had a list like this, then I might use it to come up with some ideas about what to include in articles. I probably couldn't think of something for every type of traveler, but I would probably think, "Oh, right, I should mention that this attraction has good wheelchair access (or doesn't have, which can be even more important information), and it'd be easy to add in that playground, and the directions for that restaurant should say that it's next door to that hotel..."
I think that including some content that is specifically useful for different types of travelers would be feasible for most articles. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:18, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
In some cities no sane person would consider the proposition of driving a fun activity and we usually say so in our "get around" section. However despite a good start at United States without a car some of our articles are indeed written with too much of a "car is the default" point of view, so we should keep that in mind. As for playgrounds... I don't really think they should be mentioned in a travel guide. Most people with children in the playground age group will want to do something else with them when on holidays. We should absolutely mention attractions that cater to them (e.g. does the theme park only have "grownup" rides or ar there some things targeted at the very young crowd?). For accessibility we might wish to include a symbol or a parameter to check in our listings. (e.g. "disabledaccess" or "wheelchairaccess" with a simple yes no question) this might not be the be all end all solution to this, but it is a quick and easy fix and does not require many words once the software is in place (please don't ask me whether the code is easy to write). In some cases it would probably make more sense to break down certain listings by category instead of / in addition to price (e.g. "Mexican" "kosher" "sausages" etc.), but I think we already do that for some cities. As for tone, I have always found LP in English a refreshing read that does not translate well into German. I fear that German WV also has a tendency to a more bureaucratic tone than English WV. And no, I don't know an easy fix... Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:02, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
I think it makes sense to list special or particularly good playgrounds. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:44, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
Certainly. I think the main reason not to mention playgrounds is that it is unclear which ones are relevant (the one that would fit between that giant museum and the hunt for somewhere to eat with children, but if you have a different itinerary, it would be another).
I think it is a very big mistake to forget those small things "you could do at home", when going abroad with small children. The small things you are used to do at home give the children comfort and a chance to relax. A 10m×10m playground can indeed save your day. I would include some such if writing an itinerary for families, but they would clutter guides on any but the smallest towns.
--LPfi (talk) 13:15, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
  • I agree that playgrounds are best for articles specific to family/travel with children. I think they would clutter and annoy people if we put them in the main city travel guide article. We have a general start-up article for Travel as a vegetarian. Vegan redirects there but is admittedly not actually addressed in the article.
I feel like handicap accessibility was brought up a long time ago and people were against it. I could be wrong but the reason might have been because it would make it difficult to make articles star articles if handicap accessibility were part of the listing templates (which would make it necessary to fill them out). I personally think it's worthwhile and would definitely be a way to set ourselves apart from other guides in a meaningful way. I would suggest though having three categories: "accessible", "not accessible", and "partially accessible" with space to explain if "partially accessible" is chosen. An article for the travel with the blind could also be useful. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 13:37, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
First, on playgrounds: Just as listings for amusement parks don't "clutter up" articles for people who want to skip them, if playgrounds are particularly special, listing only those playgrounds won't "clutter up" articles if they're set off in a clearly titled subsection. But that said, the most usual way to mention a playground or a few would be just to state that they exist, in a listing for a park.
Second, on accessibility: I strongly support mentioning this. It's hard to be thorough in including it in every listing, but that's no excuse to oppose its inclusion as a goal, in my opinion. I don't remember people opposing the mention of accessibility in previous discussions, and I'd find such opposition shocking. Perhaps what they were opposing was a specific template field for it, but I'd actually support that. I don't know how helpful I could be in contributing information, though. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:54, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
A non-compulsory field in the listing templates could be a good start. I do hesitate myself to put in that information without guidelines from somebody who knows the issues. There might be a ramp that is too narrow or steep or has too tight turns – if I say "yes, accessible" somebody might come in a wheelchair and get stuck (I do include such information occasionally, when I find official statements). Do we have wheelchair users among us? If not, writing guidelines for accessibility information is a quite big project, where we should involve handicap organizations (perhaps starting with some specific countries). --LPfi (talk) 09:43, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps this is just a pet peeve of mine, but "wheelchair accessible" is a small subset of "accessible". An amusement park can be wheelchair accessible without providing the least bit of thought for access by people who are Deaf, blind, or autistic, to name just three examples. I've even seen wheelchair accessibility that makes physical access harder for people with other problems. When a long, gently sloping ramp replaces (rather than supplements) a short flight of stairs, it can be a nightmare for someone who has difficulty walking. If we want a "yes, accessible" checkbox, then it should be labeled specifically for wheelchair access.
Wheelchair access tends to be very uniform in the U.S. Pretty much, if you see a ramp with handrails in the US, you can safely assume that it's sized to accommodate standard-size wheelchairs. I was really thinking of something that goes beyond the minimum (although in some countries, even the minimum is worth noting). For example, most wheelchair-accessible toilets are required to have one grab bar, but having one on each side is better (what if you're using a wheelchair due to a stroke, and the only grab bar is on the side with your weak arm?). WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:15, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
I chose wheelchairs exactly because I think it is a well understood issue :-) If it is safe to do such assumptions in the USA, very good. But I even do not know what can be assumed in Finland or Sweden (although we tend to be good at standards). The point is that you need to have some understanding of the issue to make useful assumptions or assessments. We need guidelines for that. --LPfi (talk) 17:51, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── On playgrounds:

  • I don't see how you could usefully limit this to a travel topic for families. It's all very well if Traveling with families says "go to a playground", but that doesn't help you figure out which parks in any particular city have a playground, much less which ones could be recommended.
  • Searching for "playground" shows that the word appears in about 5% of articles right now. So I think people are already adding this (e.g., in a listing for a park, as Ikan says) when it occurs to them and it seems appropriate.
  • There is quite a bit of diversity in playgrounds around the world, and those cultural differences may be interesting to some travelers. They're almost non-existent in Chinese cities. American playgrounds tend to be part of a larger park, and there is frequently a certain sense of sameness to them. German playgrounds are small (but every neighborhood has at least one) and have equipment that would have injury lawyers lining up in the US (because "developmentally appropriate" means "sometimes, a kid is going to fall off this and break an arm"). Some UK playgrounds have paid staff ("playworker" is a real job there). I think that adding half a sentence about these differences in a listing would be lively and interesting, and thus fit with the general goal.
  • I notice that several people seem to worry about providing information for parents of young children (which need not be playgrounds; it could also be something like mentioning the (non)existence of diaper-changing areas), but nobody objected to including teen-focused entries, even though I thought my example for that was much weaker and much less universal (most teens won't care about gaming shops, but almost all young children will care about playgrounds). WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:54, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
To me, teens don't need much specifics because they usually have interests that are still compatible with regular travel. Lots of traveling teens can get excited about museums, castles, cathedrals, beaches, etc. all things we already list, as well as shopping centers and that kind of entertainment which we also list. I would think it odd and maybe even feel that the author was desperate to add content if they added a playground and talked about the slides and swings.
In my mind, a wheelchair accessibility icon would certainly have a wheelchair in it (maybe crossed out to symbolize "not accessible") and I'm not sure for partial accessibility. Certainly it would be specific to wheelchairs. Wheelchair accessible never implies that the place is hospitable towards the blind or people with any other issues. Writing about bathrooms in the city articles seems like too much information to me. I mean, if we write about the bars in the handicap stalls, we could also write about overall cleanliness, number of stalls, diaper-changing stations, nursing rooms, if they have Western and/or squat toilets, what floors the bathrooms are located on, if they have soap/towels/toilet paper... That's too much potty talk to add to each listing. You could literally write an entire new city article with only toilet information about each listing. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 15:04, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
I totally get your point on bathrooms, but I'm still not really seeing eye to eye with you on playgrounds, inasmuch as it does make sense to me to list or at least mention a particularly great or unique playground. Otherwise, for the most part, it just makes sense to mention in a park's listing that there are (x-number of) playgrounds in the park. And maybe I should start adding that for New York City parks, except that in my experience, every single one has at least one playground, so maybe that's something to mention in a single sentence in the overall New York City guide, but only if it can be confirmed. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:04, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
I don't think that we need to have a lot of "potty talk" to include information that's useful to this group of travelers. For example: there's a small chain of expensive steakhouses in the US discourages people from bringing young children. They don't actually have a sign on the door that says "no children" (AFAIK; I've never been there), but they have reportedly banned highchairs. One of them is listed at Boca Raton#Splurge. We could easily say "Not a good choice for dining with young children", without going into a long list of details like whether there's a diaper-changing station in the men's room, or if they still believe that only women change diapers, or if they don't believe that diapers need changing.
Similarly, if you happen to know that an attraction has particularly good wheelchair access (or a menu in Braille, or whatever), then you can mention that in equally few words: "Menu available in Braille" or "Good access for wheelchair users". However, access doesn't always need to be explicitly stated as having any relationship to disabilities: "Climb up the slippery stone staircase, built in the 12th century, to see the view from the belfry" applies to everyone, but it still tells people with mobility impairments that it's not accessible. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:31, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Editing News #2—2016[edit]

m:User:Elitre (WMF), 17:20, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Open call for Project Grants[edit]

IEG barnstar 2.png

Greetings! The Project Grants program is accepting proposals from July 1st to August 2nd to fund new tools, research, offline outreach (including editathon series, workshops, etc), online organizing (including contests), and other experiments that enhance the work of Wikimedia volunteers. Whether you need a small or large amount of funds, Project Grants can support you and your team’s project development time in addition to project expenses such as materials, travel, and rental space.

Also accepting candidates to join the Project Grants Committee through July 15.

With thanks, I JethroBT (WMF) 15:21, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Would be nice to get a response to the question at m:Wikimedia merchandise/Design ideas#Wikivoyage Sticker. --Traveler100 (talk) 16:17, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Schengen template[edit]

Apparently the Schengen template still talks about "autumn 2015" as if it were recent news. Given that the Schengen Teamplate shows up in quite a handful of articles, this should be fixed. Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:05, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Go knock yourself out :) Template:Schengen
I don't really regard the Autumn 2015 as 'out of date', but if you can make it more relevant then so much the better. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:16, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
Well Fall 2015 is almost a year ago now. And apparently some of the then current suspensions of Schengen have been lifted (though I don't know if all of them and I also don't know where I could get that information)... Hobbitschuster (talk) 13:37, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

How to solve the problem wikivoyage cannot login?[edit]

When a Chinese users (zh:User:Hiokdat) login to wikivoyage , but there show " Fatal exception of type "Exception" ", And even the whole global account has a problem [6], who someone can help the fixes? Thank--Yuriy kosygin (talk) 07:11, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

There's nothing we can do about login issues from here. I suggest asking on Meta-Wiki or filing a bug report on Phabricator. Powers (talk) 17:22, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
Thank you! Has been repaired successfully, sorry to bother everyone... --Yuriy kosygin (talk) 17:47, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
Yuriy kosygin, I'm so sorry to hear that User:Hiokdat got "bit" by this bug. There was a terrible problem in the software, and it has just been fixed. About four thousand login attempts failed recently – far more than usual.
It is supposed to be working now, but, just in case, I hear that some editors were successful if they started to log in at their "home" wiki (usually the Wikipedia for your preferred language, but Special:CentralAuth will know for certain – it's marked with a "house" or a green "+" icon). Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:29, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
One more thing, of more general interest: The fix involved temporarily reverting a lot of software changes. So, some recently fixed bugs have reappeared. Don't worry; they'll be re-fixed soon (expected time: today). Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:31, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
I know! thank you for your reminder.--Yuriy kosygin (talk) 11:03, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Experience with new maps[edit]

Beginning to find the new maps inconvenient. The biggest issue is when you click on a location icon of a listing to get to the map (something I tend to do more on a mobile as the geo map icon is difficult to find). It only shows other listing of the same type. Not good when I click on the attraction I am at to see when restaurants are within walking distance. The project appears to have stalled are the open issues going to be addressed? --Traveler100 (talk) 07:54, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

We found the same behavior at WV/de. For a workaround, in the {{Marker}} template a show parameter is to be introduced having all possible values. To make this easier I proposed an additional show parameter for the Kartographer. --RolandUnger (talk) 14:00, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
I added a workaround to the {{Marker}} template so all markers are now shown. --RolandUnger (talk) 04:44, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
Great, thanks. --Traveler100 (talk) 06:56, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Incubator help[edit]

Please see incubator:Incubator:Community_Portal#maplink_and_imagemap Can anyone here help our fellow traveller? —Justin (koavf)TCM 23:06, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Data visualization hackathon in Seattle[edit]

Happening July 22nd at 10 am [7]. Likely useful for those involved with technical map work. Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:14, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Turkey[edit]

Should there be a warning box? Given - http://turkey.usembassy.gov/sm_07152016.html

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes --Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:04, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm usually in the minority on reflecting these sorts of news events in Wikivoyage articles, but unless there is something to say that would be useful to travelers I don't think there is enough information to add a warning box yet. Wikivoyage isn't a news site, so unless someone wants to spend the next several hours updating the warning box as information becomes available it's probably better to wait until there is clear information that we can provide on how the current situation will impact travelers. -- Ryan • (talk) • 23:15, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
All flights into Istanbul are cancelled and are being turned back, which would have a strong traveler impact. US State department has also issued warnings.
I'd agree that WV is not the place for news updates, but if someone does want to place verifiable warnings (not just rumors) then it should be OK. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:20, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Short-term flight cancellations, temporary road closures, and other events of very limited duration are typically considered out of scope for Wikivoyage - for example, if storms shut down airports in a region it would usually not be mentioned. While state department warnings are mentioned if they pertain to a danger in a region, a warning typically wouldn't be included for an event that is of a very limited duration. The current situation in Turkey may have long term ramifications for travelers, but at this point I don't think it's clear whether or not that will be the case.
I understand the desire to reflect major news events in Wikivoyage guides - for example, since it was a news event someone added a road closure warning to the Nice article, something that probably wouldn't have even merited a mention had the source of the closure not been in the news - and would just ask that if these types of warnings are going to be added that they are legitimate travel planning information, and not just a way to show that Wikivoyage editors are concerned about news events. -- Ryan • (talk) • 23:55, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Is there any merit to introducing / bringing back a "news" section / subsection maybe in cooperation with other Wikimedia projects? Hobbitschuster (talk) 00:12, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Is there any merit? In principle, probably. Do we have the manpower necessary to keep it up to date consistently? Not at this time. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 00:30, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Have to agree with AndreCarrotflower, nice idea but would not work in practice. Take a look at Wikinews, a good 10 hours into the event and no mention on that new site. --Traveler100 (talk) 06:27, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Escape rooms (again)[edit]

It may be time to get an actual policy position on escape rooms as one was added to and removed from the Portland (Oregon) article recently. I really have no made up opinion either way, but it would be nice to have clarity to avoid this discussion popping up every couple of months. Hobbitschuster (talk) 00:10, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Unless I'm misunderstanding, Escape Rooms aren't any different from other attractions and thus shouldn't need a special policy. In the case of the edit you cited, I reverted that addition to the Portland article because it wasn't for a specific Escape Room business, but was instead a generic description of Escape Rooms with a link to an Escape Room directory website, and it was cut & pasted to a dozen articles. -- Ryan • (talk) • 00:24, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

What to do for listings with two phone numbers in different countries?[edit]

So I did some copy editing on San Juan del Sur recently and found a couple of listings with a Nicaraguan (+505 - nnnn nnnn ) number as well as a US one (+1-whatever). How is the right way to format them? And is there a page that spells out how to do this? Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:47, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

See Wikivoyage:Listings: "In nearly all cases only a single phone number should be included, but if multiple phone numbers are required then they should be separated with a comma - example: "+1 234-567-8901 (front-desk), +1 456-789-0123 (reservations)"." -- Ryan • (talk) • 17:08, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Well this policy does not cover or explicitly mention numbers in / for different countries, which seem to be common in certain regions. Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:14, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Use the same system: "+505 - nnnn nnnn, +1-whatever". In terms of formatting, it doesn't matter whether the two phone numbers are front desk vs reservations telephone numbers or Nicaragua vs US ones. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:46, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Importing open license text into Wikivoyage[edit]

Hi

I've been working an easy way to import openly licensed text into Wikipedia which is now complete, I'm wondering how easy it would be to create something similar for Wikivoyage? It consists of:

  1. A Visual Editor enabled Template:Open-source attribution
  2. Simple instructions for both source editor and Visual Editor

To give an example of how this could be used, I've created a page to organise creation of en.Wikipedia articles of Biosphere Reserves using UNESCO descriptions, it uses a map fed by Wikidata to show which articles are missing. This could very easily be recreated if there was a template on Wikivoyage to use when importing open license text, here is an example of a Wikipedia article incorporating UNESCO text and using the template.

Thanks

--John Cummings (talk) 21:48, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Interesting tool! In the case of Wikivoyage, where would the data come from? Wikidata does not contain the data that we need for the creation of even a stub article, I fear. I would be glad to be proved wrong though :-) Syced (talk) 11:52, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Hi Syced, I'm sorry for not being clear, it would not import data from Wikidata, the instructions describe how to copy openly licensed text from other sources and paste it into Wikipedia and the template provides the attribution needed. The Biosphere Reserve project is just a use of the instructions and template that uses Wikidata to organise the work, its a bit overly complicated really, I partly did it as a proof of concept. John Cummings (talk) 15:14, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

How to import the TOC Bread-Crumbs on the banners to hewikivoyage?[edit]

TOC bread crumbs

Hi, I want to import the TOC Bread-Crumbs on the banners to hewikivoyage. What do I have to do to import it? Thanks, Dekel E (talk) 07:17, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

The banners utilize mw:Extension:WikidataPageBanner. You should be able to open a request on phabricator: to get it installed. -- Ryan • (talk) • 07:31, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Boundaries on maps[edit]

I cannot seem to be able to display county and city boundaries on the maps any more. Am I missing some option somewhere? Making things more difficult to assign listings to the correct articles. --Traveler100 (talk) 11:48, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

The layer "boundaries" has been updated and is available now again. -- Joachim Mey2008 (talk) 04:20, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Great, thanks. --Traveler100 (talk) 05:33, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Integration of Wikidata in Listings[edit]

I created phab:T141345. It would be great if you could comment on it. Thanks, -- T.seppelt (talk) 08:43, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Isn't one of the problems that Listings on de-WV work and look differently from those on en-WV? I think you have "vcards" or something of the sort. Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:29, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
No no no. Totally against this idea. We have enough trouble already trying to grow our community and convert casual readers to editors; we should be making it as easy as possible for newbies to contribute, not forcing them to navigate the arcane labyrinth of Wikidata (I've been a regular editor for almost five years and I still have trouble with WD). T.seppelt, before taking this issue to Phrabricator, you really should have brought this up at the Pub first and figured out whether our community even wanted to cede this very important piece of functionality over to Wikidata. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 15:45, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
This is an open process and the ticket is for brainstorming and comparing ideas with technical possibilities. Nothing big is going to change in the next weeks and your input is very welcome. And I think forcing people to use Wikidata is in this case not a good idea. But we should find a solution to combine the forces of the different Wikivoyage language versions and create a better experience for the readers and users. --T.seppelt (talk) 15:50, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
@AndreCarrotflower: Sharing data via Wikidata would undoubtedly be a good thing, although you are correct that it will be important to get the implementation correct so that it makes things easier for users rather than harder. I've done some work recently on using Wikidata in listings (see Wikivoyage talk:External links#Listing editor changes) and I think there are a handful of others who might also be able to provide firsthand feedback. Unfortunately I don't have time to provide a detailed response right now, but there is definitely benefit to the idea and it would be counter-productive to have efforts to put better tools & infrastructure in place summarily shut down since we can't make better use of Wikidata here until the tools available from Wikidata have been improved. -- Ryan • (talk) • 16:26, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Although I can see some advantages with getting data from Wikidata I agree with AndreCarrotflower, this is again alienating casual users. All this moving of activities and discussions to phabricator and editing to wikidata is great if you are computer programmer and active in the wikimedia sphere but for most people on the web this is an alien world and is totally undiscoverable. Until there is an easy and clear way to edit wikidata from Wikivoyage or Wikipedia then we should move carefully in this direction. --Traveler100 (talk) 20:14, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
I think there is some misunderstanding. Wikidata offers the potential of being able to build easy-to-use tools for editors that opens up a huge amount of valuable shared data for use in the travel guides on this site. HOWEVER, there is work that must first be done to ensure data can be stored in Wikidata, that it can be easily accessed, etc. These sorts of phabricator tickets lay the groundwork for future tools that offer the potential of very easy, very useful Wikidata integration that Wikivoyage could then either take advantage of or ignore. Opposition now is essentially telling willing developers not to do the groundwork necessary to make potentially valuable features available in the future. -- Ryan • (talk) • 21:18, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
I am not against developing new functionality, just saying the functionality should be aimed at causal users of the site. After the way the map changes went I am a little sceptical, changing the reading facing UI with a regression in functions. --Traveler100 (talk) 05:31, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

I worked it on a first implementation. Module:Listing is the result. It should have exactly the same functionality as Template:Listing, but additionally and only in case nothing can by found locally data is loaded from Wikidata. Please have a look at Template:Listing/test. You can test how it works be going e.g. to Template:See, changing the first line to {{listing/test... and use the preview form to display any page with the new template. What do you think? There is a known issue regarding the CSS of links which I still try to solve and not all parameters are matched with Wikidata properties. -- T.seppelt (talk) 15:58, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

These sorts of experiments are useful in determining how to better implement integration with Wikidata and to improve the underlying pathways, and I would encourage more of them. That said, you're viewing this updated listing template as a proof-of-concept rather than something that is proposed for actual implementation, right? As noted above, Wikidata implementation needs to be transparent to most editors, so while I very much support the idea of making better Wikidata integration possible, that integration needs to be transparently added to existing templates and tools in easy-to-use ways - a solution that forces users to go to Wikidata to edit a listing would not be viable. -- Ryan • (talk) • 17:48, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
I agree with Ryan. From a technical perspective, it’s cool that the integration can work and there can be local overrides. But from a usability perspective, it reinforces my belief that integration with Wikidata should be invisible to users (those Wikidata pages are not user friendly). -Shaundd (talk) 18:05, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm not going to pretend to understand all that programming language in Module:Listing, or its effects on how Wikidata-integrated listings would operate in practice. But Ryan hit on my exact concern in his above comment. Encouraging casual readers to get over their intimidation and self-doubt and understand that their contributions are welcome and in fact essential, and that they don't have to be any kind of expert or have any kind of credentials as a writer or whatnot - that's already a pretty formidable hurdle that we haven't quite figured out how to clear. I might be talked into supporting Wikidata-integrated listings if the process is straightforward and user-friendly, but any scenario wherein the editing of Wikivoyage takes the end user to a site other than wikivoyage.org is, I think, a nonstarter. To newbies, Wikidata is the darkest and most obscure corner of the WMF network - unlike Wikipedia which is an encyclopedia, Wikivoyage which is a travel guide, etc., Wikidata has no utility to casual users; its only purpose is to facilitate integration between different WMF sites. As such, I can imagine very few editors who aren't already familiar with the behind-the-scenes inner workings of the WMF would know what to make of Wikidata, or to be motivated to bother decoding how to use it as a Wikivoyage editor-by-proxy. Furthermore, as Shaundd said, the Wikidata interface is also hideously user-unfriendly. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 19:35, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
I think one of the several reasons for the crisis Wikipedia has been experiencing for quite some time now is that it has gotten too complicated for the "non-initiated" to contribute. A Wikivoyage article with its scant amount of templates and tables and other fancy programming shebang (sorry for the wording) is way easier to write for someone who knows the topic and how to write but not programming. I hope we can keep it that way. Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:26, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
It is from my perspective that the casual user/editor be kept from being alienated from contributing simply by keeping the old motto: "KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid)". Coding that allows some event to occur should in most cases be simply hidden as it is within the listing editor, visual editor, templates, gadgets, extensions, .js, .css etc. in order to shield one from coding creep and overload. Users come from many different levels of expertise. I come from a background where it was an absolute necessity to know wiki code markup, javascript, css, python, a definite understanding of templates and how they work, working with an api and how to write and use extensions. A knowledge of the mediawiki file structure and mediawiki's inner workings were also a must. I also have a database, typesetting and text processing background. I find that the casual user/editor does not need to be an expert in all of these areas, but should be encouraged to contribute information (content) for various articles which may be lacking. These contributors IMHO provide an essential portion of the bread and butter for Wikivoyage and should not be alienated.
I have a tendency to write my own tools that I use in sandboxes mostly for doing some basic analytical/editorial work such as comparing TOCs from different articles, creating a basic list of words found in an article, checking an article for red linked images in articles or those found in listings etc., conversion of markers and listings to maplinks, grabbing pieces of information from wikidata such as latitude and longitude, creating basic markers and listings for sister cities and other entities, build tables and find various url (wiki links) for an article among other things. These are not something the casual user would have use of. The basic point I think is that there are tools and there are tools; from the simplistic to the complicated; (some of which are not for the faint hearted) - each with some purpose in mind and useful for users of different degrees. We as a community collectively have to settle down and discuss Who, What, Where, How and Why as well as user impact. Perhaps these discussions could be pursued more appropriately on Wikivoyage Request/Suggestion page(s). -- Matroc (talk) 01:35, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your input. I think the main finding of this discussion is that we need better tools to make editing of listings as simple as possible. I imagine that the difference between editing listings locally and on Wikidata for example with the listing editor can be made almost not existing (see phab:T141345 again). Next steps could be to integrate Wikidata in the listing editor and in the visual editor plugin which is going to arrive to Wikivoyage. Matroc, can you help with the coding work? -- T.seppelt (talk) 06:07, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

T.seppelt - If I was 45 or more years younger I would be glad to assist in a coding effort; however, for business and personal reasons I am going to have to decline. -- Matroc (talk) 01:16, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
I think that a few important things were missing in this discussion:
  • First, the main goal of using Wikidata is the synchronization of information between different language versions, but there is no way to synchronize individual listings without assigning them unique identifiers, such as Wikidata IDs. This job will not be done by these precious casual editors who are "completely unfamiliar with Wikidata". It has to be done by someone who is familiar (on a very basic level, though), but so far there was little interest in doing such a work, and, to the best of my knowledge, Wikidata field is not even available in the listing editor. According to Syced, English Wikivoyage has as many as 46 listings with the Wikidata identifier, and at this point our only hope is to synchronize the data between French and Russian Wikivoyages, where this number is about 50 times higher.
  • Second, each listing should have a separate Wikidata item, which is easy for major attractions already having their own Wikipedia articles, but I am not sure that Wikidata allows to create listings for all the cafes and hotels, including those that may have ceased to exist. If there was a discussion with the Wikidata community, could anyone give me a link? Wikidata requires that all information is verified, bust most of the data from Wikivoyage is not verified because it is based on the original research and lacks proper sources (in Wikipedia sense).
  • Third, we have discussed which information could be potentially shared, and arrived at the conclusion that only geographical coordinates and phone numbers/e-mails/URLs can be shared easily. Addresses may be language specific, whereas opening hours and prices are always language-specific. While it may be possible to overcome these difficulties, a lot of work and discussion on Wikidata will be required in order to agree on the format that they can accept. If anything, I would start such a discussion on Wikidata and not here.
After thinking it all over once again, I am not even sure that this whole story is worth the effort, given the current understanding by the community and their (lack of) interest in this project. --Alexander (talk) 08:09, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Glad to see this discussion happening :-) My views:

  • I believe that an easy-to-use editor would make everyone happy. For that, some of us need to take time to get familiar with the technologies involved, and implement it. Not easy but a necessary step.
  • We can't switch overnight to storing everything in Wikidata. As a goal for the new 3 years, we should probably restrict ourselves to items that are already present in Wikidata. The listing editor should check whether a Wikidata property is present or not, and accordingly use the right backend.

Cheers! Syced (talk) 09:17, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

The French Wikipedia has 6090 listings with a Wikipedia attribute, I checked just now. These Wikipedia attributes can easily be translated to a Wikidata identifier. These were entered manually by the French editors. Once the listing editor gets a gadget allowing easy search and selection of the relevant Wikidata item (via its label), I am sure the English Wikipedia can reach 10,000 items in no time. That would mean 10,000 less latitude/longitude to care about. Syced (talk) 08:29, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm in favor of having 10,000 fewer latitude/longitude pairs to care about.
What's the most useful thing non-technical people could do at this stage? For example, should we be adding the (undocumented but apparently extant) |wikipedia= items to listings for major attractions? (I'm assuming that a bot could easily translate from a Wikipedia article to a Wikidata number.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 08:37, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
The discussion about the implementation and rollout of the "wikipedia" and "wikidata" fields for listings has been going on for a few months at Wikivoyage talk:External links#Listing editor changes and provides more detail about changes to the listing editor for these fields, support in listing templates, etc. The fields were just enabled two days ago, so at this point patience is probably necessary as feedback is solicited and support is improved. If you want to add "wikipedia" and "wikidata" attributes to listings by all means go ahead, but it will be much easier to do so, and to then use the "wikidata" field to lookup lat/long and other shared data, once the listing editor has been updated. -- Ryan • (talk) • 15:22, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
I like the W and Wikidata icon appearing at the end of the listings by the way. -- Matroc (talk) 02:33, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Breadcrumbs (isPartOf) for destinations covering two regions[edit]

I recently created a park article for the Swiss Alps Jungfrau-Aletsch UNESCO area. This site lies on the border of the Valais and the Bernese Highlands regions and has significant parts in both regions, therefore I marked it as part of Switzerland. This was then changed by AndreCarrotflower to be in only one region (Valais in this case). A discussion arose to which way is the correct way.

The problem is that both methods are used on WV. Examples:

The problem is that there doesn't seem to be any official policy on this (or at least I couldn't find any). The only reference to this problem I could find is at Wikivoyage:Breadcrumb navigation#Under the covers, but this does not describe very well how this should be handled for new articles. (And it's not up to date, as Russia is now marked as part of Europe). How should this be handled? Drat70 (talk) 00:46, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

The problem with at least a few of the articles in the second list is that they're mischaracterized. As it doesn't fall anywhere within the regional division scheme of either New York (state) or Ontario, Thousand Islands should be an extrahierarchical region (taking Template:Extraregion rather than Template:Guideregion; extraregions also have null article statuses - they can't be Guides, Usable, etc. - though I don't necessarily agree with that policy). As well, Aral Sea, which is currently inexplicably characterized as a park, should also be an extraregion. Unlike bottom-level destinations (i.e. cities, Huge City districts, and parks), extraregions pretty consistently follow the rule of being placed in the next biggest shared region as far as the breadcrumb hierarchy goes. However, Swiss Alps Jungfrau-Aletsch, as a bona fide Park article and therefore a bottom-level destination, IMO needs to be treated differently. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 00:59, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I see what you mean. I specifically looked for park articles which were put into the next biggest shared region: Curonian Spit, La Amistad International Park and Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve as well as above mentioned Great Smoky Mountains National Park and Zion National Park. It seems to me that those parks who are put into only one region either have the majority of their area in one region or are big enough to be split up into two articles. For destinations which are more or less equally shared among two territories, I think it makes sense to put it into the next biggest shared entity. Whichever way it is done however, I think there should be some better defined rules on this. Drat70 (talk) 02:48, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
Anyone else has inputs on this? I think this is still not very consistent. Drat70 (talk) 01:17, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Niagara Falls and Nogales are {{extraregion}} as they are containers which hold two cities each. Thousand Islands is a bit more awkward as there are no cities under it, so it can't be a region. The only villages on the islands are tiny places like Marysville (Wolfe Island ON K0H 2Y0) and Fineview (Wellesley Island NY 13640) with fewer than a thousand people each. That makes 1000 Islands a bottom-level destination, like Prince Edward County (one municipality) or Rural Montgomery County. It's not a region, so it can't be an extraregion. The same would be true of Jellystone Park as a park article.
There's also the not-so-minor detail that extraregions exist outside our main hierarchy - which is fine if they're Niagara-sized, but awkward for something Russia-sized which needs to be in the hierarchy as it's a whole country. An extraregion works well for certain applications - something like Sioux City] or the Quad Cities where there are a few clearly-defined twin cities-like entities which can be grouped as a highly-local region across a boundary. It just works poorly for Glenrio-sized entities as there are no individual cities under them. K7L (talk) 12:53, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
I think it is fairly simple for extra-hierarchical regions; just use the smallest in-hierarchy region that includes the whole thing. I've done that with several — Bactria, Ferghana Valley, Lake Tai, Panay, Negros, ...
Where there's a problem is if in-hierarchy regions need to span others. Also are Russia, Turkey or the Caucasus in Europe or Asia, Iran in the Middle East or Central Asia, etc.? Pashley (talk) 14:11, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Okay, I see from the discussion how it works for extra-hierarchical regions and that if a region spans more than one region it should be made into one of those. That doesn't work however for bottom-level articles such as Swiss Alps Jungfrau-Aletsch, which is a park article and can't be a region because there's no real towns inside. So what is the proper way of attributing it to a region? I still don't think it makes sense to choose one of them in cases where it's split in more or less equal parts. Drat70 (talk) 14:22, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

NOCC tag[edit]

I'm sure this is a silly question, but what does the NOCC tag in listings mean? Some pages have a whole bunch of those bright yellow tags, but it's not easy to fix if you're not sure what it is... JuliasTravels (talk) 11:14, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

I think it means that the phone number is not in the 'correct' format, mostly by the country code (+44, +49 etc) being absent. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 12:25, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
Yes it means "no country code" and means the number is either formatted incorrectly (e.g. 1 - whatever instead of +1 - whatever) or totally lacks a country code. Given that WV is a global project, this should of course not stay this way. Unfortunately I sometimes find myself with places where I don't know the country code or how to fix the formatting Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:09, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
Well, of course it's good to tag incorrect numbers for fixing... but is there any way we can improve the functionality of the tag? Make it more understandable perhaps, ideally with a reference to how to fix the phone number? Those bright yellow tags in capitals are quite huge and ugly (imho), so at least they should come with the benefit of providing information to a large audience. JuliasTravels (talk) 21:37, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
One problem is phone numbers which cannot be dialled from outside the country. The listings template has a "tollfree" field, but not a way of handling non-free domestic only numbers. For example Birmingham (England) has three NOCC numbers, but these are number ranges which often don't work from outside the UK. (see w:Non-geographic telephone numbers in the United Kingdom.) AlasdairW (talk) 22:08, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
I see; that complicates things even further, indeed. But first, is there a way to change the displayed name and remove the all-caps? Instead of NOCC, could it say something like "wrong format" (or a better version of that), and is it in any way possible to make that a link to instructions? The "dead link" tag is less intrusive because it is smaller, for example. JuliasTravels (talk) 09:13, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
I agree that the wording could be improved, but these tags should only seen by logged in users who have the Gadgets - Experimental- ErrorHighlighter preference set. AlasdairW (talk) 22:00, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
Ah - I didn't know that :) Thanks, AlasdairW. That takes away most of my doubts about the tag, although indeed the wording could better. I don't know how to change that, though. JuliasTravels (talk) 19:17, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
I've added more descriptive text which you'll see when you leave your mouse pointer hovered over the text. -- WOSlinker (talk) 20:18, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
Perfect. Thanks, WOSlinker JuliasTravels (talk) 21:00, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Creating a New Language ![edit]

How to create a new language? i am good in Tamil and english and im backpacking in india n europe. how to create a page?

Assuming that you mean creating a language guide, check out Phrasebooks first to ensure that your new language doesn't already exist. If it is new to Wikivoyage then you can use Wikivoyage:Phrasebook_article_template to create it. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 12:21, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
There is a Tamil phrasebook; at a quick glance it looks incomplete, so improving it would be a useful contribution.
If what you want is to create a Tamil version of WV, look at Wikivoyage:Language version policy and Wikivoyage:Language Expeditions for some information. That would be a large project and would require considerable familiarity with WV policies, templates, conventions, etc. I would strongly suggest you put off considering it seriously until you have at least several months experience with the English version.
There does seem to be a Tamil Wikipedia. If you aren't already, you should probably consider contributing there. This would be useful experience and might put you in touch with people who could help with a Tamil WV. Pashley (talk) 20:22, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
I answered at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikivoyage/Lounge#How_to_create_a_page_for_contributions_in_Tamil_.3F

Pageinfo-footer[edit]

Could I bother an admin to please edit the Pageinfo footer to add the same tools as in Wikipedia? So this: "WV footer" would look like this: "WP footer". Just a copy/paste. I'm mostly interested in the pageview functionality myself but the other tools might be useful to other people. This is how it would look in an actual page: Scroll down to the bottom. Thanks, Acer (talk) 18:45, 29 July 2016 (UTC)


Actually, some changes are needed, pretty simple, just changing wikipedia to wikivoyage in the urls. I'm pasting the updated version below, I also removed the wikichecker as I couldn't get it to work. Acer (talk)

External tools

Yes Done. -- Ryan • (talk) • 19:52, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, it's working fine Acer (talk) 20:19, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

"Cuisine" articles[edit]

We have a whole slew of articles on different types of ethnic cuisine: French cuisine, Italian cuisine, Mexican food, Japanese cuisine, etc. None of them are better than Usable status (and most of them are Outlines), so perhaps I should wait a bit before raising this concern, but most of them seem to be developing in an awfully encyclopedic direction. I'm not sure if these articles are the work of one individual gourmand editor or several, but I'd like to see them reworked a little bit to function more as bona fide travel topics rather than information that's essentially redundant to their respective analogues on Wikipedia. In other words, on Wikivoyage it's not sufficient to simply describe these foods - the approach should be, if I'm a traveler who's (let's say) going to Italy, and one of my goals is to experience the best Italian cuisine, what cities or regions should I visit, what kind of places should I seek out, what kind of pitfalls should I avoid, etc.? -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 06:36, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

I share your concerns and think it's always good to raise some awareness about them. It's a common issue with our travel topics. Often enough, the "travel guide" aspect is injected as a somewhat uncomfortable and basic list of obvious destinations. Some of the articles about religions, however interesting, have a focus on the encyclopedic side, as do some of the sports-articles (e.g. Horse riding), in my opinion. One of the challenges is to make sure the travel information is not confined to general or obvious remarks. In the example of horse riding, Each nation has its own culture of horsemanship, with local customs and taboos that need to be respected (without any more specific information) is hardly helpful. JuliasTravels (talk) 09:35, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
I agree with both of you. In case anyone asks, I don't think this is a reason - at least in most cases - to delete the articles, but it would help a lot if there were more edits with a clear travel focus and practical information a traveler can use. And one issue with an article like Italian cuisine is that when you are in Italy, there very arguably is no such thing as "Italian cuisine", only Tuscan cuisine, Campanian cuisine, Roman cuisine, Milanese cuisine, etc. In a real sense, it's only when you are outside of Italy that "Italian cuisine" exists. Ditto and maybe even more so for "Chinese cuisine" and "Indian cuisine", although South Indian cuisine is a much more coherent concept. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:31, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
Well, focus is the key word here. To be very honest, when I look at the Wikipedia article on French cuisine, full of regional differences and information on the different kinds of venues, I'm not even sure how to shape an article here that will have any real added value and not seem like a pale shadow of its WP counterpart. JuliasTravels (talk) 13:17, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
There are a lot of sections that wouldn't be relevant here. But I think we could possibly improve on the regional sections. The region I know best is probably Provence, as I spent parts of 2 summers as a graduate student in Nice, and I find the "Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur" section fairly cursory, although I see it has a link to a region-specific article.
I don't know, my skepticism really has to do with two things: (1) Do we have enough editors with specific knowledge about regional specialties to really add value to these "cuisine of" articles? (2) Is it really useful to talk about "Italian cuisine" or "French cuisine" as if it's one thing? I tend to think broader topic articles like the one on Alcoholic beverages may have more potential, even if they're hardly perfect. Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:36, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
I created many of these articles, though other users have provided most of the information. One reason is that many country articles are bloated, not least the Eat sections, which are in many cases dominated by lists of dishes without context or grammatical flow. Sections such as France#Eat can be shortened down to more essential information for eating in France, while the bulk of the text can be exported to French cuisine. For countries of similar culinary tradition such as Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Oman etc, a link to Middle Eastern cuisine would be more appropriate than repetition of similar lists. /Yvwv (talk) 14:07, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Not intended as an argument for either side, but the advertising hellhole has in their infinite wisdom to bloat their main page decided to "feature" a cuisine every month. All they actually do is link to often neither well written nor up to date "eat" sections... Edited to add: They seem to have gotten rid of it, but they still have a "language of the month" and similar features that are mostly explained by their extremely low standards. Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:27, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

We should study the mistakes of The Other Site, to avoid making them ourselves. We learn that links to short or deficient articles should not be promoted on the main page. And certainly not short or deficient sub-sections. Most cuisine articles, most of them are very young, compared to artifacts such as Bavarian cuisine, and need time to grow. /Yvwv (talk) 14:41, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
By "artifacts", do you simply mean "older articles"? Because that's not normally how I'd interpret the word. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:30, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
The Bavarian cuisine article was created on The Other Site in 2004, and has since then remained a simple bullet list. Since 2015, the corresponding Wikivoyage article has improved greatly, especially thanks to User:Hobbitschuster and User:Andrewssi2. We should be patient with Wikivoyage articles which are short today. The Wikivoyage community will be able to improve such articles to a level unattainable by The Other Site. /Yvwv (talk) 16:05, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
It's not the length of the articles that is the issue; like all WV articles, it is fine that they take time to develop. The challenge is to make them more travel oriented, and provide an angle that is different from the encyclopedic articles over at Wikipedia. While I agree the Bavarian cuisine article has been nicely fleshed out, by exception perhaps even more so than the WP one, I don't see how it is any different in focus. JuliasTravels (talk) 21:05, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
Many Eat sections are not travel-oriented, either. In general, both the Eat sections and the cuisine articles should focus on information such as typical meal times, availability of restaurants, table manners, and information about how to find vegetarian food, or other food to fulfill specific needs. Cuisine articles could also benefit from more historical context of the cuisine. /Yvwv (talk) 21:49, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
We could flesh out Wikivoyage:Article templates/Sections#Eat for guidelines how to write an Eat section for country articles. /Yvwv (talk) 21:51, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
I think "Eat" sections might also focus on regional dishes that are not widely known or available outside their home region. See Buffalo#Local specialties for an example of what I mean by this. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 22:19, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
I've just looked these over for the first time, and I'm not very happy with them. It's handy to know what the foods are (descriptions and translations will be very handy when looking at a menu in a restaurant), but I think what I'd want is something more like "You've got to try this" or "Here's what to get for street food, here's how to get a snack, here's what to get in a fancy restaurant", or "This is for adventurous people, this is for timid diners". For example, it's been years since I've been in France, and I can't claim to be very familiar with it, but it seems like the article ought to mention things like this:
  • Lunchtime is important and long (by US standards) – but don't be late, because it's hard to find a place that will seat you after 1:30 p.m. Dinner is typically late, maybe starting at 8:00 p.m. in cities. A three-course meal is an everyday affair.
  • If you're hungry and you need something quick to eat, then buy a crepe. There are crepe stands all over the place.
  • Restaurants can be pricey. If your budget is tight, then get bread, cheese, fruit, and vegetables from the outdoor market, and make a picnic. Also, wine is cheap (at the store, not at the restaurant). Water (plain and fizzy) is free at restaurants.
  • If someone invites you to their home for a meal, it will probably last for hours.
  • Frog legs, snails in garlic butter, and lobster are all very traditional, but not very popular. Picky eaters might be happier with the excellent bread and butter that's available all over the place. Vegetarians might be successful with cheese soufflé, a savory tart, or vegetables gratin. Vegans and people who dislike cheese should visit some other country.
It might also be interesting to provide some information about "home country" cuisine in appropriate articles: There are American-style steakhouses in France, and McDonald's is everywhere. But Italian visitors to Chicago will be unpleasantly surprised by Chicago-style pizza, and Chinese visitors to America should be warned away from most "Chinese" restaurants, and to attempt only those that name a specific region's cuisine, and even then with an expectation of disappointment. WhatamIdoing (talk) 13:33, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
So I had a look at Germany#Eat, and it has perhaps changed my views a bit. The #Eat and #Drink sections are about 20% of a very long (~200K) article. I think it's a little weak on some regions, but it mentions a broad range of travel-related needs (e.g., vegetarian, kosher, and celiac). It's generally good content, even if there is room for improvement.
But I'm now thinking that it's probably just too much in one place. My Mac says that it would take 63 pages to print this article out. But I'm not sure whether it makes more sense to talk about splitting some information to a subpage on "German cuisine" (presumably with a focus more on "what to eat while you're there") or "Eating in Germany" (mostly the same content on "where and how to get food"). What do you think? WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:59, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

News concerning Intercity buses in Germany[edit]

It has strangely not been picked up much even by German media (maybe they tried to do it in the equivalent of the "Friday night newsdump" slot), but Flixbus, already controlling well North of 70% of the German long distance bus market has announced that they'll buy up Postbus, until now their biggest competitor at something around 15% of the market. this is a German language press release of Postbus. Now the brand Postbus will continue to exist until October 31st of this year, with Flixbus to fully take over starting November 1st 2016. Flixbus has already announced that the Postbus name will be withdrawn and as it is mentioned in quite a few articles (ironically I added it a few days ago to some), I hope you can try and catch those instances. The main article will probably have to be rewritten as well. From a traveler's standpoint this whole thing will probably mean higher prices and worse service (Postbus has tried to distinguish itself by better service - apparently to no avail) and some routes previously served by two or more companies may now see reduced overall service. Is there a template in use for en-WV to alert when something becomes outdated? Because we can probably not delete Postbus already, but having them listed long after November should not happen too often either. On a related note, we should also see whether Meinernbus is still mentioned in some places as that brand has already been withdrawn as well (the website still works, but its functionally a redirect to the Flixbus page). Megabus meanwhile has sold its non-UK network in Europe to Flixbus a month or so ago. Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:46, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Edit Request[edit]

Hi,

I have built a website which is useful for Melbournians that is also extremely useful for travellers.

The site is http://www.burgersofmelbourne.com.au - it is a blog that showcases all of Melbourne's best burgers and would be a great resource for those looking to eat this type of food. It displays a live list of top rated burgers as well as a list of top milkshakes and gluten free options.

I tried to included the to do section on https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Melbourne and it told me the link was spam.

Internally in the CBD page, I did see 2 burger joints displayed which is why I thought it would be a good idea to contribute to the whole state page.

Are you able to help?

I also tried to include a listing into the St Kilda area, which is La Roche - a well known restaurant for travellers which has great deals each day of the week, it kept saving but no confirmation which makes me believe it hasn;t been submitted.

I look forward to hearing back from you soon.

BL —The preceding comment was added by Lozpinch (talkcontribs)

Thanks for your post. Please look at external links#what not to link to. We don't link to blogs or other travel guides, unless sometimes when they're official (such as being produced by the local Board of Tourism). If you'd like to contribute to this guide, the way you can do that is by sharing information here, not by linking to your blog, however good it may be. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:44, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

0845 numbers[edit]

Does anyone know if you can phone UK 0845 numbers from abroad? The reason I ask is because I just added an 0845 number in the Events section of the Brighton article, but as I thought you couldn't call them from abroad, I didn't add the +44 country code, but then that yellow NOCC thing appeared, so I added it in. So if you can't ring them from abroad, is there a reason to add the country code? This is probably a bit of a stupid question, but anyway, thanks for your help.  Seagull123  Φ  13:51, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

See the Wikivoyage:Travellers'_pub#NOCC_tag section above. Some 0845 numbers can be called from some overseas phones, but not all numbers from any phone. If possible I prefer to use a geographic number instead - saynoto0870 may help. I don't know how common domestic only numbers are around the world - is it worth adding another phone number listing field, or should we just ignore the NOCC tag (which most readers won't see)? AlasdairW (talk) 23:12, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
@AlasdairW: Thanks for that link to that website, I found a geographic number to use with it! For the use of country codes with non-geographic numbers, maybe there could be a notice or bit of text that says it's a non-geographic number or something, which would appear like, "0845 1234 5678 (non-geographic number)". I don't know.  Seagull123  Φ  20:07, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
@Seagull123: I've added "non-geographic number" as an option to Module:LinkPhone, so if you use the format you mentioned: phone=0845 1234 5678 (non-geographic number) then it will no longer be flaggedand have updated Brighton to use it. -- WOSlinker (talk) 21:39, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
@WOSlinker: That's great, thank you! That does make it easier when you've got one of those numbers. Thanks again!  Seagull123  Φ  12:21, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Boosting our search engine ranking - creating new pages[edit]

So maybe you'd wish to try and replicate this as search engines are sometimes influenced by who is doing the searching, but I just today searched Intercity buses in France and Intercity buses in Germany (two more or less recent page creations that the advertising hellhole does not have); they were in the first page and the latter even quite prominently so - even after I changed the search term to "long distance buses...". Now the former is by no means a complete article (help from fr-WV maybe?), but this seems to indicate how we can increase our search engine ranking and draw more eyeballs and - hopefully - editors to the site; new articles and edits to existing ones even if they are not all that major. I just wanted to share that observation. I am of course a layperson, so it may well be that this observation is pure chance and we are just one of few English language sources to cover the topic at all, but still this is encouraging to see and motivation for me to keep updating the article as best as I can. Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:30, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Cool! Indeed, good up-to-date content is the best way to get visitors. Thanks for the hard work! Syced (talk) 04:16, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Building a free/open (Wikimedia/OSM style) community for reviews[edit]

Hi Wikivoyagers,

I wanted to let you know about a project that I'm working on: https://lib.reviews/ . As the front page notes, the goal is to build a free, open, non-profit community dedicated to reviewing anything -- including restaurants, tourist attractions, and the like. I think this could become a natural complement to the information provided on Wikivoyage.

Reviews are inherently subjective, but we will support the notion of teams (similar to WikiProjects) that have defined standards and rules. So you could have a team "Paris Vegetarians", for example, to identify the best vegetarian restaurants in Paris, France, with membership rules like "You must have visited a restaurant three times to write a review". There will be other features to mitigate against abuse.

As with Wikimedia, support for many languages is important. The software is already fully localized into German, and you can translate all content (try changing the language on the front page and notice how some content is now German). If you want to help with localization into a new language, we can already get started on that right away (we're not on translatewiki.net yet, but I'll look into making that happen).

The license for reviews is CC-BY-SA, and for metadata CC-0 -- identical to Wikivoyage and Wikidata, respectively. Right now we identify things to review by URL (e.g., a restaurant's official website); over time I hope to build adapters for OpenStreetMap, Wikidata, and so on.

At this point, you can write reviews, and you'll soon be able to start teams. Contributors and collaborators of any background are welcome, as long as you're willing to deal with bugs/rough edges/missing core features. Until I'm confident in anti-spam measures, an invite-code is required -- you can email me through my user page, or follow the instructions on the front page.

I hope this project will fill a void in the free culture ecosystem. Happy to answer questions here directly, and hope to see some of you get involved. :-) --Eloquence (talk) 23:10, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Interesting experiment! Not easy but I hope you will be able to design a system that works... be sure to let us know your findings after like a year! I just sent you an email requesting an invite :-) Syced (talk) 13:45, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
Looks like a great initiative. I'm excited for the possibility of downloading reviews for offline use, complementing the Wikivoyage ZIM. Carlelliss (talk) 16:50, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Herron Island[edit]

Over the years I created some pages for areas I wanted to visit but had not had a chance to get to. One of those places was Herron Island in the South Puget Sound region of Washington State off of the Kitsap Peninsula. Unfortunately it is considered a 'private island' with limited access so the page was eliminated since this violated wikivoyage rules.

However this next week I have rented an airbnb on the island and I'm finally getting a chance to visit this next week. Is there some work around that this page could be reinstated? I would love to develop it since I will be visiting and I think that it should qualify for being on wikivoyage since you can in fact visit it via a vacation rental. Thoughts?

--Lumpytrout (talk) 15:19, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

If it's a tiny place the preference would be to put the info into the next article up the hierarchy, but if that doesn't make sense - currently Herron Island redirects to Kitsap Peninsula, which is a pretty broad area - then I'd suggest starting an article and at worst we can merge it later if there isn't enough to support a standalone article. Private islands generally don't get their own articles if they aren't somewhere that you can visit, but the fact that you're going there and staying in an Air B&B is evidence that an article about this place should at least be considered. -- Ryan • (talk) • 17:34, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Meeting in Tuscany[edit]

Hello. We're organizing a trip to w:Cascina with some wikimedians of Tuscany. See it:Wikipedia:Raduni/WikiGita all'abbazia di San Savino, We will visit a place that is usually closed. It is nothing fancy but we will also show some new tools for image harvesting (wiki needs pictures, we are going soon to update more than 180k entries of building missing an image on wikidata). We have already a Swiss and a de-N user joining us, so it is quite international if you want to join! Also as a member of https://it.eurobilltracker.com/ I will also introduce to money tracking app, so a lot of synergy. Sorry for the spam: We can inform the local users but we have no idea who's a tourist in the area. :D --Alexmar983 (talk) 17:59, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Have fun there! wiki needs pictures is a very promising tool indeed, I also started contributing to that project two days ago. On Android, it makes a good combination with the Commons app :-) Syced (talk) 13:27, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
Syced but the new version of wikishootme is also updated. They all have pros and cons. But feel free to try them all.--Alexmar983 (talk) 01:25, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Updating Wikidata items when moving pages[edit]

I've been inactive for a while, so maybe I missed explanations given before. I must confess I haven't put the least bit of effort into working with Wikidata, and to be quite honest, I don't intend to. I understand why it's very useful, but that part of the wiki is just not my cup of tea at all. I like travel-prose, not technical lists. When I write a new article, I just don't do anything about it, and someone else will :) So far so good. When moving a page however, I'm not sure if it's visible for others that the wikidata item is now incorrect? Should I attach any kind of tag, or is there a simple correction I can make that will put it on the radar? For example, we have articles on rural municipalities that cover a number of small villages and hamlets. It wouldn't make sense to have articles for all of them, but wikidata has entries for even tiny places. Should the redirects have the relevant wikidata entries? I moved Leek (Netherlands) today. When moving a page, users get a warning to also fix the wikidata entry, but I don't think we should expect all users to know how to. JuliasTravels (talk) 10:23, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Having the wikidata item point to the redirect is the right thing, but there is some magic involved, such that the item might get (semi?)automatically changed according to page moves or redirects. --LPfi (talk) 18:11, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
I see... That doesn't really give me (or other non-wikidata users) any pointers to what to do in case of a move, though :) JuliasTravels (talk) 10:11, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Wish there was some MAGIC - Need to change enwikivoyage link in Wikidata to Westerkwartier -- which I just found has been corrected by Julius. I will go ahead and check the Wikipedia inline reference to wikivoyage and change that... - Matroc (talk) 19:40, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
On sv-wp they said you need to connect an item to Wikidata while it is not a redirect to avoid Wikidata using the target article instead of the redirect. Thus creating redirects you need to create the page, connect it to Wikidata and then make it a redirect. Moving a page should not destroy the connection. In the case with many tiny places one should probably assure the real article has a Wikidata item before starting to create redirects, or create them with the three-step approach.
When our article is about a non-administrative region we have the problem it usually does not match any existing Wikidata item, but should get its own before it gets connected to something badly wrong – having it connected to the main town it tells about or an approximately matching administrative entity is probably not a big problem, but having it accidentally connected to one of the hamlets is not good.
--LPfi (talk) 05:27, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Save/Publish[edit]

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:03, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Updated listing editor with Wikidata & Wikipedia support[edit]

Newly updated listing editor.
The old listing editor.

Per Wikivoyage talk:External links#Implementation_2, listings now have support for linking to Wikidata and Wikipedia, and I've just pushed a large update to the listing editor to support these new fields. Changes from the previous version of the listing editor include:

  • Wikidata & Wikipedia fields have been added to the listing editor.
  • The Wikidata, image, and Wikipedia fields will now autocomplete as you type, with lookups done by searching the relevant site. So if you start typing "Eiff" in the Wikipedia field you will get suggestions based on Wikipedia article titles that will include "Eiffel Tower".
  • Latitude, longitude, official link, wikipedia link, and image can be populated with the values stored at Wikidata by clicking on the "Update shared fields using values from Wikidata" link.
  • The "image" field was previously hidden in the listing editor if there was no pre-existing "image" value; now it is always shown.
  • Several cleanups to the underlying code have also been made.

Several people have been using the beta version of the listing editor successfully, but it's now live for everyone so please report any bugs. Feature requests can be added to this thread or left at Wikivoyage:Listing editor#Feature requests. -- Ryan • (talk) • 04:57, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your effort. I know that I didn't participate in the discussions which directly led to these changed but nevertheless I'd like to point out that the "Update shared fields using values from Wikidata" function is in my eyes a step in the wrong direction. Instead of copying data from Wikidata and storing it hard-coded in our articles we should transclude it dynamically using plain templates and lua modules. The aim is to maintain data centrally in cooperation with all sister projects and not to create local clones. Instead of "Update shared fields using values from Wikidata" we need "Update shared fields on Wikidata".
Secondly, many more fields (address, url, phone numbers etc.) are available on Wikidata. Please have a look at Wikidata:Wikivoyage/Resources#Properties_for_listings. Again, thank you very much for working on this. I really appreciate this advancement. -- T.seppelt (talk) 07:00, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
While I would agree that it would be better to use data directly from Wikidata and only support overrides when needed, Wikidata has performance and other limitations when retrieving arbitrary Wikidata items - see the comments from User:Matroc at Wikivoyage talk:External links#Implementation_2 when this was discussed previously. I would assume that current limitations will be addressed as Wikidata matures, but in its current state I think copied data is the only solution that will be viable. Update - phab:T93885 seems to indicate that we would encounter limits at 250 arbitrary accesses ({{#property:P856|from=Q3699364}}), plus the performance overhead of parsing each record, although anyone more familiar with Wikidata could hopefully provide further insight. -- Ryan • (talk) • 07:19, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
Have tested the editor! - fits in nicely with some of the things that I have been doing lately - Cheers! -- Matroc (talk) 07:35, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
Just a quick note: In some cases it is best to double check the Wikidata ID, name, latitude and longitude when updating listings etc. In several cases, when I did a lookup by name in Wikidata for example; there was no match available (the name in Wikidata, Wikipedia and Wikivoyage listings were totally different). Looking up a few items I found 2 airports in India with a latitude and longitude which placed them in the United States. In other cases; the Wikidata ID was incorrect or Wikidata entry was not found. I have on occasion edited Wikidata entries to rectify a few of these situations. Image availability in Wikidata is hit or miss. Overall, the editor is very useful and I appreciate the amount of work that went into it as it has saved me some definite listing editorial time.
I also had taken an extra step by querying Wikidata for IDs pertaining to India and instance of field (and Wikipedia) in order to produce various lists of Wikidata IDs in order to create reference tables or Wikivoyage style listings or <mapframes> for mapping groups (all this provided some useful information as to possible future listing candidates for various articles, lookups and data checks such as the example found in Mosques etc. - even these queries produced some false positives. -- The editor works fine and again, Thanks! -- Matroc (talk) 03:21, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Ryan: Wonderful!!! This implementation with "Update shared fields using values from Wikidata" is the most pragmatic thing we can do right now, and it is well executed. When we switch to reading from Wikidata in real-time, we can first run a script that replaces all values that are identical to their Wikidata counterpart with the appropriate expression, so it's not like we are losing much information.
In one week, the number of Wikidata fields on the English Wikivoyage has jumped from 67 to 592!
That number may be incorrect if you are counting listings from other than Main Page (ns:0) articles - I know I have a few hundred on my User and Talk pages -- Matroc (talk) 04:01, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
That number is correct, I count only mainspace articles. Syced (talk) 04:23, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Then we are making progress :) -- Matroc (talk) 05:20, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Problem report 1: Try looking for Beijing's "Guanghua Temple". Two "Guanghua Temple" appears and it is very difficult to tell which one is the right one. How about showing the English Wikipedia article's name instead? That way there will be no duplicate names.
Not all Wikidata entries have enwikivoyage counterparts ... Updating shared fields will show in pop up box the related Wikipedia title - click on Cancel button if it is incorrect and start looking around for the correct Wikidata ID -- Matroc (talk) 04:01, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
I found 3, one of which is a disambiguation entry - Guanghua Temple (Putian) - Q1552743 -- Guanghua Temple (Beijing) - Q379381 -- In the case of duplicate Wikidata labels (Guanghua Temple) go to Wikipedia and get the Wikidata ID from there and enter the Wikidata ID directly in the listing editor - Entering a name is a convenient way to get a Wikidata ID; however, you can use the Wikidata ID directly -- There are plenty of duplicate labels - just have to double check -- Matroc (talk) 04:01, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Our ultimate goal is to hide Wikidata. Hence this report :-) Syced (talk) 04:23, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
I am in agreement and it is good to raise these issues -- Matroc (talk) 05:20, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Problem report 2: Nothing is found for "Guo Moruo Residence", presumably because the Wikidata item has a different page from the Wikipedia page.
Wikipedia Home of Guomoruo redirects to Wikipedia Guo Moruo Residence - Wikidata ID Q4165193 (Home of Guomoruo)-- Matroc (talk) 04:01, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
A casual editor might not be able to find that. It could be done automatically, which would be a further improvement. Syced (talk) 04:23, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Yes; however, when a problem arises some help or guidelines should probably be developed to assist them -- Matroc (talk) 05:20, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Enhancement suggestion: In Yokohama there is a building called "Landmark Tower", so in its Wikidata box I entered "Landmark Tower", and clicked the single item that appeared. This item had no description, just "Landmark Tower" (many Wikidata items still lack metadata). Only when I checked further did I notice that it is actually another Landmark Tower in the USA. The risk of mistaken item is very real, especially for POIs that do not have a Wikidata item. Many users will be tricked. To solve that problem, I suggest this: Get the latitude/longitude of each proposition, and only show the proposition if it is within 100 kilometers of the article's coordinates. Does that sound implementable? Cheers! Syced (talk) 08:22, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Yokohama Landmark Tower (Q587108) and Landmark Tower (Q19361336) located in Texas (both have Wikidata label Landmark Tower) - Again this is why I mentioned issues earlier and to double check!
As far as checking to see if an entry is within 100 km, that would be interesting; however, as some wish to have all kinds of listings in Wikidata (which I oppose except, for relatively important sites/locations) - imagine Coffee Day (India) or some other chain all within the same lat/long info? -- Matroc (talk) 04:01, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Can you elaborate on the "Coffee Day" example? Are you talking about two listings with the same name that are within 100km of each other? Syced (talk) 04:23, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Yes, multiple listings with the same name within less than 100km of one another. -- Matroc (talk) 05:20, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Problem report 3: "Zhongnanhai" has two images on Wikidata, but pressing "Update shared fields using values from Wikidata" does not import any. Syced (talk) 04:23, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Appears to be working at this time -- Matroc (talk) 05:20, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Responses:
  1. I can definitely investigate ways to make it more obvious what the Wikidata article actually represents - using the linked Wikipedia article title (if there is one) sounds like a good idea, although I won't have time to work on it right away. In the mean time note that after you select a value there is a link in the listing editor that will take you to the Wikidata page so that you can verify your selection is correct.
  2. I'm not sure how to resolve the issue with searches not returning expected results - the listing editor is using the same search algorithm that is in use on Wikidata, so if it's not finding a result that's an issue with the Wikidata search algorithm. A geographic search based on lat/long is an interesting idea and would definitely be useful, but I don't know if it's technically possible. If someone else can create a proof of concept then I can help to integrate it into the listing editor, but it's not something I'm likely to pursue on my own.
  3. The issue of records with multiple images not returning an image should now be fixed.
Thanks as always for the feedback! -- Ryan • (talk) • 04:40, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Strange, "Zhongnanhai" still does not get any image. Syced (talk) 05:06, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
If I search for "Zhongnanhai" it gives me record "d:Q197889", and when I then click on "Update shared fields using values from Wikidata" I get "Victory banquet for the distinguished officers and soldiers at the Ziguangge (Hall of Purple Glaze).jpg". Have you reloaded your browser? Sometimes it takes a bit for gadget JS to update in the cache. -- Ryan • (talk) • 05:11, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
After restarting my browser and pressing CTRL+R (instead of just f5) it worked, thanks for the fix :-) Syced (talk) 06:06, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Two small observations from a new user[edit]

Two thing's I've noticed since I started dropping by, probably because I'm new here...

  • The font size in the pagebanners is a bit small I think and the text can get lost in the background. I actually didn't see the navigation links for almost two weeks after I started visiting here more and assumed you guys didn't use them. Navigating large articles was a pain. I've been editing wikis for quite a while and don't have any vision impairment so if I missed them I'd say it's a fair bet some casual readers are missing the links as well.
  • Is the "Related sites" tab on the sidebar still relevant? I imagine it's a leftover from when this was a standalone project? It mostly just repeats what's in the sister projects tab now. The only other site I see there from time to time is DMOZ. More often than not it's just Commons and Wikipedia.

On a side note, I've been doing some interwiki work on the 'pedias related to WV, I'll do a write up later of what I've managed so far, mostly replacing WT links with WV ones and a few other things. Cheers, Acer (talk) 06:29, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Related sites is now mainly duplication. Until recently, there didn't used to be a "In other projects" section. Now that there is, I'm just wondering if we should remove all the [[wikipedia:]] and [[commons:]] links from the bottom of articles? We could also remove the [[dmoz:]] links and add some code into {{pagebanner}} to get the dmoz links from wikidata and still show them in the releated site section. -- WOSlinker (talk) 14:13, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
Would be a good idea. Do we need to do any cross check first before removing the [[wikipedia:]] and [[commons:]] links? Also using the "In other projects" facility, any way to auto generate Category:Articles without Wikipedia links? --Traveler100 (talk) 14:37, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
We could add a little bit of code in {{pagebanner}} to see if wikidata has a wikipedia link and then add the page to Category:Articles without Wikipedia links if it doesn't or maybe adding it to a new category Category:Articles without Wikipedia links (via Wikidata) (or other name) so that a comparison can be done. -- WOSlinker (talk) 15:13, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
Sound like a method that would work. I assume we could add to that a check that the wikidata WIkipadia name matches the [[wikipedia:]] entry so we can clean-up data before deleting the entries. Also create a categories of pages without wikidata page. --Traveler100 (talk) 16:14, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
If you just want a list of pages without a link from Wikidata, Special:UnconnectedPages will provide that information. The list is sorted by newest-pages first. -- Ryan • (talk) • 16:24, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
If you select Main Space in Special:UnconnectedPages that brings list down to 103 articles - Matroc (talk) 01:54, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
I can see a few problems with removing the [[wikipedia:]]. Take a look at Icefields Parkway which has a wikidata page and corresponding pages on other language Wikivoyage sites as well as pages on non English Wikipdia such as German and French. The English Wikipedia, which did exist, now is part of w:Alberta Highway 93 with a redirect to the section. Based purely on Wikidata the link to English Wikipedia would be lost. And not sure what to do about Tokyo or Windsor and Eton. --Traveler100 (talk) 19:19, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Russia / Europe[edit]

Hi there,

The Kiwix team has released a European version of Offline Wikivoyage, but then realised that Russian cities are not included. This is weird since Russia appears to be in category:Europe as a page... but not as a country category. I've seen this change happen in 2014, but I do find rather suprising that Turkey would only have {{|isPartOf|Europe}} while Russia only has {{IsPartOf|Asia}}. So here is my question:

  • Can a country belong to two continents (and therefore have two {{IsPartOf}} (I would think of Israel and Cyprus as other countries with a double location)?
  • If not, then shouldn't Russia be in Europe and Turkey in Asia?

Thanks, Popo le Chien (talk) 14:01, 15 August 2016 (UTC) 

Unfortunately - as far as I know - any child region can only belong to one parent region. So Russia can only be in either Europe or Asia. Extraregions (regions that otherwise don't fit into the regional hierarchy) are usually formally child regions of the regional element to which they fully belong without any overlap into other regions. So "Harz" would be a child of "Germany" in that logic as it crosses state boundaries. Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:44, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
Maybe better if there was a new top level region for Eastern-Europe/(Western)Central-Asia, consisting of Russia, Turkey and the Caucasus. Although there is a risk of being dragged into an argument over Ukraine. --Traveler100 (talk) 18:18, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
Ok, that's far from ideal - there's a Eurasia region, but that does not really solve the issue, does it? Would it make more sense at least to "move" Russia to Europe then? Popo le Chien (talk) 06:14, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Agree not ideal, just a though for others to consider. For now have fixed the category. --Traveler100 (talk) 07:41, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Can't we manually add Category:Russia to Category:Asia? Powers (talk) 13:37, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
I don't think there's a perfect solution -
  1. Category:Eurasia would create a new top-level geographic category, which isn't ideal.
  2. Adding Category:Russia to Category:Asia wouldn't fix the issue where the breadcrumb for Siberia shows it as part of Europe.
  3. There was a past effort to create sub-regions solely for breadcrumb purposes, but while that approach would fix Russian sub-regions, we would still have to pick either Asia or Europe for the breadcrumb on the Russia article. The idea was that "Russia (Europe)" and "Russia (Asia)" would be created as redirects to Russia, but would be either {{isPartOf}} Europe or Asia (not Russia), so breadcrumb trails would look like "Europe > Russia (Europe) > Central Russia" or "Europe > Russia (Asia) > Siberia". It looks like that effort was aborted (see Talk:Russia (Asia)), but it might be worth revisiting.
-- Ryan • (talk) • 04:18, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Well, I wasn't aiming to fix the breadcrumb issue, but rather the issue User:Popo le Chien identified. Powers (talk) 01:32, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
{{IsPartOf}} is designed to be hierarchical. I suggest you use the latitude/longitude of each article to decide whether you want it or not. Just choose a few segments and do basic math (see http://gis.stackexchange.com/a/80408/1013 for an example). God luck :-) Syced (talk) 07:53, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

PoiMap2raw & Mapframe[edit]

I am having various problems with the templates PoiMap2raw and Mapframe, and the problems vary depending on the browser used: IE, Edge (Windows 10 replacement for IE) and Chrome. In a previous topic, someone reported problems with PoiMap2raw. Thus, should I be using PoiMap2raw and Mapframe, or are there better substitutes? There are articles (i.e. Calgary, Markham) where PoiMap2raw could magnify a district within the city that has a cluster of sites and establishments. Thanks. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 00:12, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

I'd like to echo these comments. Do we have a fix for this/is it a known problem? In the Kenosha article, the map is isn't working on my computer. It's using the mapframe template and I'm using IE edge. It seems to not work for IE 10 and up. I switched to compatibility mode and it works for IE 9 and under. I've not been actively editing for awhile, so I don't know if there are any map updates/changes that have occurred in my absence. DethDestroyerOfWords (talk) 15:16, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
I am also finding the new in-page maps. As well as the restrictions listed in discussions above I am finding it unhelpful that when opening map from a listing number it does not center on that point, so in a large city you are non the wiser. It appears the project for new map has stalled, no response to issues listed, should we revert to the original version until the work on the new mapping tool is complete? I know wiki is a WIP type media but this does not mean we should move backwards on functionality. --Traveler100 (talk) 20:26, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Today, I find that PoiMap2raw works in both Edge and Chrome. Thanks! MapFrame works in Chrome, but in Edge, while the frame around the map area is drawn, the map area itself is still left blank.TheTrolleyPole (talk) 17:15, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Status template text[edit]

I took a look at Europe and again noticed it is classified as an outline. The quality criteria for usable may or may not be at the right level, but saying "This continent travel guide to Europe is an outline and needs more content. It has a template, but there is not enough information present." is silly, to say the least. Visible text should give correct and intelligible information, and we should at least not beg our readers to plunge forward with such misleading directions.

The continent, country, region and hugecity status templates need text that suggests the problem can be elsewhere in the hierarchy and a link to an intelligible explanation of what needs to be done (I usually go via quite a few pages before finding the criteria, every time). Now the text is in a template not meant for mortals to edit, so I am not going to change it, but I hope those who unified the templates do something about it.

--LPfi (talk) 18:49, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

I have added some more specific text, please provide feedback on better phrasing or now you see what was edited you can make changes yourself. --Traveler100 (talk) 19:23, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
I appreciate your quick fix; my wording was too harsh. Checking the template more carefully, I see it is indeed possible to have specific text, but I need some sleep before being able to figure out how to get sensible results; the text for outline continents is still not very clear. --LPfi (talk) 20:43, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Where can I see the changes to the text? And yeah, you are right, the thing with the "outlinecontinent" has been bothering me for a long time on several levels. Not least of which because the article itself is getting ever closer to star level, but it will probably never be guide because Iberia or something is not high enough up the status ladder. And the text in the form you describe it is just the icing on the cake, but the easiest thing to fix. Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:51, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Korean student project will be back - any suggestions on how to make it better - and what to edit?[edit]

Hey guys. Last year I run a project with several Korean ESL students and we improved/created several Korea related articles (ex. Ansan, Daebudo, Jebudo and few others). The class will start again in few weeks, and I'd very much appreciate suggestions on which articles people would think I could suggest to the students they could work on. The page on the city our university is in, Ansan, looks pretty good, but if you can tell me what can be done to move it towards the Wikivoyage-equivalent of Featured article, it would help a lot. Ditto for what can be fixed with the main South Korea page. As for other topics, I usually let student chose them based on their hometowns/favorite destinations (most of the students are from the Gyeonggi province), but if anyone knows of any big gaps in WV Korea coverage, do suggest it. Perhaps something related to the upcoming Winter Olympics? Our entry on Pyeongchang and Gangneung don't seem very impressive. --Piotrus (talk) 10:03, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

One possibility would be a guide (formatted as a travel topic) for players of the oriental game called baduk in Korean. Korean has some of the world's finest players and some major tournaments, and makes equipment for the game that travellers might want. People do go there for classes in the game, e.g. the Go (English name of the game) players' wiki Sensei's Library has an account from two students who spent a month in a Korean baduk school. Pashley (talk) 11:18, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
Of course Sensei's Library also welcomes contributions. WV is fine for travel-oriented material, but things like tactical advice or biographies of famous players belong elsewhere. Pashley (talk) 11:53, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
@Piotrus: Not sure how you are grading assignments but if someone is a little stuck on what to do, he can make sure that listings are up to date--listing templates have a small box for this and it's something that anyone can do by making some phone calls or checking some websites. Not the most fun thing but very useful. —Justin (koavf)TCM 14:02, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
There's a diagnostic feature you can turn on in your user profile that will highlight dead links, badly formatted phone numbers, etc. This makes these housekeeping tasks easier. Pashley (talk) 14:45, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, enabled it for my account. --Piotrus (talk) 09:05, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Seoul and its districts could use some more content, especially its peripheral districts. ϒpsilon (talk) 16:26, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

There are some relevant travel topics which could do with improvement. Pyeongchang 2018 is missing several sections (Vancouver 2010 and Glasgow 2014 may be best similar articles to look at). High-speed rail in South Korea could be expanded (see High-speed rail in China or Rail travel in Great Britain). There are also many topics which are lacking any entries for Korea, e.g. Lighthouses, Science tourism or Botanical tourism. Thank you for offering to help. AlasdairW (talk) 21:01, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

The main thing I noticed about the ESL articles last year was that they were more Wikipedia style knowledge articles, and not particularly travel related. If your students could consider travel as a guiding principle then that would be great.
Also if you take a look at Ansan there are lots of listings (a good thing) but very little description to say why this town is special and why I should visit. They could take a look at the official Korean tourist site for inspiration (not copying!) about how to 'sell' a destination. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 03:45, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
The Wikipedia style is probably my fault, as I am much more familiar with that site. Could you show me an on-WikiVoyage example of how to sell a city better? If possible, a Korea destination or another Asian one would be most helpful. --Piotrus (talk) 09:05, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
On reflection it was rather unfair to suggest the articles were too Wikipedia like, when in fact only a minority of articles in Wikivoyage are written like true travel guides. I myself have worked a lot on Korean articles and have failed to meet this on most of them!
Of the Korean articles perhaps Seoul, especially the 'Understand' section, is the best in terms of prose. Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:43, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Great! This project resulted in several great articles last year. My pet peeves I suggest you ask your student to fill: latitude, longitude, wikidata :-) Syced (talk) 07:46, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Should an article about public bike rentals in Korea be copied/moved from Wikipedia to Wikivoyage?[edit]

On a related note, few weeks back some of my students wrote a Wikipedia article that seems to me may be more useful if moved to Wikivoyage: w:Public bicycle rental service in South Korea. Frankly, I am not sure if it meets the Wikipedia w:WP:N requirement. But here it seems to me it would fit more, alongside travel guides like High-speed rail in South Korea you pointed out to me earlier. For now I've added a short note about bicycle rental to Seoul#On_bicycle_or_on_foot.--Piotrus (talk) 09:05, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Yes, please copy it before the content is removed from Wikipedia (the "Usage" could easily be considered as unencyclopedic). We don't need Public reception/Future development/References though. And the "Usage" section could use more details here, I guess :-) Syced (talk) 07:41, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
It's maybe not the best idea to copy over the entire article just as it is in one lump; much of it is travel relevant but not everything. IMO it's better to add the city-specific information to the Get around sections of cities and information that applies to all of SK to the country article's Get around section. The few things in that article that aren't of any use to travelers such as the Public reception section should not be moved over (also, remember that WV doesn't use references :)). ϒpsilon (talk) 12:53, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
At any rate, bikeshare and bike rentals could be better covered on WV. Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:56, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
It could potentially be within the scope of WV, but it would be odd to have a South Korea-specific article on bike sharing while the more general Bike sharing travel topic doesn't yet exist. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 17:37, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Then how about moving the content to Bike sharing inside a big "South Korea" section? Often articles start in a very USA-centric way and are then "internationalized" by passer-bys, starting from South Korea is unusual but not stranger. Syced (talk) 03:03, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Update on WP links to WV/WT situation[edit]

So, I've been looking into this for the last couple weeks. As it turns out there were still quite a few links to WT all over the many different language versions. I've now gone through the entire list of Wikipedias here. I haven't kept a precise log but judging by my edit count I'd estimate something like 1500-1600 links replaced so far. Portuguese had the most overall with 150 links but in general the worst were medium sized 'pedias without corresponding Wikivoyage editions. Large enough to have plenty articles, small enough to fly under the radar when many links were changed a few years back in the larger projects. Something that stood out was that many links were repeated over and over. Basically the way it works is that the smaller editions will often import and translate articles from larger "seeder" wikis and the links go along for the ride.

There are still five languages with WT links, three of them Finnish, Japanese and Hungarian (also the last that still uses a WT template) link to their respective WT language editions which Wikivoyage lacks so I won't be working on them. The other two I'm going through now, if anyone wants to help:

Georgian and Czech

The Georgians have a WV template so use that, for Czech just replace the URLs. PS: This isn't just about the clicks those links get, WP content gets reproduced online all the time, the copycat sites don't necessarily use nofollow so the links count for google ratings. Acer (talk) 13:21, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Your diligence is much appreciated! Powers (talk) 00:39, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Wikitravel links I don't think it's a problem for us to have links to editions of Wikitravel that don't exist--again, ttcf, right? —Justin (koavf)TCM 02:12, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure I understood you, but I have intentionally *not* replaced links to WT language editions without WV counterparts (Finnish, Japanese, Hungarian and a solitary link in Esperanto). I might eventually add links to enWV but I won't remove the originals. Acer (talk) 09:29, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
I just realized I used the word "remove" above instead of "replace", now changed. In case it wasn't clear I'm substituting WT links with Wikivoyage ones, not removing them outright. Acer (talk)
Great work! /Yvwv (talk) 18:03, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for this. But isn't there some kind of bot that could be used for repetitive tasks like this? I guess if you'd contact someone on Wikipedia who knows how to write bots, they would gladly help out, given that this is about a sister project in need for more visibility. ϒpsilon (talk) 19:04, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
I considered that but didn't want to wait on someone to do the coding. It would have to be somewhat flexible since the links have to be changed into different formats. Wikivoyage templates, sister project templates, direct links etc. But anyway, it's all done now. Acer (talk) 15:52, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Create banners easily with CropTool[edit]

100% online, no third-party website, no copy/pasting of metadata. All the boring stuff gets done the right way, automatically.

CropTool 7:1 aspect ratio
  1. Go to https://tools.wmflabs.org/croptool/
  2. Log in
  3. Paste the name of a Commons image, for instance: Sainte-Enimie-Gorges du Tarn-Frankreich.jpg
  4. Specify 7:1 as a custom aspect ratio
  5. Drag, resize, move the selection box
  6. Preview
  7. Save as a new image with a simple click.

So much easier than anything I have used before!

Syced (talk) 10:12, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Could be worth adding that info to Wikivoyage:Banners. -- WOSlinker (talk) 18:18, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Someone has now added it apparently :-) Syced (talk) 06:08, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Mapframe view changes[edit]

Hello, There a small change coming to interactive maps I would like to share with you. Currently maps using <mapframe> are shown without a frame. After an upcoming update maps will appear inside a small frame with the option of a text caption. Similar to how embedded images work.

Frameless maps are good for insertion as part of a template, whereas framed maps are good for insertion directly into the page, either by hand or by using the visual editor.

  • To insert a map without a frame, add the "frameless" attribute: <mapframe frameless ....>
  • To add a caption, use the text="..." attribute.

Note: Adding the text attribute automatically enables a frame.

If you wish to keep existing templates from showing a frame, please add the frameless attribute. You can do this now without waiting for the deployment.

This change should be enabled on Wednesday, August 31st. For more information please see T143734, start a discussion at mw:Maps, or leave a note below. Thank you. CKoerner (WMF) (talk) 22:31, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

My apologies, this change has already deployed this week. Sorry, my mistake. It seems the mapframe tag looks ok, but please let me know if anything should be changed. Also, I will look at updating the Module:Map to support this feature. Thanks! --Yurik (talk) 22:42, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
I happen to drop by and notice that both Module:Map and {{Mapframe}} still need to be updated to reflect this.. TheDJ (talk) 12:24, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

How many pictures per page?[edit]

How many pictures are permitted on a wiki voyage page?--Kwameghana (talk) 01:00, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

The long and short of it is there's no magic number, just don't overdo it. See Wikivoyage:Image policy for a more detailed answer. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 01:55, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
If there is a lot of text I usually try to restrain myself so that images do not go down further than the text. It is very unscientific and depends on screen width, but that's how I usually do. If there is not much text, I usually head for two pictures, or one picture and a map. Syced (talk) 02:56, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Population in numbers or in comparison?[edit]

How should articles present population of cities or regions? In approximate numbers, or by comparison to other cities, regions or countries?

This is due to a recently reverted edit for Yakutia (with 958,528 inhabitants in the 2010 census). A geography nerd myself, I have no idea of the order of magnitude for the population of Rhode Island, so for me it is less useful a comparison. A guess is that more people could have use for the rough number "one million".

What do you think? /Yvwv (talk) 01:01, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

There's no hard and fast rule. Every case is unique. In the specific case of Yakutia, the population is being compared to its land area. The latter is compared with that of India, so it makes sense to compare the population to that of some other (very small geographically) entity. Especially in the lede, we don't need to be worried about precision. The issue of whether Rhode Island's population is well known enough is a potential problem, of course. Powers (talk) 01:43, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
While comparisons make for lively writing, they are only useful when the (large) majority or readers have an understanding of their size. In the Yakutia example, India is a good comparison as it is general knowledge that India is huge. Using US-states seems very US-centric to me, though. Especially a small one. I dare say that >90% of Europeans (including me) have no clue of the number of inhabitants or the size of Rhode Island. Comparing with any city is better; while people still have no exact idea of inhabitants of cities, the contrast between an area the size of India and a population the size of a mid-sized city (in whichever country) already gives more info than Rhode Island does. JuliasTravels (talk) 11:51, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
I also had no idea what the population in Rhode Island is (could as well have been 10,000 or 10,000,000). I tried to come up with a good comparison, but it is hard to find a 1 million inhabitants city that most of the world knows... "less than Manhattan" would probably be grasped by more people (1.6 M). Syced (talk) 02:52, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Norwegian Winter Driving[edit]

I will be in a remote area East of Oslo for the month of November. Since there is no internet available in that area, I find it necessary to rent, lease an automobile. The minimum period of time will be one month, to a maximum of 5 months. Since I will be driving in the winter, and on some back roads, what type of vehicle should I look for, and where would I rent/lease one? I'm flying into Oslo.—The preceding comment was added by LMcDTravels (talkcontribs) 02:04, 27 August 2016‎

We have an article on Winter driving and one on Winter in the Nordic countries. Either might partly answer your questions. Pashley (talk) 13:00, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
Also Driving in Norway. Pashley (talk) 13:03, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Map layers are gone[edit]

Hi, there are a few missing options in the new dynamic map:

  • The map layer options (the ones that used to be on the right below the maximizse/close full screen button) are no longer shown on the new dynamic map? They were very useful to switch to the more detailed Mapnik tiles for example.
  • In full screen mode, the closing button alt text just says "<kartographer-fullscreen-close>".
  • There no longer is a button that shows nearby Wikivoyage articles.
  • The button on the left where you can zoom out to show all existing markers on the currently shown dynamic map is also missing.

Could someone please look at that? Thanks a lot! 2A02:C7D:2E5B:9E00:807:CA0:38F0:F771 10:59, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback! I also miss these two last buttons. Syced (talk) 02:58, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
They have been missing for several weeks! - I believe they are working on several issues at this time - frames, divs and icons among other things and hopefully they too will resolved soon -- Matroc (talk) 03:25, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Eastsidebug.png
Hi all - thanks for your comments. I was referring to existing functionality in the new maps that disappeared in the last week or two. On the screenshot to the right you can see the buttons that I'm referring to: the button on the left below the +/- buttons, and the one on the right below the full screen button. 2A02:C7D:2E5B:9E00:807:CA0:38F0:F771 22:15, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
The functionality that disappeared is now back. Thanks to whoever fixed it. 2.127.72.235 21:53, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Outline articles[edit]

Currently there are about 19 thousand articles at the outline status and within that there is a large range of varying quality. One thing I'm not that keen on is that any stub article can make it to outline status by applying the templated layout. What I would like to propose is that there is a new status in-between stub and outline, called start (or better name if one could be suggested) that would contain articles without any listings (not necessarily using the listing template) and don't have much info (could mainly be measured by size being under roughly 1500 bytes). Running a query for this on PetScan returns about 3400 articles (although a few of those could still be outline rather than start). -- WOSlinker (talk) 07:08, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

I think this would make sense especially for regions or country articles. While it's quite easy to get bottom-level destination articles to 'usable' status, it is quite hard to do so for countries or regions, because it requires the most important destinations (or all destinations linked for countries) to be at usable or better level. So I think for those cases it would make sense to have something between outline and usable, to differentiate between a region with only the template and a region which is good, but where the destination articles are not yet up to standard. Drat70 (talk) 07:22, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
I don't think an extra low-level status would solve anything, to be honest, and I don't like the idea of further complicating the setup. I can see the point about regions, but for simple destination articles, the proposed extra status would make the difference between none and one or two listing, in practice. Three listings already make them usable. If an extra status is deemed necessary, I would suggest replacing or changing our current "stub" status. Placing a template on an article or redirecting it is hardly more work than adding a stub-rating, and its use is very limited. In the end, I don't think any of this makes much difference. While these status-ratings are important to our community's "organizers", users read an article first, and wil judge for themselves. The status is only at the bottom, and likely missed by the majority of users anyway. If we want users to take our ratings into account, they should be as simple as possible. JuliasTravels (talk) 11:20, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
We have had similar discussions in the past. One proposal was to have an addition maintenance tag. It was not given much support but maybe we should re-discuss {{Needsimprovement}}. --Traveler100 (talk) 12:24, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Articles that have had so little info for a year or two could then be converted into redirects to a location nearby with more info. -- WOSlinker (talk) 16:18, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
I would not recommend this, unless you're very familiar with the place in question and are confident that redirecting is the best solution. I've done this a couple of times in the past and have managed to raise the ire of newcomers who are mad that their town/neighborhood isn't represented. PerryPlanet (talk) 17:47, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Also, there is no consensus or policy to support redirecting valid destinations solely because they are currently outlines. Redirecting is fine for destinations that likely wouldn't be able to fill articles of their own, but for larger towns that could have their own articles, the fact that they are as good as empty is no reason for redirecting or deleting. Personally, I think redirecting is the worst possible outcome, as it's usually confusing and not helpful for readers. We've discussed it a few times, including last year: Wikivoyage_talk:How_to_redirect_a_page#Redirects_for_real_places_with_no_content. JuliasTravels (talk) 20:56, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
But isn't there always a lot of outrage whenever a "real place" is proposed for deletion? Hence redirecting or keeping are the only options, or am I mistaken? Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:37, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
In fact, unless it's a small destination/neighbourhood that would fall under our redirect rationale, keeping is currently the only valid option. I know the empty outlines bother you (and me, too), but redirecting is not a solution that benefits the traveller in most cases. There was no consensus to allow deletion last time we discussed. Perhaps, that will change over time. JuliasTravels (talk) 09:08, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

We might need to discuss the status ratings for regions countries and continents. Or at the very least their current wording. Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:37, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

I don't understand what a new status below "outline" would entail. Once you add the appropriate template's section headings, it's an outline. We have so few stubs as it is; I don't see a point in adding another status below "outline". Powers (talk) 01:10, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
I'm also skeptical about adding another status; to address the original concerns my preference would be to expand the definition of "stub" to include articles that are either missing a template or contain a template without any content. That said, overall I think our current "status" rankings need a massive overhaul - star nominations are lingering for months, country and region articles containing pages of useful information are "outlines" because a single child destination is incomplete, a mostly-complete article is kept at outline because one section is missing data while a barebones article with just the name of an attraction, a restaurant, and a hotel can be promoted to "usable", etc. -- Ryan • (talk) • 01:24, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Adding a category between stub and outline wouldn't make much sense, as promoting the article to outline only requires adding the section headings. What perhaps could be added is a category for countries and regions, for cases where the country or region article itself is informative and otherwise in a good shape but only the bad status of articles below it prevents it from becoming usable (or guide). I think somebody already suggested this a few months ago. ϒpsilon (talk) 04:20, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Yes, regions need a separate approach. To get back to the original idea posted here, there's one other option to limit the number of empty outline articles for cities. I've suggested it before, but it was buried under another discussion. Rather than adding an extra category, we could add an extra information box to a stub page, refraining from adding a template and making it an empty outline directly and offering the benefits of a redirect without actually redirecting. Maybe it's a terrible idea, I don't know, but I've made a quick example here. I'm not even sure where it should link to (just the edit version of the page, a templated page or an info page), but you get the general idea. Personally, I think such stub pages are friendlier to the eye and more useful to travellers than almost empty templates are. We could then proceed to add a template when there's some more information. JuliasTravels (talk) 09:31, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Well the correct solution is to add some information to the empty articles. Take a look at Wikivoyage:Germany Expedition, Wikivoyage:England Expedition and Wikivoyage:Wales Expedition; in particular do a history compare between current and start of project. The table numbers need to be updated manually but clicking on an entry gives you an actual list of article. Pick a country or state/region. The first thing to tackle is the bottom right field, articles with no listings at all, the bulk of these can be addressed with formatting then take a look at Wikipedia for sights of interest. Next group to tackle is has no - sleep (bottom left) look at Google maps for hotels in the area or check out another travel website to add one or two entries. During this process finding places without accommodation identifies the articles to merge. While doing this keep eye on those in the green needs only - check, these may well be usable status candidates, just need a little cleaning up. Next task is then generally looking at the articles with no see listings. Usually during this whole process start to look at the bottom level regions and clean them up. --Traveler100 (talk) 10:58, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Those expeditions are interesting. I didn't realize we had them for countries/regions. On the topic of outline and stub articles, It's odd to me that a user would want to put forth the effort to adding a template box and locating nearby cities to link to but NOT want to put forth the minimal effort it often takes to add some content to the article. Why is there so much interest in marking/deleting/banning low-content articles but none in adding content? If there is a particularly problematic area, why not just bring that up instead of always proposing some massive overhaul of all articles sitewide? If a user stumbled upon 53 empty outlines in Cape Verde (for example), asking if we can delete some might actually get support, but proposing a deletion of all such articles on WV or adding a template on that basis just seems like a lot of effort put in for no meaningful gains (and potentially some losses). The bar for usable status is quite low, so I don't see how adding another status would be that useful. If it would merely be to separate empty outlines and outlines with at least 2 sentences, I think the user is better off just doing that work when they find it to eliminate their own problem. The region status is a separate issue. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 14:43, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
The bar for "usable" is indeed quite low for city articles. However, with all the child articles needed it can be quite high - if not to say too high - for continents, countries or larger regions. And the current text for outlines suggest that Europe or Canada lacks content (both are ranked "outline"), which frankly is an absurd statement to make. Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:02, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
You're mistaking our status templates as article status templates. They are not. They indicate the status of the entire guide, which is hierarchical and can include hundreds of pages for large countries. Powers (talk) 22:06, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Well the way they are currently formulated does not indicate that. It is true in essence that our status ratings are hardly ever of the article in question alone, but they are formulated as if they were. Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:36, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
If it's confusing, then we should look to clarify that somehow. Powers (talk) 22:24, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
It wouldn't be obvious for someone coming here from another wiki (such as Wikipedia) where the status box on the talk page is indeed rating the individual content page only, and not whatever subtopic articles may fit under it. From Talk:Canada#Destination article statuses it looks like Terra Nova National Park is holding the whole country back? That's not obvious without reading policy very carefully. K7L (talk) 01:15, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Have there been any known bugs with the new banner extension?[edit]

These days the Hebrew Wikivoyage community is also looking into adding the new banner extension. We are currently in the testing phase of the new banners, trying to see if we can catch any important bugs that need to be fixed before we add the new banners to all our 2,067 articles.

I do recall seeing a discussion in the English Wikivoyage sometime in the last year about specific bugs related to the new banner extension which everyone must just accept and "live with" (if I am not mistaking, the discussion was about how the good old Table of Contents would sometimes appear in various random articles as a result, or some similar annoying bug which is caused by the new banner extension).

Do the new banners work well in all platforms (mobile+ desktop) and browsers, even though it relies on Javascript?

Please let me know which specific bugs you have discovered that occurred as a result of installing the banner extension having the new banners replace all the old ones. ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 10:41, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

The bug with the content table appearing has been addresses. Have not seen any issues for a couple of months now. --Traveler100 (talk) 10:46, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
So the new banners are flawless ? they work well in all platforms and browsers ? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 21:00, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
I use a variety of browsers and haven't seen any bug in a while. Syced (talk) 03:33, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Useful site[edit]

See here How can we incorporate this info here? —Justin (koavf)TCM 03:16, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Interesting tool! I think Wikivoyage already has a lot of this data in prose? The rest depends where the traveller comes from, which we can not tell as we are intended to be usable as a book too. I don't really think it would be a great idea to link to them either, per our external links policy. Cheers! Syced (talk) 07:35, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
But yeah, quite a nice tool! Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:16, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
It is indeed quite a nice tool & the site is not infested with advertising. I think we should link to it somewhere.
He says there will be an app "probably open source" for it & an API. We should track developments & when they reach a good point, look at integrating the app with WV apps, adding WV links to their app, and/or using the Basetrip API here. Pashley (talk) 12:31, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
There's a really good argument to be made that linking this site somewhere is in the interest of travelers and that for that reason, we should make an exception to our usual policy on external links. But where would you suggest linking it, other than in an app? Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:00, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek: Maybe in the infoboxes? —Justin (koavf)TCM 04:14, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
You mean for each country? Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:15, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek: Yes. It would only be relevant for country-level data, of course (you don't need a passport to get into Indianapolis). So maybe a line that says "Passport info" and a link to this site by way of a template. If the site changes its architecture or goes down, then it can be easily removed by a bot and it will be excluded from print versions. —Justin (koavf)TCM 04:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
Seems like a good idea to me. What does everyone else think? Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:28, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
If we decide to link to the site, the infobox or Understand would be the best places to put that link. Normally we want to have the information here rather than in some other guide, but that would mean a lot of writing (even without including all the embassies). ϒpsilon (talk) 04:57, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Possible integration[edit]

Email from the author I don't think this is confidential, so I am reproducing what the founder of the site sent to me:

I have a question though - it says "The rest depends where the traveller comes from" which is not quite true - if you remove the "From" thing you get this (the same minus the comparisons), for example for France - https://www.thebasetrip.com/en/france-travel-information
There is also a pending (not online yet!) blog post which should maybe clear some doubts about monetization/ads etc. - https://www.thebasetrip.com/en/blog/unexpected-launch

In case we decide to go forward, I think this is relevant. —Justin (koavf)TCM 04:37, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

If they charge or press people for contributions or subscriptions, I don't think it would be Wiki-like to link them. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:57, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek: Agreed that we should only link to and promote free culture and knowledge. The entire idea that Evan and Maj had was that we could all get together and share knowledge for our mutual benefit. What a beautiful thing. Some amount of "can you please give your time or money so we can stay afloat" is fair--that happens here as well. But real monetization or locking down the site to be proprietary is unacceptable. —Justin (koavf)TCM 05:33, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
We are in agreement. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:11, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Help needed: Malformed coordinates, URLs, emails[edit]

Here are a few spooky things that might need to be fixed: http://wvpoi.batalex.ru/download/listings/wikivoyage-listings-en-latest.validation-report.html

You can uncheck categories at the top, to not show email for instance. This page is updated every 2 weeks.

Thanks a lot! Syced (talk) 08:01, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Syced, is it possible to have it for all languages? --Andyrom75 (talk) 07:44, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
It is also available for Russian, French, German: http://wvpoi.batalex.ru . If you want to add more languages, please post an issue at https://github.com/baturin/wikivoyage-listings/issues thanks! :-) Syced (talk) 10:33, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
If it's not a big effort you can add all the languages, otherwise it doesn't matter. The request is just to give to all the admins or users in general the chance to use a new tool (regardless of the nature of the tool) :-) --Andyrom75 (talk) 16:58, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
I don't see a way to remove or mark those that I have fixed - thus others are going to end up checking them again? -- Matroc (talk) 03:23, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
Indeed that's a known problem with this tool: There is no way to "mark as fixed". On the positive side, the list is shown in random order so that you have less chances of checking the same items as someone else, and it is updated every 2 weeks, which is much more frequent than the previous tool I was maintaining. If the randomization is bothering you, please remove the "this.shuffleIssues();" line from the HTML. Thanks a lot! Syced (talk) 07:56, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

destination "user rating" and "traveling style[edit]

could be great to provide a way to "note" the interest of a page with several criteria "beauty" "historical interest" "physical difficulty" "engagement" "scientifical interest" could be great to provide a way to "classify" "Do" destination amongst "traveling style" for example a "night in tropical forest using indigenous lifestyle" should be classified "roots lifestyle" or an "difficult treck" should be classified as "well trained trecker"

(Jlmalet (talk) 15:40, 5 September 2016 (UTC))

I am not entirely sure what you mean and how you envision this looking? I think our current prose is - or should be - sufficient and there is no need for another hard to maintain layer of... something. Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:24, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

A relevant Humble Book Bundle[edit]

See here This may seem a little tout-y but I don't have a horse in this race. This is relevant for us as those interested in travel but also because Humble Bundles have given a lot of money to the Wikimedia Foundation (and you can often choose that as a charity but it appears not in this instance). —Justin (koavf)TCM 19:17, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

FYI - Links from Commons[edit]

I just realized Commons doesn't link back to us. I asked about it here: Commons:Village_pump#In_other_projects Acer (talk) 21:20, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

The challenge is that Commons main form of organization is categories while Wikivoyage is articles, and Wikidata links articles to articles and categories to categories. If you look at places with articles on commons they do have links to Wikivoyage while smaller destinations with just categories do not. For example commons:Aberystwyth does link but commons:category:Aberystwyth and commons:category:Devil's Bridge, Ceredigion do not. Would you want to create an article in Commons for every location in Wikivoyage? --Traveler100 (talk) 06:08, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
There was a lot of controversy on Commons when Wikidata was to be introduced there, for more or less this reason. A Commons category is mostly about entities that could have articles in the Wikipedias, while the Wikipedias have categories only for some of the entities. Before Wikidata, categories were often linked to Wikipedia articles. There was to be some solution, but I missed the final discussion.
I think it is non-controversial to add old-style iw-links to Commons categories (à la [[en:Aberystwyth]]). Probably mentioning the Wikivoyage article similarly or with a template (à la {{Commonscat}}) on the category description page should be uncontroversial too. Somebody should also research whether Wikidata does provide for some easy way to add these links (as an additional property or something).
Articles on Commons (or "galleries", as they are called over there) should be created only if one can add a good collection of images or if the gallery can be supposed to be maintained later.
--LPfi (talk) 09:24, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Job for adventurous travellers[edit]

This Job Will Pay You $39k to Travel the World and Brave Its Most Extreme Conditions for Columbia Sportswear. Would it suit anyone here? Pashley (talk) 18:20, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Picture help[edit]

Hi. This goes out to all the picture and formatting experts. Due to a lot of recent edits of both myself and - what I presume to be - one person using more than one dynamic IP the article for rail travel in Germany is now much more up to date, has prose that is - hopefully - easier on the eyes and ears than before and has improved coverage. Unfortunately, the image distribution is rather bottom heavy with (next to) none at the top and (at least on my screen) more towards the bottom than there is text. So if you know anything about layout and photos, even if you don't know a thing about the topic in question, please have a look. As an aside, I hope to get the article ready for promotion to guide and a FTT nomination, but I don't think it's "there" yet. Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:33, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

True that, and there is a lot of room for photos higher up. If nobody is opposed to having pictures not related to the text next to it, that is. ϒpsilon (talk) 16:46, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
The aforementioned IP editor moved the ICE map from the very top to somewhere lower. Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:26, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Gateway Error 502[edit]

Trying to click on map icon (geo) and getting this error - it may be temporary but thought I would mention it -- Matroc (talk) 03:52, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, the old (more functional) version of the dynamic map was down already yesterday. Are they maybe going to discontinue it now? :( ϒpsilon (talk) 04:47, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
And the new one has even less functionality, cannot see nearby articles.--Traveler100 (talk) 15:23, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
I have been seeing that error for a few days. Just tested at Xiamen & got it again. Pashley (talk) 17:58, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

RevisionSlider[edit]

Birgit Müller (WMDE) 14:56, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Map image request[edit]

Can someone who is familiar with creating region maps create a new one for North Wales with Denbighshire, Flintshire and Wrexham (county) merged. Maybe also new colours that are not so close to each other. --Traveler100 (talk) 20:14, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

North Wales Wikivoyage map.png
@Traveler100 I may not be as familiar with creating region maps, but I gave it a shot either way. How's this?
-- Wauteurz (talk) 15:16, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
@Wauteurz, great thanks. --Traveler100 (talk) 18:44, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Open call for Project Grants[edit]

IEG barnstar 2.png

Greetings! The Project Grants program is accepting proposals from September 12 to October 11 to fund new tools, research, offline outreach (including editathon series, workshops, etc), online organizing (including contests), and other experiments that enhance the work of Wikimedia volunteers. Project Grants can support you and your team’s project development time in addition to project expenses such as materials, travel, and rental space.

Also accepting candidates to join the Project Grants Committee through October 1.

With thanks, I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 14:49, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

11 Digit Phones in San Francisco?[edit]

So for some reason, someone went into San Francisco/The_Avenues and changed all the phone numbers to 11-digit numbers. n-nnn-nnn-nnnn. Is this correct? I thought in the US, that this was only done with toll-free numbers. L. Challenger (talk) 20:25, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Here's your proof: [10] PerryPlanet (talk) 21:03, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
@Challenger l: We should have international dialing codes, which for the United States would have eleven digits. —Justin (koavf)TCM 13:56, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Yes, we should have international numbers, but the change "+1 415 765-0497" → "+1-415-765-0497" would mean, if I read Wikivoyage:Phone numbers correctly, that the international prefix has to be used even for local calls. That seems unlikely, although the "proof" linked above could be interpreted so. --LPfi (talk) 19:15, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
I meant that the numbers were all linked by hyphens - I've been typing out +n nnn nnn-nnnn for phone numbers that weren't the toll-free variety before now. L. Challenger (talk) 20:03, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
If the locality has ten-digit dialing, I use two hyphens. If it has seven-digit dialing, I use one. And toll-free means three hyphens -- all eleven digits. However, I could be wrong, as it seems even with 10-digit dialing, local callers still need to use the 1 prefix (which, within the U.S., is a long-distance code not a country code; it's apparently a coincidence that they're both '1'). Powers (talk) 01:50, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
Only the largest U.S. markets (LA, NYC, Chicago, and now SF) require 11-digit dialing, due to area code overlays (in fact, the chart of country-specific examples in Wikivoyage:Phone numbers shows the different examples). There is a caveat to this, however, which is that you only need to dial the "1" before the area code if you're on a local landline. On a cell phone, 10 digits is enough (though the call will still go through if you use all 11 digits). However, since we don't know which one a traveler would be using, it makes sense to default to landline format. PerryPlanet (talk) 02:32, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
There was to be a second area code overlapping +1 415, so the new format should be +1 415-NXX-XXXX with ten digits dialled locally. Eleven digits usually appears in the largest markets, where nothing (including landline calls to the same city) is "free" or flat-rated. K7L (talk) 15:49, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

For future reference, the North American Numbering Plan Association maintains a list of area codes that require 10-digit or 11-digit (the latter are listed as "1+10D") dialing for local calls. And yes, area code 415 now requires 11 digits, at least for landlines. Eco84 (talk) 15:31, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

So w:Area codes 415 and 628 got this wrong, they claim w:ten-digit dialing but cite this as w:WP:RS. The original source raises exactly the 1+10D landline issue you mention. K7L (talk) 16:48, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

WT article import[edit]

I managed to get a list of articles on WT that we're missing. There's about 2900 of them. I placed all the red links in my user space for reference.

I also have the XML dumps with full history for those pages. 58 Mb uncompressed. I read the policy pages and I know importing is discouraged for SEO reasons but I'm not sure it's really that relevant at this point. It's a small subset (there's 47000 total on WV) and we're adding new articles much faster than they are. There's about 3500 more articles on WV than WT right now. Since they have those 2900 unique to them that means 6400ish unique articles have been written here since the fork.

I'd also volunteer to curate the material, place them in my userspace at first and check each one individually to see if they're worth keeping. I had been doing similar work on EnWiki with a large list of machine translated pages. WT gets new contributors from time to time, well meaning people who don't know the background story. I dislike the idea that all their work will be wasted when that place gets inevitably overrun by spam bots. It already is to some extent... Is this is something that could be considered? Acer (talk) 22:23, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

I think the duplicate content penalty is definitely still an issue. We're making headway as the two sites' content diverges, but it's slow going and I would fear that importation would reverse some of those gains. Better to treat that list as a list of requested articles and write them from scratch. Powers (talk) 01:48, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
@Acer: @LtPowers: I agree that before we mass add content from Wikitravel we keep it somewhere separate. First off, it would be helpful to do some (semi-)automated replacements just for SEO purposes (like "extremely"->"very" and "tasty"->"delicious") and then have editors who are willing to look through the content individually before uploading. I would be willing to assist. —Justin (koavf)TCM 04:09, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
There has been a great deal of work to up the quality of content on Wikivoyage, my first reaction would be a negative one to this. However the idea of a list of needed article is not a bad one. Could you remove from the list all the redirect pages and also order by country? --Traveler100 (talk) 06:43, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
@Traveler100: For what it's worth, I am working on redirects and removing them from the userpage now. —Justin (koavf)TCM 07:04, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
...And also deleting items at Wikitravel which should have been gone awhile ago there as well. —Justin (koavf)TCM 07:12, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

@LtPowers: I just ran a search for #redirect on the XML dump and got 1259 hits. Then there's going to be empty husks, one liners, inadequate/inappropriate/unsuitable articles, spam pages and I even saw a misplaced user page. By the time we finish combing through I reckon there might be less than a thousand pages left. Given the SEO concern we could be even stricter in accepting these than we are with original pages here. And we'll implement Koavfs suggestion to replace words with synonyms. If we end up with a few hundred higher quality pages I feel that's a fair trade for a small penalty, if any. In fact I think our biggest problem is the number of sites that link to us. Per Alexa WT has incoming links from almost 17000 sites, we only have 2000...

@koavf: Yes, I already did some find/replace on the raw XML file. Replaced some templates, added edit comment attribution to each revision and modified usernames to include a WT prefix. While it would be very easy and quite practical to do what you suggest on the XML itself, it would break attribution. But it can be done with a script once the articles are uploaded (if there's agreement for importing)

@Traveler100:I share your concern with article quality, that's why I'm proposing importing all articles into my userspace at first. Then we can work through the list and decide on what's worth keeping. I'll commit to checking each one myself and doing any necessary fixes (see below). I'll see what I can think of to organize the list the way you suggested. I can't do it with simple terminal commands. Will need a script I think.

So, taking everyone's comments into consideration and the concerns about importing, I'll ask just to be allowed to import into my userspace (user talk actually as it's non-indexed) at first so there will be no quality or seo concerns. Me, User:Koavf and anyone else who wants to help would comb through and produce a much smaller list of of higher quality articles to be considered for permanent importation. We'll replace words with synonyms to lessen the SEO impact. We then would submit this refined list for evaluation and acceptance by the community. Nothing gets moved to article space before that. Would that alleviate some of the concerns? Acer (talk) 10:23, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

I don't think there's an issue with importing to your user space as an experiment. I do agree with a "quality" standard, though. Apart from the SEO concerns, there has also been ample discussion about the many very small outlines. Even with a minimal intro and a listing or two, such outlines are not considered a gain by all. While we don't delete the existing ones, it has always been discouraged to mass-create them. The same would be possible by importing from Wikipedia, for example. I do think creating hundreds of such small articles should be avoided in this case too, then. So I think focussing on the larger, higher quality articles is the best way to go. Nice to see that list, though :) JuliasTravels (talk) 11:29, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
Great, we're in agreement. Let's see if others are on board. Thanks! Acer (talk) 14:11, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
I have a number of thoughts about this effort but due to past history would prefer to stay out of this discussion. The only comment I would make is that if this effort does move forward there cannot be any failure whatsoever in ensuring that the imports comply 100% with every line of the CC-SA license - if there is ANY question about whether correct attribution has been provided then the imports should be deleted as quickly as possible. -- Ryan 22:22, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
I followed the model used when the fork happened, attribution in the edit summary of each revision (Import from wikitravel.org/en). I also added a WT prefix to usernames to differentiate them from any possible duplicate here. This was also done back then. A copy of the license is linked to at the bottom of every page here already and any changes we make after importing will be recorded in the history. That I think covers all attribution requirements in the license. The ShareAlike requirements are fully covered also. Did I miss anything? Acer (talk) 22:58, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
"(WT-en) " is the preferred username prefix; that matches what we used for migration. I guess my main concern is that doing this could lead to WT doing the reverse. Sure, we know they already have the legal right to do it, but why encourage it or tip them off? Powers (talk) 23:18, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
The only reason it was sufficient to attribute imports to a "(WT-en)" user during the initial import is because there is a corresponding user page with proper attribution; if the new import is done without the corresponding user page (and its corresponding references) then the attribution is probably insufficient. -- Ryan • (talk) • 06:13, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
But we will be providing the name/ pseudonym of the authors and also say that they were active in another website. This actually goes beyond the requirements. I reread the license terms and I can't find any issues. I placed the sections relevant to attribution here and bolded the relevant parts. What part do you think we are failing to comply with? Acer (talk) 09:47, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
Creative Commons has, in the past at least, used the terminology "you must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor". I believe they've changed this terminology in the human-readable versions of their licenses, but I'm not 100% clear on the history. Anyway, when we migrated, out of an abundance of caution, we interpreted "the manner specified by the author" to include not just the username proper, but a link to the author's user page, as well as attribution in the page footer according to one's preferred display name (as opposed to username). Neither of these can happen without importation of the user pages and preferences as well. Powers (talk) 20:26, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Let my register my oppose vote on any copying from WT. We might get inspiration what to do articles on, for sure, but they should be bottom up written by us with our own words (and better yet first hand experience) rather than copying a single comma from "that other site". Not only is there the concern with the fork/duplication penalty and the possibility that the three paid admins and five spambot IPs that still remain on that site might get similar ideas in reverse, I just don't think we need to do that. Our new content since the fork/migration is good. Sure, there might be a few nuggets of gold in what has happened over there since almost everybody left, but the main thing to copy are imho the ideas of what to write an article on and not an article itself. Besides, it would be interesting to see a split how many of those articles are destinations, how many are travel topics and so on. Probably a lot of them would just be redundant or have been axed with good reason over here. Hobbitschuster (talk) 01:52, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

I did a quick sampling of the list and thought about this a little more. I also oppose the idea of importing these articles. There is little point to having article with no listings and a just walking into controversy on copyrights. Maybe use this list to identify needed articles but then just add the location name to Wikivoyage:Requested articles‎ and add a red link to the appropriate region. --Traveler100 (talk) 07:30, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
That's not happening. The plan is for nothing to be transferred to article space unless it's of sufficient quality and has been properly formatted. I'm just asking here to have these pages into userspace so I and others can work on them. See these pages here, they are much better than the average article we have.. (hit Random pages a few times) Tychy Cirali Sinj Pian Camuno Luçon Dania beach and they already include information for the listings, just to need to format using the template. There are mony others like this, but not that many, a few hundred maybe. Everything else will be discarded Acer (talk) 08:51, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
I'm struggling to understand the utility of such an import. If I wanted to do import any WT (or other CC licensed content) then I would just create that article directly in WV or in my user space. What do you actually get out of importing all of these articles?
If you know that Dania beach is a really awesome article on WT then just go ahead and build it here. No need to import it it 'to work on' first. Andrewssi2 (talk) 20:46, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
Not sure I understood you. You mean copy/paste the text? If we do that then there would need to be an attribution template in the body of the article linking to WT. That's not ideal.. Importing the whole history is safer license wise. Also, I don't know which articles are good and which aren't. That's why I wanted to import into userspace and then do a triage. FInally, importing an XML dump is much simpler/faster than copying hundreds of pages by hand.Acer (talk) 23:01, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
I think what was meant was that you can see what is in the WT article, verify it from sources outside WT and upgrade / create our article accordingly. I have to reiterate here that I do not think copying anything from that other site under any circumstances is a wise move. In my opinion we have made a lot of headway by things including random drift at our articles (IP editors or simple wording changes) that google recognizes. Importing or copying from that other site would hurt that more than even the most diligent work over years could help us. I would like a list of genuine travel topics that site has and we don't. Destination articles either come about by people with local knowledge showing up or they don't. Forcing it is not gonna help us. You can get a city article to "usable" without having been there if it is in a country with reasonable "on the internet percentage" for businesses, but those articles do not do much good besides completing regions and whatnot and should not be created just 'cause. The best impetus for new articles is someone with local knowledge starting them. Even if that someone has a limited grasp of English or has touty intentions. So, let's look through the three or four travel topics worth salvaging, create them here from scratch and for the most part forget that other site even exists. I am actually not sure we should even import this stuff to anybody's user page without clear consensus in favor. Hobbitschuster (talk) 23:20, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
Ryan, Hobbitschuster, and (particularly) Powers' arguments have convinced me we're playing with fire here. I think it might be useful to retain the list of articles present on WT and absent here, but beyond that I oppose in the strongest possible terms any notion of copying from the other site, and frankly (germane to Powers' comments) would love for this discussion to be brought to a speedy close, in case any prying eyes from over there are watching. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 01:29, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
I was trying hard to not give the impression that we would forbid this process, but the benefits are minuscule and we really need to keep away from the IB company if we can possibly help it.
Basically great intention, but there are safer and better ways to achieve new content. Andrewssi2 (talk) 05:32, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
That's alright. I've been editing wikis for over a decade now. Sometimes you get your way, sometimes you don't. Archive away :) Acer (talk) 23:26, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

WT database / XML dumps[edit]

(related to the above but didn't want it to get lost in the discussions)

This is the complete database dump / back up of WT in all 21 languages. This includes all pages in all namespaces. Download here. The file is compressed using 7zip it's 370 MB in size. XML's are plain text files that can be edited in Notepad, but the uncompressed English language XML reaches 65 GB, so handle with care :) Acer (talk) 14:11, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Apologies if this question is answered somewhere in the discussion above, but what version / date of WT is this dump? How was it created? Thanks. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 20:48, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
@Andrewssi2: They were done between September 3rd and 9th. If you download the file, each language is in a separate folder with the date the archiving was started. Most took a few hours, English a couple days. They were made using Wikiteam's tools, specifically the Dumpgenerator. It's a a script that interfaces with MediaWiki's API. Acer (talk) 22:29, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Replacing "Autobahn" with the less well known "E" symbol[edit]

Have a look at edits like this one, where the Autobahns in the routebox were replaced by the European routes (symbolized by E). Now, I am not a car person (as might be well known already), but nobody in Germany ever talks about the E whatsitsface. People only ever refer to the Autobahn A something. Often shortened to A something. And the A numbers are ubiquitous in signage whereas the E numbers show up erratically at best. I propose to change those back and if possible formulate / clarify policy on routeboxes in that regard. Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:14, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

For Germany the Autobahn numbers are much more useful for driving, in my experience only in Belgium are they commonly seen on road signs. --Traveler100 (talk) 04:17, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
There's room for both the Autobahn numbers and European route numbers in the routebox. ϒpsilon (talk) 06:15, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
I agree; both would be fine (and is commonly seen on signs in the Netherlands as well), but removing the A-numbers is not a good idea. When asking directions, getting traffic updates or just discussing routes with locals, A-numbers are usually far more useful than E-numbers. I've left User:Iceandsnow, who has been making these changes, a message to draw his attention to this discussion so he can weigh in. JuliasTravels (talk) 09:28, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
Is there a policy / information / whatever page on routeboxes? Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:03, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
I believe it's this one: Wikivoyage:Routebox navigation. ϒpsilon (talk) 18:10, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
I would like to insert something along the lines of "if possible and practical, use route names and symbols that are used at the destination". Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:25, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
Please do. Sweden, Norway and Denmark are as far as I know the only countries where roads can have only the E-number and nothing else. Nevertheless, elsewhere the E-numbers are in general always showed on road signs and maps alongside national route numbers. In Germany I remember them on many (if not necessarily all) Autobahn signs alongside the A-numbers. So, I'd say, let's keep both. ϒpsilon (talk) 19:26, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Go next vs see[edit]

I'm still a newbie to this project but I'm keen to give back to it this year so am doing more editing and I'm thinking about ways we could improve the project technically (maybe as part of google summer of code). Disclaimer: I'm building an offline wikivoyage app for my next backpacking trip but more about that later.

One thing that is confusing me is I continually see things in the go next section that I don't feel belong there and are better suited in the see section. One great example is the York article. Castle Howard is a day trip not a destination in itself. As a long time paper guidebook user this distinctions is important to me. Go next sections are used to work out places to go and visit and stay, not simply go to see for a day. As a rule of thumb if a go next destination doesn't have a wikivoyage page I would not expect it to be here. What do others feel about this? Has this been discussed before? Is there some way we could give better guidelines to users when editing on what to put here? Jdlrobson (talk) 20:33, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

[w:Castle_Howard] is 15 miles from York, but probably not a destination article in itself. Therefore probably best leave as a 'see' listing.
It isn't that unusual to create 'see' listings outside of the immediate destination if they do not constitute an article by themselves or belong to another destination. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:45, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
In general, "go next" is a list of articles for adjacent or nearby destinations - most often the next town and next major city on each highway or rail line. Actual listings for attractions and activities belong in "see" and "do" respectively. Wikivoyage:What is an article? indicates a destination meets the "can you sleep there?" test, where to be a possible candidate as a usable destination (and not merely a listing) a place should have some way to get in, something to see or do, somewhere to eat and somewhere to sleep. Merrickville is an easy day trip from Ottawa, but it gets an article as it has enough to stand alone. An individual castle? Probably not, it gets a listing.
The one possible exception to forcing listings into see/do/eat/drink/sleep would be a small city or town separated by miles of pasture land from one (or a handful) of tiny villages with a listing or two each. We list contiguous suburbs as part of the city. A group of rural villages? A rare few small-town destinations have the town itself with see/do/sleep... followed by "Nearby" (with the subsections being the names of individual villages, with a brief description and a listing or two in each) followed by "Go next" with the next destinations to actually have an article. For instance, Miami (Oklahoma)#Nearby devotes a subsection to a lead-contaminated ghost town, Picher OK, that's not going to get its own article.
That's rare. In general, "go next" lists destinations with actual articles and roads to those destinations. K7L (talk) 00:34, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
I made this edit based on the above. I've seen many other articles which have the same problem so please shout now if there's any issue with this edit :) Jdlrobson (talk) 05:22, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
I think it's fine. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:35, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Make subway/train lines more prominent in dynamic maps[edit]

No tourists come to Tokyo/Roppongi by car, but the dynamic map only shows roads.

Two subway lines cross at Roppongi station (also serving some neighbouring stations that some might find more convenient) but they are not visible on the map unless you zoom to house-level (and even then, they are masked by any street that happens to run above))

How about making subway/train lines more visible? Tourists tend to use public transport more than the locals. This is especially true for big cities and countries like Japan (but I guess we can't have per-area map styles). Thanks!Syced (talk) 06:03, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

I absolutely agree with that. I noticed this issue when looking up stuff for a trip to Seoul (Seoul/Jongno) and Busan (Busan/Central) and found it quite annoying to have to switch between the dynamic map with all the sights and the subway map with just the station names. Drat70 (talk) 06:36, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
Great idea. Most major Chinese cities would definitely benefit as well. I would still employ the caveat that it should be used on destinations with a well defined metro system (Tokyo, Seoul, London, Shanghai, etc). --Andrewssi2 (talk) 06:45, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
I like the idea too, but just wanted to raise the potential problem of light rail lines. In Germany and France there are many cities without a subway that have light rail lines that are almost as fast and frequent as subways are in other cities and they are also heavily utilized by tourists. Hobbitschuster (talk) 12:56, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
I would want light rail lines displayed as well (easiest way around Melbourne for sure). What would be the problem? Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:15, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
It would be good if we had better maps which showed the metro lines and stations clearly. In the meantime, one workaround is to have markers for the stations as in Paris/1st arrondissement#Get_in or Glasgow#Get_in. AlasdairW (talk) 23:42, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
The layer "traffic line network" shows all the public transport lines. Railways, subways and buses, etc. Including line numbers and stops by name. -- Joachim Mey2008 (talk) 04:47, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Cities listed in the Nicaragua article[edit]

Hi

I recently started a talk page thread on the Nicaragua page concerning which cities should be listed. Your input - any input - would be very welcome; currently I would have to go ahead unilaterally which is not exactly desirable. Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:59, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Is there a tool to compare the similarity of WV text with the text of other sites?[edit]

I am asking because the search engine rank according to startpage of Nicaragua is quite bad while that for Managua is a lot better, despite what I would perceive more edits to the former than the latter. I would like to see where there is still copied content in those articles to possibly edit it out as best practicable. Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:35, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

"Copyscape", linked from Wikivoyage:Search Expedition#Tools, is somewhat useful although not superb. -- Ryan • (talk) • 20:52, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Country codes[edit]

Hi

I am not sure whether all who will read this are aware, but all phone numbers are supposed to include country codes preceded by the "+" symbol. (e.g. +49 (area code without zero) (local number) for Germany). While I am trying to fix those where I am able to, it is a task that looks like a bot could better do it.

Are there any possibilities to either create a bot or make it inherent in the listing editor that it adds the country code of the country (as per the breadcrumbs) if no country code is found? With some way to turn it off for false positives?

I am sorry if the question is stupid, I am not exactly a coding expert... Hobbitschuster (talk) 01:58, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

I did create a AutoWikiBrowser script under User:Traveler100bot to do this but was not 100% reliable so had to run in semi-auto mode checking each update. Have not run for a while, maybe time to do another scan through pages (may be a couple of week before can get round to it as on the road at the moment). --Traveler100 (talk) 04:16, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Hobbitschuster, Traveler100, days ago I've proposed the introduction of this new property in wikidata. It's necessary to clean the data stored in Wikidata and in all the projects that use them. Once implemented, can be easily created a local category to check the correctness of all the numbers stored in the listings. I suggest to support to speed up its implementation (creation & population via bot). --Andyrom75 (talk) 17:53, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Interesting book?[edit]

Has anyone here read Overbooked: The Exploding Business of Travel and Tourism? The one review I saw was quite positive. Does it have anything to say that should affect our approach? Pashley (talk) 13:09, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Saftey on or near bodies of water..[edit]

Do we have a topic on Coastal safety, or Saftey near bodies of water ?

It's been an issue in the UK , in respect of the tragic incident at Camber Sands. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:56, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

We have at least Beaches, Water sports and Swimming, which all touch the subject in their Stay safe sections, but they are only outlines. --LPfi (talk) 19:45, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Pagebanner visualization bug[edit]

In diff pages like this one, the pagebanner is not shown. --Andyrom75 (talk) 17:57, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Who is charge ti fix issues on this extension? --Andyrom75 (talk) 12:06, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

SEO editing[edit]

Hello

While I am no SEO expert and don't know whether this is an effective use of our time, I think the following is at least worth a shot:

Search for our page (preferably high profile pages like countries or continents) and the page on that other site and then put their URLs into this tool. Then try to bring the percentage figure down by editing the sections that it says are copied. We can see after a few weeks (using anonymous search via startpage) whether our efforts were worth it. Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:21, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

This is one good idea. There are others at Wikivoyage:Search_Expedition and more on its talk page, Mentioning WV often on social networking sites also helps; every time a friend mentions someplace he or she is about to visit or is moving to, post a link & suggest they contribute as well. Adding simple things, like more good photos from Commons or more wikilinks, also helps. Pashley (talk) 23:27, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
Automated editing I would additionally support automated or semi-automated editing that changed out many words and phrases for roughly equivalent ones (e.g. "delicious" for "tasty"). —Justin (koavf)TCM 01:27, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Please don't change individual words using synonyms - search engines are smart enough to recognize that effort as an attempted SEO cheat and will often penalize the offending site in rankings. When rewriting please rewrite full sections. -- Ryan • (talk) • 01:34, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
@Wrh2: Thanks--I didn't realize this. Makes sense. If someone made a list in userspace of the most-viewed articles that we have which also have the most similar content to Wikitravel, we could start working on massaging those texts (and updating them as well--it's important that high-traffic pages are up-to-date). —Justin (koavf)TCM 01:41, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Good Commons pictures[edit]

Wikimedia Commons has a rather large list of Featured pictures. Someone might go through them looking at which ones might be used here. Also useful, but less work, would be to just patrol the Main Page with its Picture of the Day to see if those are useful.

I look occasionally but do not have either the time or the visual judgment to take on the whole task. Any volunteers? Is someone perhaps already doing this? Pashley (talk) 23:50, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that Ikan is already updating articles with featured pictures, but more people assisting in that effort would obviously be welcome. -- Ryan • (talk) • 23:58, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
Exactly. There are also a lot of good Quality Images which aren't featured but are really useful for our purposes. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:15, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Pages for Olympics[edit]

So my students have settled on improving pages related to Pyeongchang 2018. Now, looking at pages like Rio 2016 or Sochi 2014, it does seem like they are rather poor. M\Something that struck me is the lack of consistency in the get in/around and eat/drink/buy sections. Rio has no Get in/around/eat/drink/sleep sections at all, and is a sad testatement to the fact that wiki projects rely heavily on someone caring - and clearly, nobody cared to even add pointers "see the Rio de Janeiro page. Sochi 2014 is better, but Get in simply states - read Sochi page. Get around does provide some useful information, through much less then the Sochi page. Still, I think it makes sense to discuss Olympics-only transportation at those pages, and keep regular one at the city pages. But eat and drink are again empty, and stay has a single hotel - once again, a far cry from the useful info at Sochi. Unsurpsingly, London_2012 is better, and can be used as a boilerplate for future events, with a number of generic stuff that should be copied into each future Olympics article. Once again, however, the buy/eat/drink/sleep sections are mostly empty; through I do note that two out of four paragraphs of sleep discuss Olympic specifics. In conclusion, I think that we should formalize some sort of event page guide, in particular - stress that they should only provide event specific info, and otherwise refer readers to pages about relevant cities. Buy, eat and drink and sleep sections shout be empty and probably deleted, and should never list individual locations, only discuss how the event information affects the city pages (see London 2012 last 2 paras for what I mean by that). With that in mind, I'd also propose inserting a standardized text into Pyeongchang 2018, Tokyo 2020 and Beijing 2022 based on London 2012, i.e. "General information about traveling to/in/shopping locations/drinking/eating establishments/accommodation to/in Foo-placeappears in the Foo-place article." Sounds good? PS. One final thing - there seems to be an overlap between content in Prepare>Accommodations and Sleep sections. Not sure how to fix it, but we should not have two sections about essentially the same topic. --Hanyangprofessor2 (talk) 07:28, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, given that practically nobody of our current contributors seems to be knowledgeable about/interested in the Olympic games, the last few Olympics articles are next to useless (Vancouver 2010 is the last good Winter Olympics article). Great to see that we have some people onboard who'd like to help out with Pyeongchang 2018. By the way, contributions to our articles of other South Korean destinations would also be very welcome. ϒpsilon (talk) 08:14, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
I'm interested in the Olympics but not as much from a travel perspective and I've also been busy lately. WV just needs the number of contributors to grow. Otherwise there will always holes like this in the future. Gizza (roam) 09:11, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Gutenberg books[edit]

Gutenberg.org has over 50,000 free, legally downloadable, books. It is all older material for which copyright has expired, so (at least in the US) legally in the public domain and freely usable.

We already use them some, e.g. On the trail of Marco Polo and On the trail of Kipling's Kim are based on Gutenberg books and quote them extensively. Other articles have links, e.g. Retiring_abroad#Housing links to some 19th century cookbooks for those who might want traditional dishes from home.

There are some Gutenberg bookshelves that look likely to have more things we can use. e.g. Travel Bookshelf and Countries Bookshelf.

I'd say Gutenberg is another resource we should be using much as we do Commons, part of the huge range of sites that are part of the global commons. In fact we should be actively looking for ways to use them more. Pashley (talk) 15:39, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Other destinations section vs see section[edit]

I was looking at Gangwon and similar pages (Pennsylvania, etc.) - and I have trouble figuring out the difference between the "other destinations" section and "see" section. Both list non-city level attractions like parks, etc. What guides placing them in one or the other? I think they may be better of being merged. Is there a Manual of Style like guide to consult on that? --Hanyangprofessor2 (talk) 07:41, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

I'll let somebody more experienced explain the difference, but as a starter, here is the guide you are probably looking for: Wikivoyage:Article_templates/Sections Drat70 (talk) 08:06, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Usually "other destinations" are destinations, which have or should have articles of their own (non-city areas, parks etc.), which should be mentioned in such a section for them to get into the hierarchy, while the See is about attractions or classes of attractions that could (and should) be in See sections of other articles. I think the articles linked above could be tidied a bit; the parks probably all belong in Other destinations, perhaps See was used to avoid redlinking. --LPfi (talk) 16:34, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Align city names with English Wikipedia when straightforward?[edit]

The English Wikipedia uses the name Brasília whereas we use Brasilia (note the accent).

Should we align titles with Wikipedia in simple cases like this one?

I imagine Wikipedia people have pondered the problem for longer than us, so piggy-backing on their policy could save us some time and reduce confusion. What do you think? Cheers! Syced (talk) 10:41, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia is clearly a useful resource when deciding on names for new articles, but moving existing articles because the choice of title is different on Wikipedia is not necessarily a good idea. In some cases, especially for more obscure places, a name can have been chosen against policy and remained unnoticed, in other cases we might have some specific reason for our choice. That means "simple cases" are not always simple. A rule like this would just add one more aspect to take into consideration. If the case is simple, then do the move, if there is an argument, then argue about how the move would benefit the traveller. --LPfi (talk) 11:19, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
See also Wikivoyage_talk:Naming_conventions#Commas_instead_of_brackets. Pashley (talk) 12:05, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Temporary closures[edit]

I've been wondering what to do with listings for places that have closed temporarily, renovations, or any other reasons? The establishments are still there, the contact info remains unchanged, of course. L. Challenger (talk) 11:47, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

When I encounter this, I usually comment the listing out, then when it's back in action, it's easy to restore. Drat70 (talk) 13:22, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
My preference is generally to note the closure in the listing description, that way readers can see "expected re-opening January 2015" and if they are reading it today they will know that the place is probably open again and the listing is just out of date. Commenting out the listing would also work, although that approach means that if the original editor forgets to uncomment it then it's likely to remain hidden for longer than necessary. -- Ryan • (talk) • 14:36, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
A note is better than commenting out. Absence of info tells the traveller nothing. A note saying that a place is closed may avoid disappointment, especially for those who would turn up based on info found elsewhere and without booking or enquiring ahead (been there, done that). Nurg (talk) 10:25, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
On it:voy we are use to insert these kind of "temporary information" through a dedicated template that tracks trough categories all the information that after a certain date should be revised. --Andyrom75 (talk) 23:49, 29 September 2016 (UTC)