Wikivoyage:Travellers' pub

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to 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 are a new user and you have any questions about using the website, try the Arrivals lounge.
  • 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
QA icon clr.svg

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.
Wikivoyage sysop.svg

Switchable static/dynamic map[edit]

Since there's a big dynamic-map-dislike club around here, going around deleting {{Mapframe}}|staticmap=... , I was thinking - would something like this User:Andree.sk/Multimap make the dynamic maps more acceptable? (obviously some better styling would be needed) -- andree.sk(talk) 07:52, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

I like it! --Renek78 (talk) 08:12, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
I saw that you were working on this earlier, and I agree that it's a really good idea and could be incorporated into some articles. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 21:59, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
Interesting. Worth testing out on a few articles, perhaps. Powers (talk) 01:27, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
I don't see how a dynamic map would ever be preferable to a static map in an article that's not a bottom-level destination, but so long as the article doesn't display both maps simultaneously, I won't stand in the way of this idea. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 02:09, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
While helping out with a Wikipedia template (Cyclone map) I monitored/followed some work you may also be interested in: Radio buttons for switching between historical maps and Wikipedia Request for comment: Mapframe maps in infoboxes. -- Matroc (talk) 03:09, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
I would like to have that feature, unless it has drawbacks such as bandwidth use. I often want information that is not available in the static map – and information not available in, or hard to discern from, the dynamic one. One tweak suggestion: try to get identical sizes; when switching back and forth to compare the maps, having to move the mouse hinders keeping focused on the spot being compared (and is also otherwise irritating). --LPfi (talk) 08:08, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Good idea! One other slight improvement to change the "Switch map" text depending on which map is displayed; e.g the dynamic map is displayed, so it says "Switch to static map".--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:59, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Do our readers actually know what static/dynamic map is? Perhaps something like schematic/detailed map could be better? -- andree.sk(talk) 04:46, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
It's misleading to suggest that one variety of map is inherently more or less detailed than the other. A static map can be as detailed or as simple as its maker chooses and so can a dynamic one. The fundamental difference between them from the reader's perspective is spelled out in the current terminology about as plainly as it can be - dynamic maps have a zoom feature when rendered on a browser while static ones don't - which is not to even mention the fact that the current terminology has been in use on this site for seven years and how immensely disruptive it would be to change it. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 04:53, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
It could be printable/zoomable or whatever - the question is if a newcomer sees "Switch to dynamic map", if it would make sense to him. I don't think we explicitly promote the term anywhere outside the pub... ? -- andree.sk(talk) 07:35, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
That's a valid point. "Dynamic map" is certainly used widely in Wikivoyage space pages (e.g. Wikivoyage:Map), but it isn't as far as I know in use anywhere in article space. "Printable" and "zoomable" work as descriptive terms, rather than as name changes.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:33, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
If it's just a question of the labeling for this new switchable map template, "static map" and "interactive map" would probably be clearer for most users. -- Ryan • (talk) • 15:02, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
I like all of the suggested alternative terrms (printable, zoomable, interactive). WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:09, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Great idea! I modified your work to make the style better: User:City-busz/Multimap. Changes:
  • The map can be switched by the thumbnail caption text.
  • The text is changing between "switch to interactive map" and "switch to static map" as needed.
  • The map sizes are identical.--City-busz (talk) 21:22, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
Great idea andree and excellent fine tuning City-busz! I think the next step is to change Template:Regionlist to manage internally the div code and determine the right size for the interactive map. --Andyrom75 (talk) 15:58, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Take a look at Template:Regionlist/Test. I'd like to fetch the height of the image but I don't know how to do it. Any idea? --Andyrom75 (talk) 16:23, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Finally I've done. Now is possible to add just "| regionInteractiveMap=map1" to the Regionlist template and inside the article the relevant "geoshapes". This would be helpful to all the editors that are used with the current syntax. What do you think? --Andyrom75 (talk) 22:50, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Nice work, User:City-busz and User:Andyrom75! I would say it's pretty good for the rollout - we can always improve on it later, if new "requirements" show up. I'd just consider splitting out the static/interactive switcher to a separate template, maybe we'll need it. And perhaps add a switch to prefer the dynamic map (though that might be too hard to implement without duplicating all the code)... In any case, great that it could be done without additional javascript! -- andree.sk(talk) 06:07, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for your work User:Andyrom75! Great to see that it works within the region template. One thing that I noticed is that this solution doesn't work with the mobile view, but I don't know why: https://en.m.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Template:Regionlist/Test --City-busz (talk) 09:41, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
User:City-busz, it's a known issue that collapsable area doesn't work on mobile view. See phabricator:T111565. . --Andyrom75 (talk) 09:51, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Andree, City-busz and Andyrom75, thanks for working on this, it looks great. I was testing it on this edit here and a couple of things I found are:

  • When I toggled to the dynamic map, it kept zooming out. I'm not sure why but was wondering if the zoom parameter should be included to stop this
  • I think it's easy to miss the toggle switch because it's just black text like the description. Is it possible to make it a different colour or stylize it like a hyperlink or do something to highlight it's interactive?
  • This comment is just a nice-to-have, but I think it would be ideal if it the user could specify whether the dynamic map or static map is the default for the page. The quality of both styles of maps varies from page-to-page so it would be nice if we could put the best one forward as the default.

Overall though, it looks awesome. -Shaundd (talk) 16:43, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Shaundd the zoom-out issue is caused by the presence of the railway shape. But honestly I don't know why... I'll try to figure out if your idea can be implemented as a workaround, but I think that the problem is elsewhere.
Good point on the switch label. Is easy to do, we just decide how to customize. I've just made a change.
On the last point I can say that is feasible but I think that the best approach is to show first the static one. Let's remember that Wikivoyage initially was made to be printed, (although nowadays is not common) and once in paper you cannot switch :-). If the static map is awful, well... maybe we should remove it instead of putting it in the background. On the other hand, currently the template assumed to have a static map. If we want to implement officially this template, we can extend it to work also with a dynamic map only (quite easy to do ... but I haven't done it because I don't know if there is a real interest). --Andyrom75 (talk) 17:20, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Shaundd, I've just implemented your suggested zoom and it works; Check it! :-) --Andyrom75 (talk) 17:33, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
@Andyrom75: Cool. I see it centers the map based on all the mapshapes, which in the case of East China, pulls it away from the area of focus. It's an unusual case, but I wonder if it would be good to permit the lat and long to specified (like a normal mapframe) to cover situations like this? I did another test too, at Kootenays, and it works fine as-is. -Shaundd (talk) 19:57, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Shaundd, automatic center is how maps work by default if coords are not specified. Although I like to keep thigs simple, I've implemented the optional parameters regionmapLat, regionmapLong and for uniformity I've change the name of zoom into regionmapZoom. Now you can play with them :-) --Andyrom75 (talk) 20:40, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Andyrom75, I agree simple is better, but I find the auto-center feature of dynamic maps doesn't always hit the best spot so I think it's good to allow users to position the map if needed.
Do you think it's ready to deploy to the Regionlist template? -Shaundd (talk) 21:33, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Shaundd, for me it's fine. Any further feature can be added afterwards. PS Once published, the two articles used for the test shall be adjusted to use again the main template. --Andyrom75 (talk) 22:18, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Shaundd, I've just deployed the template (and updated thw two articles). Template manual is not yet updated; I'll wait few days to get any feedback. --Andyrom75 (talk) 13:16, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Shaundd, I've just added a brief explanation of the new parameters on Template:Regionlist/doc, feel free to improve it. --Andyrom75 (talk) 13:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Andyrom75. I made some copyedits and added a bit more detail about how it interacts with the "group" parameter in the mapshape template. -Shaundd (talk) 05:50, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Cities vs. towns[edit]

In a recent edit, User:TagaSanPedroAko changed a heading in the Mindoro article from "Cities" to "Cities and towns". My first reaction was to want to revert, thinking along the lines "No, that heading is a site-wide standard & you cannot change it."

But is it the right standard? In Mindoro, Calapan is officially a city & has pop. around 150,000, but I think everything else would be better described as towns. Should the heading just be "Towns"? Should that be our site-wide standard? Or perhaps, since some articles currently list even villages as "Cities", should we make the heading "Settlements"? Pashley (talk) 07:15, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

I think these kinds of headings can be changed as appropriate. However, we don't want to get into the business of defining the difference between cities, towns, villages, hamlets and what have you, site-wide, because then we'd run into the problem of very small cities and very large villages. In quite a few places, "village" and "hamlet" are merely administrative categories. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:25, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
The use of 'Cities', 'Towns', 'Villages' etc varies quite widely on Wikivoyage. Certainly in articles about the British Isles, where the difference between these types of settlement is set out in law and instinctively obvious to most people, you'll rarely find a cities list just called 'Cities'. As long as this local discrepancy is allowed, I don't see the problem with every built-up area article having the default name 'city'. I would find 'settlements' inadequate, as to me that brings to mind a small village and is also reminiscent of Wikidata's ridiculous 'human settlement' description tag.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 07:29, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
I'm completely fine with renaming the "Cities" header in region pages if the local geography permits. For the region article in question (Mindoro), I'm fine if that can be changed to "Towns", if we can safely ignore the fact Calapan is a city only in administrative terms (though it's somewhat borderline, at least for a local like me).
Whether to call a small city a city or a town or a large town a town or a city is also an issue affecting some Philippines city or town articles (such as Los Baños (Laguna) — administratively municipality or town, but a city for its population and its moniker). We also have many Philippine region or province pages that have no places described as city, but the header is not changed to reflect the geography (so are city/towns in those list without a one-liner that can aid in the appropriate section name). --TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 20:08, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Wikivoyage:Region article template#Cities already covers this scenario and explicitly notes that using a different header is fine where it makes sense:
Lastly, if calling the settlements in this region "cities" is a real stretch – say, for remote or rural areas with only towns and/or villages – it's OK to rename this section 'Towns' or 'Villages' or 'Settlements' or whatever. But if there are lots of different kinds and sizes of settlements, just leave it as "Cities".
-- Ryan • (talk) • 18:17, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

New opening hours properties on Wikidata[edit]

There are two new properties on Wikidata that might be useful for Wikivoyagers, too: opening time (P8626) and closing time (P8627). These properties can centralize and allow for adding references to opening hours information across Wikivoyage language editions. It also exposes the data to a large userbase of Wikidatans, who can help keep the information up-to-date. NMaia (talk) 10:26, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi @NMaia: Thank you for letting us know about this news; hopefully the new feature can be mutually beneficial.
There is a point of consideration which you and your fellow Wikidatans may not be aware of: on Wikivoyage, we have standardised formats for opening hours, including specific abbreviations for days of the week and month, and we use day ranges rather than daily opening hours (e.g. "M-F 9AM-5PM, Sa Su 10AM-6PM", not "Mon 9AM-5PM, Tue 9AM-5PM, Wed 9AM-5PM,..."). We also use a mixture of 24-hour and 12-hour clocks, depending on the most prevalent system in the geographical location concerned. For example, listings in the USA use the 12-hour clock, while listings in France use the 24-hour clock. Full details of the policy can be found at WV:TDF.
Will you be able to ensure that this policy is adhered to? Regardless of the format Wikidatans will use to input the data, we will need the hours to display on Wikivoyage in the required format, and as stated already this varies across our articles.
I think it's a good thing to collaborate across projects, but in this case there has to be regulatory alignment of some description in order for this to work. There may be appetite in the Wikivoyage community to update our TDF policy, or maybe Wikidata will adopt our policy, or perhaps there is some sort of software to convert WD inputs into the required WV format. But however it's done, there needs to be interwiki standardisation.ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:54, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
I think it is possible for code to give the relevant outputs based on machine readable data on WD. Hobbitschuster (talk) 12:45, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Yes, I've been told it can be done, particularly with Lua modules. NMaia (talk) 02:01, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Even if it weren't, it's not terribly important. We can import the data into the listing template, and manually correct the format. I've tried importing some Wikidata records to pre-populate the listing, and it can be a significant time- (and hassle-) saver.
I don't think that Wikidata should ever be held responsible for following our formatting style. Besides, what if a different community had a different style? We should feel free to use the information, and to share information with them, but turn it into something that works for us here. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:44, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
I doubt it is worth the trouble. WV formats are not sacred. This might be a good time to improve them. Pashley (talk) 12:15, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
The format of the property seems to be quite flexible, as shown by examples at Wikidata:Property proposal/opening hours, but there might be important special cases where the Wikidata format is more convoluted than the Wikivoyage one. In any case, we need code to get the info we want and format it in some way. Perhaps the result of a well written database query is suitable for us, but I'd try to write that query/code first and look at how more complicated entries get to look like before we deem a Luo module is unnecessary. –LPfi (talk) 12:44, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Nobody said they were sacred, I even said that we might be willing to change them. But this will need to happen across the whole site as a new standard, not be done piecemeal so that we have a bunch of different formats in use.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 12:51, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
We kind of already do have a bunch of different formats in use. There's 12 vs 24 hour, and sometimes Saturday is "Sa" and sometimes "Sat". That's four "legal" formats right there. Then there are the complicated situations. I once gave up on reporting the closing hours for one attraction because the hours varied significantly not just by the day of the week, but also by the month. Their website dedicated a whole page to their opening hours. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:52, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
No, that's not true. "Sa" should never be "Sat"; when you see that, please correct it.
We have two standardised systems in use here, for the 24-hour clock and the 12-hour clock, though these are really just variations of the same system: aside from the times, everything else is the same. The more complicated situations I grant you, but these are a tiny minority.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:53, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
See Wikivoyage talk:Time and date formats#Expanded short names for days of the week. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:46, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
(response to WAID?, 15:44) If I have to correct all the formatting by hand as soon as imported, why would I bother doing that rather than looking up the hours myself online? The idea is to share data seamlessly across the wikis, and presumably Wikidata would also benefit by importing opening hours from Wikivoyage. If we both use the same system(s), this is made easier for everyone involved.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:59, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Because formatting content is faster that looking up content plus formatting it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:49, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks NMaia for making this happen! It would be great if the listing editor could be updated to do the matching like it does for other Wikidata fields (it will be a bit more complex, so maybe just the simple cases?) Syced (talk) 00:28, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
NMaia, if I want to specify "Mon 12:00-14:00 and 19:00-21:00" I suppose that I have to add two different values (one for 12:00-14:00 and one for 19:00-21:00), correct? Or there's a possibility to add both time range under the same value (i.e. Monday)?
Regarding the timing won't be better to strictly store the time as HH:MM (24h)? This will make it easier to elaborate the output according to any specific need. --Andyrom75 (talk) 09:41, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
In the proposal, I originally intended to keep them under the same statement, like you mentioned, but someone asked me to change it, so I did. Either way, I think it won't cause many problems for Wikivoyage. NMaia (talk) 11:09, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
NMaia, it's not a problem but I think it's more complicated to manage the stored information. Having 7 values for the 7 days, each one of them having their own time range I think it would be easier, because that's how generally we show such kind of data.
What about time syntax? --Andyrom75 (talk) 21:34, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── After the addition of P8626 and P8627 I wrote the Lua module Hours (Q99600452) which makes opening hours, stored at Wikidata, available for establishment listings at the German Wikivoyage. The stand-alone module can be used both with other Lua modules or with an invoke call in a template and can be easily translated. The module produces a compact output with short or abbreviated names and clustered time periods as far as possible which can be learned form the documentation of the module mentioned.

The module is already for productive purposes. There are some maintenance categories to watch the module's operation. A special feature is used which we already added to other Wikidata data-fetching modules in a similar manner: For common ids we are using a table to prevent fetching from Wikidata which is time consuming. --RolandUnger (talk) 08:04, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Map of campsites doesn't work, is rawhtml permitted?[edit]

I just made this change: https://en.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=H%C3%A4rn%C3%B6sand&oldid=4068115 I have modeled and photoed some campsites I know of in the municipality and would like to share them on Wikivoyage on an interactive map based on a search query from WD. How is the best way to go about presenting this on Wikivoyage?--So9q (talk) 14:22, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions. Please make a listing for each one of the campsites, that's the Wikivoyage way. Ibaman (talk) 14:41, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
I found out that listing are automatically added to article maps with color coded numbers. Very nice solution to a complex problem. :)--So9q (talk) 20:38, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Listings generator from WD queries[edit]

I read and understand the structure now, LGTM. Is there a WD->WV listings exporter/generator? There are a LOT of campsites in just Sweden, it is not feasible to type in all this manually IMO.--So9q (talk) 14:50, 23 September 2020 (UTC) I found out that the listings editor is okay for entering a new campsite, but as these do not have wikipedia entries, the editor complains about the name not being filled in which is a bug IMO. Reported here.--So9q (talk) 18:21, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello there again. There's been a lot of talk about WD - WV integration tools lately, as a matter of fact. I lack the code skills to be of much help here; @Wrh2: and @AlasdairW:, would you please give a hand? Ibaman (talk) 18:26, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
When I have used the listings editor to get data on a new listing from WD, I type (or copy & paste) the venue name and enter the WD value before trying to Sync. I mainly use the WD sync to get the lat/long and WP article details, with it sometimes giving URL too. However I am usually only adding a few listings, so I am not sure how I can help here. For a campsite listing it is useful to add some information that may not be in WD, like price, number of pitches and facilities. AlasdairW (talk) 20:01, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
I think the data about pitches and facilities (excluding the price) should be in WD. Anyway the campsites I would like to add are the ones found with this search query from WD.--So9q (talk) 20:36, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
I whipped together the quick python script below that converts from this query to Wikivoyage listings. The result can be seen on Härnösand:
#!/usr/bin/env python3
# License: GPLv3
# Author: So9q

import csv
from datetime import datetime

# Example output
# * {{sleep
# | name=Lomtjärnberget
# | lat=62.588214 | long=17.851131
# | wikidata=Q96578823
# | lastedit=2020-09-23
# }}

with open('campsites.csv') as csv_file:
    csv_reader = csv.reader(csv_file, delimiter=',')
    line_count = 0
    for row in csv_reader:
        if line_count == 0:
            print(f'Column names are {", ".join(row)}')
            line_count += 1
        else:
            print("* {{sleep")
            print(f"| name={row[1]}")
            print(f"| lat={row[3]} | lon={row[4]}")
            print(f"| wikidata={row[0].replace('http://www.wikidata.org/entity/','')}")
            print(f"| lastedit={datetime.now().strftime('%Y-%m-%d')}")
            print("}}")
            line_count += 1
    print(f'Processed {line_count} lines.')

Nice. One thing I wonder. In Härnösand most of these "campsites" are lean-to shelters, and at least a few had an image suggesting the terrain was not suitable for pitching a tent. I suppose most readers would expect a campsite to be something else. Is there some way to tell the lean-tos apart from regular campsites (so that a note on what they are can be added)? –LPfi (talk) 08:21, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Good point! Yes and no. I created these two items (see section subclass) to model it, but it really depends on how big a tent you want to put up and how you define "suitable". I think its better to provide lots of photos from different angles and of the surroundings, for the user to make up his own mind. Do you have a suggestion for how to model it in an unsubjective way?--So9q (talk) 21:28, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
I think these listings need a few words of subjective description. If it is fair a subjective description is welcome here. A "campsite" could be a site with spaces for caravans and campervans and an onsite bar, or just an area of grass. So "bare ground for pitching a tent and open cooking shelter, no electricity or mains water" might describe some of what is in the photos. The listings also need some details of how to reserve (website, phone number etc), or say if you just turn up. AlasdairW (talk) 21:59, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Russian Wiki-Conference 2020[edit]

Wikikonf-logo-bn.svg

Dear coleagues! I'm happy to announce you russian Wikimedia conference that will take part in Saint Petersburg at September, 26-27. This time like previous years we'll hold not only in-person meeting — video translation will also be available and @Frhdkazan: (Farhad Fatkullin) will provide simultaneous interpretation through Zoom call. Conference will start at 7:00 UTC, translation hopefully will start around 8:00 UTC.

I announce this is not only because you can be interested in Russian Wikimedia activities, but also because I will make presentation of North-West Russia Wiki-Historians User Group and announce a cross-Wikivoyage marathon about regions of our UG activity. Exact time of my presentation will be provided later. Красный (talk) 14:45, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

New feature: Watchlist Expiry[edit]

Hello, everyone! The Community Tech team will be releasing a new feature, which is called Watchlist Expiry. With this feature, you can optionally select to watch a page for a temporary period of time. This feature was developed in response to the #7 request from the 2019 Community Wishlist Survey. To find out when the feature will be enabled on your wiki, you can check out the release schedule on Meta-wiki. To test out the feature before deployment, you can visit Mediawiki.org or testwiki. Once the feature is enabled on your wiki, we invite you to share your feedback on the project talk page. For more information, you can refer to the documentation page. Thank you in advance, and we look forward to reading your feedback! --IFried (WMF) (talk) 16:50, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Wow, that's neat! --El Grafo (talk) 09:32, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
Yes indeed. –LPfi (talk) 09:47, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Missing WD items on Gävle article[edit]

Hi, the Gävle article has a lot of listings but not a single one points to WD. Would it be acceptable to copy this data (lat, lon, name, website) to WD via a script? WDYT?--So9q (talk) 21:41, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Why not, as long as the guys at WD won't frown upon it... -- andree.sk(talk) 07:03, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
The museums are probably all in scope for Wikidata, while restaurants and cafés usually are not, if I've understood this right. The scope is however still in change, becoming more broad. –LPfi (talk) 09:32, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

IP block[edit]

I blocked 62.60.63.20 for calling reverts vandalism. In itself it could have been seen as a finger slip, but I believe the IP was evading a block. Do with this what you might. –LPfi (talk) 11:15, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Good call. Looks like block evasion to me. Ground Zero (talk) 11:39, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
Hey, @LPfi: @ThunderingTyphoons!: I am part of the Wikimedia Database team. Recently there was a (quite rare) data issue, that may have led to a blockage not being applied correctly in the range you mention here. You may have seen some instability on recentchanges on certain wikis a few hours ago, it was related to this. I would like to talk to you (please message me in private if discussing user blocks is a sensitive issue), as I need to make sure the data regarding blocks is consistent with what you need to be applied throughout all databases. If public on wiki discussion or private messaging is inadequate can also pm on IRC (Freenode) as jynus in the following hours. --JCrespo (WMF) (talk) 14:06, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
@JCrespo (WMF): I have no problem with talking on-wiki. There was a lag with recent changes at the same time as I imposed a longer block on the IP in question.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 14:36, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
So the issue is that 2 blocks were setup, but 1 is currently active in a subset of database servers (the old one in some and the new one in others). This needs to be corrected ASAP. With your permission, I would delete from the database the previous block, and leave the last one. I think this would end up in a consistent state and desired state by you (ip blocked). Please do not do any manual operation on the ip until that is done. Do you think that is an ok procedure for me to do to get the databases in a consistent state? Thank you for your work protecting the wikis! We never edit the database manually, except in this exceptional situations (data corruption) and with the project admins ok.--JCrespo (WMF) (talk) 14:46, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
PS: The lag happened because this inconsistency (not your fault!) caused replication to break temporarily between dbs. I am now trying to get us to a health state so this cannot happen ever again. However, only one "block" can be active per address (so one will have to go away). JCrespo (WMF) (talk) 14:50, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict) In other words, the blocking actions will be kept on the logs of the user, but only the last one will be active. The previous one will be deleted. Ip will continue to be blocked. --JCrespo (WMF) (talk) 14:56, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
@JCrespo (WMF): No problem. This is not a user that will make massive changes if unblocked. –LPfi (talk) 14:55, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, I will apply the server fix and report here. Again, the user will still be blocked with the last block applied, as the older one didn't apply fully to all dbs. I wanted to warn you because you will see the older block "disappearing" magically with my server powers. Thanks for your understanding. --JCrespo (WMF) (talk) 14:58, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for your help. All the best, ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 15:50, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
The database consistency issue has been solved. Final state: Logs are kept, but only the block of 62.60.63.2 made by @ThunderingTyphoons!: at 2020-09-25 11:39:33 is active. You can now, if desired, edit/delete/modify the block if needed, as dbs are in a consistent state. Don't be afraid of blocking/editing, this was a one time thing, and you didn't break anything (it was the database's inconsistent state's fault). No other data or blocks should be affected by this issue. Thanks to everyone that helped here. If you want to know more about this issue, there is a ticket open at Phabricator: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T263842 Cheers! --JCrespo (WMF) (talk) 15:53, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Herefordshire[edit]

Why on earth are you running two PARALLEL pages devoted to this English county? ---- —The preceding comment was added by 88.106.222.96 (talkcontribs)

Who in the World is "you"? The author of this site is "we" - everyone who edits. That includes you. So if there are two articles that cover exactly the same destination, I think you just selected yourself to start merging the content as appropriate. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:50, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
However, I think you're making a mistake. There are articles about Hertfordshire, Herefordshire, the city of Hereford and the town of Hertford. Are you seeing anything else? Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:54, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Blocking Radisson marketers[edit]

Hi. I think I should mention that I am now blocking Radisson marketing IPs without warning when they tout. My reasoning for this is that they change IP addresses often and not one of the Radisson marketing accounts has paid any attention to touting warnings or instructions on avoiding default address info in listings in talk page posts nor to any of the content of edit summaries. I don't think we should tolerate promotional, paid accounts creating unnecessary work for us (basically, trying to jerk us volunteers around) by refusing to cooperate. Therefore, at the first example of touting, I block right away. This is the second time I've done that to a Radisson account, after following usual procedure for weeks. And I think we should seriously consider blocking for persistent violation of Wikivoyage guidelines on default address info, too. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:06, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Some context: See User talk:103.48.102.46 and this edit. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:10, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
I've been correcting lots of Radisson updates lately, maybe 10 or more a day. While I totally agree with your reasoning, I fear that hard reverting these edits may end up with Wikivoyage keeping a lot of obsolete weblink and phone numbers, which is, ultimately, unhelpful to the traveller. Only because of this, I usually go for manual edits, which is a drag, agreed again. If a consensus about a total block of Radisson updates is agreed upon, I'll gladly enforce it from this moment on. Ibaman (talk) 12:23, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
I'm currently only threatening a "block on site" policy to try to get the attention of a Radisson manager, but I think we should at least be reverting touting posts by Radisson employees and blocking any Radisson account that touts right away after they tout (without trying to block every single account already used by Radisson at this point). I'm happy to tolerate their continually disregarding our attempts to get them to respect Wikivoyage's address content guidelines if you'd like to continue correcting those fields. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:30, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
Should we contact Radisson directly? They have an interest in their listings being up to date, and if the people updating listings do so on orders from some one person, it might be possible to get them change their instructions. –LPfi (talk) 12:35, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
That's a good idea. Perhaps one of our users with experience working in or with hotels as something other than a regular customer would have some insight into who should be contacted. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:38, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
I really hope this works. These edits are tricky stuff, almost malicious, should I say. About half these edits seem to already got the gist and just update the link and phone numbers (these I keep). The other half will change the name from "Radisson Blu" to "The Ultimate Highscale Radisson BLU Hotel, Spa & Lobster Restaurant, Ibiza, Baleares"and insert three paragraphs of flowery promotional prose on "content" (these I revert). Again, I hope that contacting their marketing department, or whatever, works. Ibaman (talk) 12:43, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
The IP I blocked also just deleted some addresses. I don't know what that was about. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:45, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
https://www.radissonhotelgroup.com/media_contact-us has a list of e-mail addresses. Are these edits all about one part of the world, or scattered around? WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:42, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
For the record, today it was mostly about Finland and Norway, yesterday it was UK and USA, I'd say it's nearly always Europe and North America, but it's really global, on the long run. I already saw India, Thailand, Bangladesh, Australia, Hong Kong, for instance. Ibaman (talk) 16:08, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
The edits that remove addresses need extra scrutiny: I've seen cases where the Radisson hotel in the destination has closed, but an IP editor edits the entry to remove the address and contact information and replace the URL with a link to the Radisson page for that country or region. In effect, this directs readers to a Radisson website even though there is no longer a Radisson hotel in the destination. That seems to be what was going on here. I think the appropriate response in this situation is either to remove the listing or, if a new hotel has opened at the Radisson's former address, to replace it with a listing for the new hotel. —Granger (talk · contribs) 17:14, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I support the initiative to contact Radisson directly. The overall aim of these edits, updating links and contact info across hundreds of listings, is very useful for us, but it's not acceptable that volunteers should be made to run around after paid employees. As Ibaman noted, simply reverting and blocking the troublesome edits is counterproductive because it also reinstates outdated information. As usual, communication is the key to solving the problem. If nobody with industry experience comes forward (I know we have people with such experience, but will not nominate anyone who doesn't choose to come forward), I'd be happy to try to contact Radisson, but must stress that I'll not be able to do so for at least two weeks for several reasons, but first among them being that I currently only have access to a mobile phone.

If we can't get in contact with someone in authority, then we still have at our disposal the spam filter to block new Radisson links, but that would have to be a last resort given the number of hotel brands they manage all over the world.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 18:02, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

In answer to WhatamIdoing's question, these edits have been all over the world. In addition to the countries Ibaman mentioned, there have been edits in the Arab world, for example. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:12, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
Since it is a global effort, we should probably e-mail one of the people listed for the corporate office, rather than a regional representative in their public relations department. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:27, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
Looking on the contact page you linked, there are three regions to the business (EMEA, Asia-Pacific, and Americas), but no single global contact. Perhaps a single email to the most senior relevant person in each region? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 21:39, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
Sounds reasonable. I think the key points we want to make are that everyone working for Radisson must avoid: (1) using promotional language, (2) describing what a hotel location is "near", (3) putting in more than the street address except in countries (notably including the UK) where we've decided post codes (but not city names) should be included. Also, they should delete listings for locations that are closed and shouldn't delete the address and leave a merely promotional link to the company's website. At least some of us are also deleting city names in the name fields of listings for hotel branches. If we consider that promotional SEO, not really part of the title, we need to tell them they can't include it in the name field of their listings, that it will be considered touting, whatever. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:05, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
I think we might want to start with a shorter, more general message. Something more like "It looks like Radisson has hired an employee or contractor to edit Wikivoyage. We'd love to have Radisson entries updated, but we're having trouble with the quality of the work, and they're not responding to our messages. Can you help us contact them?" My recommendation is to focus the PR people on their task (find that person) instead of on our policies. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:41, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I think we should contact the company. It can't be in their interest to have a bad reputation in the travel writer community... Hobbitschuster (talk) 10:32, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps it should be time to establish paid editing policy here if one isn't already created? OhanaUnitedTalk page 19:03, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
It's here: Wikivoyage:Don't tout#Marketers and SEOs. -- Powers (talk) 23:12, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Oh! I have missed that. The exception was not in the lead of Don't tout ("Business employees, like everyone, are welcome to add information to Wikivoyage"). I reworded to reflect it, and added it to Welcome business owners. –LPfi (talk) 08:09, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
Good job making our policies clearer and more present.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:01, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

It still seems that Radisson is a special case in terms of the volume of edits by different IP addresses and the refusal to communicate. I would support a briefer, more targetted email of the kind proposed by user:WhatamIdoing in the first instance, as our first goal is just to open a dialogue with the company and be put in touch with the person responsible for the edits, either the editor(s) or their manager. Once we have that contact, we can go more in-depth with our specific concerns, like what user:Ikan Kekek proposed. Additionally, I would want the Radisson editor(s) to be more available; to stick to editing with just one IP address or, better yet, to create a named account and crucially to reply to on-wiki messages within a reasonable period of time. Without the ability to communicate with them moving forward, I can't see how we can tolerate any editing arrangement with Radisson.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:01, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Wiki of functions naming contest[edit]

21:16, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Help[edit]

Hi, friends! I'm Bonzg and I need help. I come from Zagreb and I want make article about my neighborhood Trnje. Can I do that? Please,can you help me? Thank you very much! Bonzg (talk) 12:31, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that's possible. You'd have to "district-ify" the Zagreb article, which is a little complicated to do. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:43, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
To elaborate: If you believe it is in the interest of travelers to divide Zagreb into a series of district articles on this site, you would need to explain on Talk:Zagreb why the article for the overall city would be too long to be user-friendly if it included all useful listings for the city, post a proposal listing all the districts you'd divide the city into and their boundaries, and give readers a sense of about how many "See" and "Do", "Eat" and "Drink", and "Sleep" listings each district would be likely to have.
Looking at the Zagreb article, my feeling is that it's sizable but not so long that it's clear to me that the city needs to be districtified like, say, Tokyo or London, but if you have a clear idea, make a proposal.
Your other option is simply to add information about your neighborhood to all the relevant sections of the Zagreb article, which would be great! Please post listings of your favorite sights, restaurants, bars, etc. Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:12, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
In addition to what Ikan said, does Trnje on its own have enough to offer visitors so that it would merit its own article? Except for cities that have a massive number of attractions, we usually districtify cities like this: a couple of central district articles (with a much higher density of attractions), and then the rest of the city are divided into something like North, South, East, West (where an individual neighborhood may have just one or two interesting thing). --Ypsilon (talk) 16:24, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
It seems (from the current article and its dynamic map) that Trnje covers only a small area of the centre and is not an important tourist district. Thus I think it would be better to list the interesting places in Trnje rather than to describe Trnje as such. –LPfi (talk) 16:48, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
Adding more information straight into Zagreb would be the easiest way to start. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:46, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Remember to log in again[edit]

Everyone got logged out. Make sure that you've logged back in again. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:51, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

I noticed I had been logged out. What happened? Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:01, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
Info at Wikitech-ambassadors. Nurg (talk) 06:46, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Huh, weird. Thanks. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:48, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

My edits[edit]

Are they any good? Just wondering. Juliancsabancas6000 (talk) 22:04, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

It looks like some of your punctuation doesn't match the usual style. That's not a fatal flaw – I'm sure you'll catch on after a bit. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:36, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Buttefly effect on map update[edit]

While working on #Switchable static/dynamic map I've noticed that 1 year ago has been updated the map on China, but unfortunately the updated has been done in a bad way: overwriting the existing map.

I'm writing this post hoping to avoid it on the future because this approach will mess up all the other language versions that use the same map. The good approach is to create a new file and let the article of a specific language version to use that new file. In this way all the other language versions are not affected.

This good approach has been followed (I think by chance) on Southwest China, maybe because the old map has a mispelled name, but anyhow this was enough to preserve all the other language versions.

In all this mess, I've notice that the map on East China has not even updated, so the areas described in the article do not match the ones on the map, and for South China no new static map version has been created (it's not mandatory, it's just a choice, but let's consider that it's not uniformed among the other articles). Whomever will take in charge the map update task, please follow the right process, and please share to whomever is interested on this topic to be aware of this issue. --Andyrom75 (talk) 13:38, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

I think that User:Buernia made that update. Maybe talk to that editor about what happened? (It looks right to me.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:23, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Sorry about that. I’ve reverted the coloring of File:Map of China (en).png to the 2012 version. The article in en:voy can reference the bitmap generated by File:Map_of_China.svg. -- Buernia Talk  13:22, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks User:Buernia for taking care about China map and Shaundd for the East China one. If one of you would be available to create a new version of the South China static map would be great. --Andyrom75 (talk) 14:54, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Call for feedback about Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws changes and Board candidate rubric[edit]

Hello. Apologies if you are not reading this message in your native language. Please help translate to your language.

Today the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees starts two calls for feedback. One is about changes to the Bylaws mainly to increase the Board size from 10 to 16 members. The other one is about a trustee candidate rubric to introduce new, more effective ways to evaluate new Board candidates. The Board welcomes your comments through 26 October. For more details, check the full announcement.

Thank you! Qgil-WMF (talk) 17:10, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Editing by Listing Editor[edit]

I can not edit by Listing Editor. It says, "Error: An unknown error has been encountered while attempting to save the listing, please try again: invalidsection". What should I do? It happened on multiplr pages.-Nizil Shah (talk) 07:01, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Nizil Shah, could you be more specific? Please provide: article, listing & text you tried to change. Thanks, --Andyrom75 (talk) 14:48, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
I tried to edit Gandhinagar with a new listing in See section.-Nizil Shah (talk) 17:34, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
Nizil Shah, sorry for late answer but you haven't pinged me. See history of that page. I've added a new "test listing" and deleted it. Both action with listing editor without any issue.
If your problem persist, you have to provide me also all the data that you insert in any listing editor field. I need to replicate exactly your action. --Andyrom75 (talk) 09:09, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
@Andyrom75: It again happened on Junagadh. I clicked [add listing] in Go section. Than added Name=Girnar ropeway; Price=₹700 normal, ₹400 concessional, ₹350 children; Selected Wikipedia=Girnar ropeway, Content=Opened in 2020 to go from Girnar foothill to Ambaji temple above the hill in 8 minutes. Than Submit. The error says: "Error: An unknown error has been encountered while attempting to save the listing, please try again: invalidsection". I don't know what is happening but I am unable to contribute to Wikivoyage for this reason. Please do something about it.-Nizil Shah (talk) 14:21, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
It also happens when I try to do changes in listing via edit button on the end of each entry. There must be some bug in Listing Editor. It used to work perfectly in past.-Nizil Shah (talk) 14:24, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
I don't see a "Go" section in Junagadh. I edited a listing in Do with the new listing editor and added the described one in Get around (was that your Go?) with the default one. No problems. –LPfi (talk) 14:45, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Nizil Shah, as said by LPfi, there is no "Go" section on Junagadh. Notwithstanding this, I've assumed that you were talking of "Do" section and I've added the new listing as per your description on that section and on its "Religious festivals" subsection, then I've deleted them. All managed correctly through the listing editor (see article history).
Could you check which is the correct section and if there is something missing in what you described? Please let me know also the browser that you are using. FYI I've used Chrome.
If I'm not able to replicate the issue, I'm not able to support. --Andyrom75 (talk) 17:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Even if I change a typo in See section using listing editor, it shows the same error. "Go" section is not there but same issues happen even if I try to edit anywhere with listing editor. I am using Google Chrome.-Nizil Shah (talk) 04:38, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

I am not the BT Central vandal (Solved)[edit]

Hi I created my first page: Perranporth in Cornwall UK, just a couple of days ago. I was just experimenting, so I copied a section from the existing St Ives page, and just started typing.

Today, back from holiday, I go to my rough draft page for Perranporth, and fill out a bit more detail, delete the St Ives text then try to publish.

Dang, I get autoidentified as vandalising my own page. Its not obvious what I can do now to prove my innocence, publish my edits, etc.

Any clues???

Actually I just needed to create an account and login. Aliks29 15:14, 17 October 2020‎ (UTC)

Good. Welcome. These "edit filters" are rough. They catch some editing patterns typical for certain vandals, but can match unrelated innocent edits. Glad you got around it. (We try to check for false positives and take measures as needed, but we might miss some, and this is manual work that in no way is instant.) –LPfi (talk) 06:22, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Nuremberg U-Bahn extension[edit]

The Nuremberg U-Bahn opened a new station w:de:Großreuth (U-Bahn Nürnberg) on October 15. We should add it to the mapshape. Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:31, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Assuming you mean the diagrammatic map in Nuremberg#Get around, I recommend approaching the map's creator, who is still active on Commons.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 20:44, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
No I mean the lines that show up on the dynamic map. Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:09, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
@Hobbitschuster: Those mapshapes are dependent on data from OpenStreetMap. Once the edit is made there (and it has been made already), it will take a bit of time before this change is visible here as well. Things like these require no action from us whatsoever. This change to the map should be visible here before the end of the month at the latest, or so I reckon. However, changes like these are quite unpredictable as to how quickly they become visible here. It could be visible tomorrow, it could be visible next week, but all we need to do is sit back and wait :)
-- Wauteurz (talk) 22:01, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
As long as somebody at OSM takes care of it. It might be a good idea to check that the update has indeed been done over there, as you did. –LPfi (talk) 06:24, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
It's strange that it still didn't show up, though - it usually takes a day or two, when I was adding various routes from OSM :-/ -- andree.sk(talk) 19:16, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Mahjong[edit]

I wonder if this would be an article worth creating. It's certainly a fairly popular game in many parts of East Asia, and it's certainly possible for people to travel to East Asia to purchase sets and play the game. One of the main issues though is that because it's associated with gambling, in many places, the only way you can play it legally is with family and friends. In addition there are so many different rule sets. Different parts of China have different rules, while Taiwan and Japan have their own rules, and so do we in Singapore, so while the basic gameplay is similar, it would not be practical for us to cover all possible rule sets in a travel article. If we have to pick any to cover, I would say perhaps Cantonese, Taiwanese and Japanese rules are the best known internationally, so these should probably the ones we should cover. Unfortunately, I'm only familiar with Singaporean rules, so I won't be able to write those.

As for tournaments to watch, there is the World Series Mahjong which uses a set of standardised "international rules" that attempts to be the "average" of the Taiwanese, Japanese, Cantonese and all the other regional Chinese rules, so that it is fair to all players regardless of which rule sets they grew up with. However, nobody actually uses those rules in casual settings; they are only used in professional tournaments. The dog2 (talk) 19:34, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Important: maintenance operation on October 27[edit]

-- Trizek (WMF) (talk) 17:12, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

This is the same thing as earlier, but in reverse. The first round took only a few minutes, so if the switch back is equally quick, I think that most of us won't notice it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:52, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

New checkin and checkout properties on Wikidata[edit]

Now check-in and check-out times (P8745, P8746) can be entered to Wikidata. For instance {{#property:P8745|from=Q56506795}} will return 14:00, the check-in time of the Nile Ritz-Carlton in Cairo.

The times are stored as an entity id. 2PM (14:00) is stored as Q55811610, and 14:00 is its label. With simple Lua scripts, formatting can be made. Now all listing parameters excluding alt and content can be stored to Wikidata (and displayed at the German Wikivoyage, too). --RolandUnger (talk) 11:30, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Religious sites, include and list or not?[edit]

I have a conundrum. A random named user added a new category and list specifically for a religious site in Oakland, without anything on it other than its address. It was simply added as "other sights." I had previously included the locally-famous Mormon Temple, because it was just as much a quiet public place with a breathtaking view as a place of worship. (It's closed to the public due to long-term ongoing renovation and such at present.) How do I handle this one? L. Challenger (talk) 05:09, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

An ordinary church shouldn't be listed because that's as interesting as an ordinary convenience store. However, if it's a place of worship of a religion that has only one house of worship in the area, it could be listed in "cope". So if there's, say, one Zoroastrian temple, that could go there, but the x-number of Catholic parish churches and Evangelical churches probably aren't so hard to find. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:38, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
Hold it; your post at Talk:Oakland has a very different phrasing: "Thus far, I've avoided the inclusion of any of Oakland's various and often-amazing religious institutions with the exception of the Mormon Temple - specifically because to list them all would add an entire new list and category for its own sake." My answer to that would be: Create the category and list any religious institution that is likely to be interesting to a traveler. If it's amazing, it should be listed. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:40, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
Part of the conundrum is the adding of a new list to an article that feels... very full as it is. If I start listing places of worship in Oakland alone, it's going to be a long list. If I keep to specifically interesting architecture - it's still apt to be a long list. These are the reasons I'm feeling stuck. The added link was to the Cathedral of Christ the Light - a place with unique architecture that lies very near to Lake Merritt, and is in fact, at the far right of the top image in Oakland's article itself. What should I do? How should I handle this? L. Challenger (talk) 23:44, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
Since that particular religious site is also mentioned in the caption of a photo in the article ("Some of the distinctive skyline of Downtown, including the Kaiser Building and the Cathedral of Christ the Light"), then I think it's a good idea to include its location. A description should be added to say something about it being part of the downtown skyline, and also that it's a Catholic church.
On the general question, the last time I thought about this seriously, I was working on Grinnell. I eventually included, under ==Cope==, the church nearest the interstate highway and the biggest church in the downtown area. The latter has some architectural interest, but my main thought was that if you were stranded, then they were accessible and would help. (The churches in that town have clubbed together to buy gas or pay for a hotel room for the occasional stranded traveler.)
Challenger l, do you think that someone might have fun with a day trip to go look at a bunch of architecturally/historically interesting religious sites in Oakland? If so, then an itinerary might be one way to get it out of the main article while still providing good information. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:38, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
I agree. Challenger l, perhaps this star article may inspire you. But in general, my answer is that if information is really interesting and relevant to travelers, never fear including it. Any time a section gets too long, it can be spun off, with a summary kept in the article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:18, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
Every church that is worthwhile for visitors should be listed, just like museums or any other site. No editor should neglect adding good listings just to avoid making the article longer or complicating a heading scheme. If the heading scheme is a problem, the headings need to be changed not listings deleted or held back from being added. Personally, I think grouping sites with location headings is better than attraction headings. In this case, I'd definitely recommend changing the headings if they are impeding on article improvements. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 11:08, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

In light of the coming opening of Berlin Brandenburg Airport[edit]

I created an article. Is this premature? No."Schönefeld Airport" has already been relabeled "BER Terminal 5". Unfortunately the lower sections of the article are pretty barren as of now, but I'm sure they can be filled in due time... Hobbitschuster (talk) 13:03, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

It might be. It doesn't appears BER will be a major hub, as most of the destinations are from easyJet and Ryanair, who both operate point-to-point models rather than hub-and-spoke. Thus, as with TXL and SXF, most passengers will probably be origin/destination passengers rather than connecting. (It's hard to find statistics for this, but [1] shows that TXL only had on the order of 15% connecting passengers in 2014.) That said, we do have plenty of airport articles for places with even lower rates of connecting passengers. However, I worry that we get carried away writing about the history of the airport (not terribly interesting to most travellers) and transportation options (important, but belongs to the city as much as the airport) and end up writing very little about the airport itself (primarily the Wait, Eat, and Buy sections). For a comparison, I'm still thinking about submitting a merge request on Orlando International Airport because most of the article is about getting to/from the airport, and the rest just isn't that interesting: the airport is easy to navigate, the food and shopping options are bland, and most passengers won't spend a lot of time there. Can you convince me BER will be any different? --Bigpeteb (talk) 20:11, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
speaking my mind as a traveller: Berlin is surely the European destination I visited the most, and cherish the most, and I'm following this BER trend with a lot of interest since at least 2011. The very tumultuous history leading up to the opening really merits to be digressed. I have already written elsewhere, the subject "Berlin airports" is very thick and rich and chocolatey, since Johannisthal. I'm saddened with the thought of never again arriving or departing at little cozy lovely Tegel, and I'd very gladly help building a "Berlin airports" article up. As for the moment, I'm curious almost to a frenzy about whether the new airport will really start operations on this following weekend. Let's see and then decide, IMHO. Ibaman (talk) 20:41, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
It's certainly an event worth celebrating. I hope they party like it's 2011. ;-) Ground Zero (talk) 20:45, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
As long as the "Terminal 5" situation persists (and it will for a while) the airport is quite complex. It is also busier than the not particularly "hub"-y DUS. Plus someone saw fit to create an article on TXL and we never got around to deleting it.... Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:06, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
Presumably just being a single, larger airport will make the development of a hub more likely in the future.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 21:10, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
The Tegel article isn't all that old, IIRC, but my feeling was always that articles about airports like Tegel or LaGuardia in New York are inessential but fine. I have to make a comment about Dusseldorf Airport, though: It's huge, and I have changed planes from there to Tegel in the past. Anyway, I see no reason to bust people's chops for writing articles about airports that serve major cities and aren't like the 4th or 5th most important and really far flung (so not Islip Airport and so forth). Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:49, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

FYI: I thought food was the best part of travel, I was wrong[edit]

https://www.eater.com/2020/10/13/21498819/food-expectations-travel-to-eat-covid-19Justin (koavf)TCM 13:44, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. That's a great story, and I definitely connect to it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:19, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
Ikan Kekek: "I can connect". —Justin (koavf)TCM 17:12, 29 October 2020 (UTC)