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


Policy against using images with watermarks, etc.[edit]

Hi, everyone. I know that Wikivoyage has a policy against using as thumbnails photos with watermarks or other writing added to the image. Where is the policy mentioned? I'd like to give a link to Renek78 in reference to the Hpa-an article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:57, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

At a stretch it could be argued that a watermark constitutes a montage which is against Wikivoyage:Image_policy. There seems to be an overall lack of guidance around image quality in our policies however. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 20:40, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
Image quality? Yeah. Not sure we need to add guidance, because "don't add terrible photos" is common sense and deleting such photos when they're added can be explained simply as a matter of logic. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:45, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
I think photos with watermarks often can be deleted by the same logic: it is a disturbing element in the photo. The reason to accept them would be that watermarks are common, but they are not here at Wikivoyage. --LPfi (talk) 20:50, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Another important thing to consider... many watermarks can be removed with Photoshop. I could help with that if there is a specific photo on WikiCommons that needs such a fix (and that you think would be a great addition to Wikivoyage if the watermark is removed). ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 02:43, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Look at my uploads on commons. A bunch of them still have a timestamp, I fear. Hobbitschuster (talk) 13:50, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

I am against allowing images with watermarks, especially if they have been removed via photoshop. A watermark was placed on the image for a reason, usually to denote ownership. If the creator of the image wants others to know that it is theirs, why would we remove their mark of ownership? Additionally, watermarks are usually used to prevent people from "stealing" the image, so I would assume they don't want it used elsewhere. I think the argument against watermarked pictures shouldn't come from photo quality guidelines, but rather guidelines about fair use / open source / commons guidelines. Obviously, this is about watermarks of ownership/branding/etc, not things like timestamps. DethDestroyerOfWords (talk) 15:15, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Commons strongly discourages watermarks. Since we get most of our images from Commons, we inherit their image guidelines. Powers (talk) 20:35, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Excited customers - treat the same way as touts?[edit]

Okay, doing recent changes patrol and looking at this edit, which seems to be of an excited customer (notice the third person pronouns and lack of some other features of "classical" touting), I am wondering how to treat those. On the one hand we want positive, lively prose, on the other hand every restaurant being praised as the best and stuff does not help our case either. And lastly there is a very serious risk of biting newbies (I for one think we might have chased away the person who created Villingen-Schwenningen simply by flooding it with edits shortly after its creation) if we edit around in their recently added listings or worse yet, revert on sight. What say ye? Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:51, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

No. There are fundamental differences, and indeed only superficial similarities, between touts and excited customers. The entire crux of the reason why we don't like touts on this site is because their vested interests in making their businesses appear to be great and wonderful prevent us from considering their point of view to be objective. Excited customers, on the other hand, are some of the most desirable people we want contributing to Wikivoyage - not only because we can presume them to be objective, but also because the logical flipside of our desire to avoid negative reviews is to encourage (objective) positive reviews; the more positive the better. Of course superlatives like "perfect" and "best" are to be avoided, as well as empty flowery language, but that's already covered in Wikivoyage:Words to avoid. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 17:30, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
That looks like a perfect Wikivoyage eat listing, from someone who's been to Big D's and clearly loved it. I don't even think "best" is a problem when used in a clearly idiomatic phrase such as the "best around", "best in town". It certainly makes me want to pay Big D a visit. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 18:17, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
In light of that what should we say about this edit by User:Ibaman? Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:35, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

I reverted Ibaman's edit in question, but would like for more discussion about this. @Ikan Kekek: @Wrh2: what do you say? Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:32, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

I think a more moderate edit would be OK, but in my opinion, the edit you reverted went further than necessary, particularly the listing that ended up with nothing but "BBQ, ribs and chicken." Calling breakfasts "large and satisfying" is perfectly fine. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:58, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Speaking for my actions, edits such as "directions=follow your nose", in my opinion, cross the line between lively and flowery promotional writing. Looking at it at the first time, I had the solid gut feeling that mr. Big D himself wrote it, and acted accordingly. However, I see and respect the point, and will abide Ikan's opinion that my edit should be more moderate. Ibaman (talk) 20:03, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
I completely agree on "follow your nose". That's no kind of direction. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:30, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
If Mr. Big himself wrote that, he is more competent than about 90% of our touts. Just saying. Hobbitschuster (talk) 23:34, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Start of the 2017 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees elections[edit]

Please accept our apologies for cross-posting this message. This message is available for translation on Meta-Wiki.

Wikimedia-logo black.svg

On behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee, I am pleased to announce that self-nominations are being accepted for the 2017 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees Elections.

The Board of Trustees (Board) is the decision-making body that is ultimately responsible for the long-term sustainability of the Wikimedia Foundation, so we value wide input into its selection. More information about this role can be found on Meta-Wiki. Please read the letter from the Board of Trustees calling for candidates.

The candidacy submission phase will last from April 7 (00:00 UTC) to April 20 (23:59 UTC).

We will also be accepting questions to ask the candidates from April 7 to April 20. You can submit your questions on Meta-Wiki.

Once the questions submission period has ended on April 20, the Elections Committee will then collate the questions for the candidates to respond to beginning on April 21.

The goal of this process is to fill the three community-selected seats on the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees. The election results will be used by the Board itself to select its new members.

The full schedule for the Board elections is as follows. All dates are inclusive, that is, from the beginning of the first day (UTC) to the end of the last.

  • April 7 (00:00 UTC) – April 20 (23:59 UTC) – Board nominations
  • April 7 – April 20 – Board candidates questions submission period
  • April 21 – April 30 – Board candidates answer questions
  • May 1 – May 14 – Board voting period
  • May 15–19 – Board vote checking
  • May 20 – Board result announcement goal

In addition to the Board elections, we will also soon be holding elections for the following roles:

  • Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC)
    • There are five positions being filled. More information about this election will be available on Meta-Wiki.
  • Funds Dissemination Committee Ombudsperson (Ombuds)
    • One position is being filled. More information about this election will be available on Meta-Wiki.

Please note that this year the Board of Trustees elections will be held before the FDC and Ombuds elections. Candidates who are not elected to the Board are explicitly permitted and encouraged to submit themselves as candidates to the FDC or Ombuds positions after the results of the Board elections are announced.

More information on this year's elections can be found on Meta-Wiki. Any questions related to the election can be posted on the election talk page on Meta-Wiki, or sent to the election committee's mailing list, board-elections(at)

On behalf of the Election Committee,
Katie Chan, Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee
Joe Sutherland, Community Advocate, Wikimedia Foundation

Posted by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee, 03:37, 7 April 2017 (UTC) • Please help translate to your languageGet help

Featuring Kassel for w:documenta, striking Wernigerrode from the list for now?[edit]

I am not sure whether I raised this issue in Dotm already, but it is getting closer and closer. I think my objections to Wernigerrode are rather known (it is by far not the best guide article about a German city to not yet have been featured) and the documenta is not a common occurence (and really; if we are going to feature Kassel, it'd better be during documenta). I want some input from the community as the decision will have to be made rather quickly, because we will likely not feature two German cities in one year, especially with potential FTTs down the line in Rail travel in Germany and Intercity buses in Germany. Keep in mind that the documenta will be from June to September of this year and will most likely only happen again five years later - and I don't think we should be reserving featured spots five years in advance, which I think would be the consequence of ignoring Kassel this time around. Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:04, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

On the topic of the Kassel page. There are a lot of broken links on the page, looks like the Kassel Museum English pages have gone. --Traveler100 (talk) 18:59, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Kassel article needs some work. It has more content than the Wernigerrode article and more pictures. I also like the idea of promoting a city if it has such a unique and "rare" event going on. I definitely think there is a strong case for featuring Kassel over Wernigerrode, so it should be added as a candidate on the DotM page with all these points brought up. There's definitely a fair amount of work to be done on Kassel though. Lots of "empty" listings (have no description) and those funny green icons that I'm not sure the purpose of. It would be a mad dash to finish it up nice before featuring, but I think it might be feasible. DethDestroyerOfWords (talk) 20:43, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
The funny green icons are German tram/bus stop signs ("H" for "Haltestelle"). They are supposed to indicate the closest tram or bus stop for the respective sight or other listing. --RJFF (talk) 21:07, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
That's a pretty useful thing to have. It's a bit unintuitive for English speakers (who haven't been informed about the meaning) so I wonder if there would be a way of making it more so. My initial thought, as someone who hasn't been to Germany, was that it was a copy + paste mistake from the de.wikivoyage article since I haven't seen it (or at least haven't noticed it) on the German destinations I've seen here. Maybe it's not a big deal and only uncultured American swine such as myself have difficulty with it. All things to discuss on the DotM nomination page, if Hobbitschuster decides to go ahead with suggesting it there. DethDestroyerOfWords (talk) 21:18, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Leaving aside the fact that Kassel isn't even at Guide level yet and slushing Wernigerode at this time would be extremely premature, the mere fact that we sometimes like to time DotMs to coincide with timely events doesn't mean we need to stop the presses every time we hear about some random event that happens to be planned for some place for which we have a Guide-level article. Pretty much every city worthy of tourist interest has a full calendar of such events every year, probably including Wernigerode. In a larger sense, I can't for the life of me figure out what huge problem you have with Wernigerode that you are so hellbent on finding a reason why it shouldn't be featured, but please either come up with policy-based arguments why it should be scuttled or else drop the issue. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 23:32, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Okay. So first of all the "H" symbol is pretty close to the sign you'd see on the street for a tram/bus stop. I am not married to it, but it's certainly not a bad idea, even though it is not as people over on de-WV are maybe more justified in thinking immediately obvious to most readers. I think the case for not featuring Wernigerode is mostly because it is not really a great article. There is no reason why we should feature that place now instead of a year or two or three from now, whereas Kassel has an event every five years that makes it relevant whereas the rest of the year people are just wondering why the ICE had to make a stop at that godforsaken village (scnr). And with Kassel we have a huge benefit that we do not have for Wernigerode. We have a local who has expressed interest in keeping / making the article up to date and answering our questions. I think we should chose local knowledge over "hey we just chose any guide article at random" every time and twice on Sundays. Does any of our editors have local knowledge on Wernigerode? And remember, according to the expedition, there are 32 guide articles for Germany. I am not opposed to featuring Wernigerode in principle, but it would take up a "Germany slot" that we can fill with a much more timely candidate and I think ceteris paribus we should go with the more timely candidate. Wernigerode contains a lot of stuff written five years ago or earlier. Some users here say that shouldn't be a criterion to withhold featuring now, so surely this won't be a criterion if featuring comes up a year or two from now. And while I am not quite sure of the importance of documenta, apparently the last edition drew almost a million visitors and it is commonly mentioned on the fifteen minute national 8pm news, which as cultural events go is a pretty huge deal. I have never once heard of Wernigerode in the news. But this is not primarily to bash Wernigerode. This is simply asking the question: Why should we feature a shoddy article with a lot of outdated or potentially outdated content over one with a local who can help us, a timely event of international renown and an ICE stop? I mean there are at the very least two considerations behind dotm nominations, one being the "timely event" or at the very least "feature warm weather destinations in the local summer" consideration and the other is "show our best work". And what is WV about if not locals writing about their town? Oh and btw, de-WV even says that they have more editors from North Hesse than mere chance would explain. My reasoning for not featuring Wernigerode at this time is in short that it uses up space we can be filling with much more worthy German destinations and topics like the three mentioned (Intercity buses in Germany, rail travel in Germany and Kassel). And once those have been featured, we might well wish to fill the "German slot" with Wernigerode. Who knows, maybe we'll have gotten a local by then. Hobbitschuster (talk) 00:39, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Forgive me for answering your question with a question, but why does a five-year event that you openly admit not knowing the importance of make a town that's otherwise so unimportant that people wonder why the train stops there, one whose article requires a great deal of improvement before it's technically even eligible to be featured, a better OtBP nominee than one that's already at Guide status, that's of interest to visitors on its own merits, and on a year-round basis, rather than merely as the site of an obscure art exhibition that takes place once every five years, and that already has banners made for it? I don't buy the argument that because documenta is only held every five years, there's some greater sense of urgency to feature Kassel now - there are plenty of events that occur as infrequently or more infrequently than that, most of which Wikivoyage will never get around to acknowledging on its Main Page, and that's not the end of the world. And as I have already said at dotm#Wernigerode, I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill when it comes to the outdated information in Wernigerode. Since Ypsilon has seemingly dropped off the face of the Earth, I've taken up the role of making sure upcoming articles that are "pending fixes" get looked after before featuring, and I don't see why Wernigerode would be any different. And furthermore, if it's only a matter of verifying whether places are still open, and confirming opening hours, phone numbers, and website URLs, I don't know why we would consider it particularly advantageous to have a local editor on the ground to verify that, rather than someone like me verifying the information via Google from far away. That's another question I asked already on the nominations page and never got an answer to. It's not as if Germany is some remote Third World country where most businesses don't have a presence on the Internet or social media. It doesn't require intimate local knowledge or an on-the-ground presence in a particular place to look up a restaurant's opening hours, or a hotel's phone number. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 01:44, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
If all you need for an article of ours is google, why should anybody use an article of ours instead of google? Also, my badmouthing Kassel is an old bad habit many Germans exhibit: Give me the name of pretty much any German town and I can say negative stuff about it. Except maybe for my home town and even then, there are annoying things about it, I am just a little more reluctant to blurt them out. And the fact that I, a total know-nothing when it comes to art (especially contemporary art) have heard of documenta should tell you all you need to know about its importance. Hobbitschuster (talk) 02:03, 8 April 2017 (UTC) - for some days during the documenta, Kassel is the most important town in germany ;) -- Feuermond16 (talk) 12:38, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
I can assure you that documenta is not some "obscure art exhibition", but a major contemporary art festival of international renown that attracted nearly a million visitors last time. It is not only about the exhibition itself, but also special events surrounding it. And saying that Kassel were bland during the rest of the year is simply untenable. It may not be the hippest of German cities, but at least the Wilhelmshöhe park is a UNESCO World Heritage site! Also, I do not really see what keeps Kassel from being upgraded to guide status. While the Wernigerode article is OK, it is certainly not among the best Wikivoyage has to offer that should absolutely be showcased. Kassel is certainly more presentable. --RJFF (talk) 14:21, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
I feel there is one person here who feels strongly - or seems to feel strongly - about sticking to featuring Wernigerode in 2017. There seems to be an opinion held by more than one participant in this discussion that documenta is a good reason to feature Kassel and the article is quite good as it stands. I would like more people to weigh in, but at which point can we say that such a change to the schedule can be made, even if the objections of one user (and if I mischaracterize anything or anybody here, please let me know) are still there? Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:57, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
It's perhaps noteworthy that at least two, and possibly all three, of the people who swear documenta is an event of towering importance in the world of modern art come from Germany themselves. I can imagine that an event like that might get its share of local coverage, but I would characterize myself as somewhat more attuned to the world of art than Hobbitschuster claims to be, and as an American, I have never in my life heard of documenta. And the one million visitors per year that it attracts does not seem like an especially impressive statistic to me - the Erie County Fair takes place in Hamburg, New York, a rinkydink midsize suburb of a rinkydink midsize American city, and no one would ever call it the preeminent anything, yet it attracted nearly 1.2 million attendees over twelve days in 2015, compared to the 100-day duration of documenta. (However, since the proposal is to run Kassel as OtBP and not DotM, perhaps that doesn't matter.)
Most of all, I find it annoying and disruptive that the suggestion of replacing Wernigerode on the schedule is being made with such short notice. Wernigerode, or whatever replaces it, is due to go up on the Main Page in only a little more than a month. We already have DotM banners made up for it.
That all having been said: in the abstract, I am not dead-set against the idea of running Kassel as a feature. But I do think the flaws that are keeping the article from reaching Guide status are much greater than they're characterized on this thread as being. For starters, the "documenta-artworks" section - in other words, the marquee attraction that we're using to sell the idea Kassel as a worthwhile destination - consists only of naked bullet-point listings, with no descriptive blurbs in the "content=" argument to give the reader any context. The same is true of literally every listing in "Buy", "Eat", "Drink", and "Sleep", and those sections also could benefit from introductory ledes. These are just the things that caught my eye from skimming the article briefly; there are surely other problems as well. If you're absolutely positive that in the space of five weeks, you can make all these improvements, get a nomination for Kassel up on the dotm page and accrue four Support votes, and get DotM banners made, then I won't stand in the way of Kassel being featured as OtBP if you succeed. But for the time being, color me skeptical.
-- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 18:15, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
I have raised the issue of featuring Kassel more than once, at the earliest I think in April 2016. So please don't characterize this as a last minute thing. I just saw that the only way to keep the imho unfortunate result of Wernigerode edging out more deserving nominees from happening was to raise this here and now. I also though that Feuermond16 himself (I'm assuming male, please correct me if I'm wrong here) would do the nominating and didn't want to take that away from him. Also, I think the comparison between a County Fair and an art exhibition is not entirely fair. County Fairs tend to attract people from the regional area only. Art stuff tends to attract people globally. Also, I am not sure we are counting the same numbers here. If somebody goes to the County Fair twice in the same year, is that one visitor or two? What about documenta? And at any rate, which are the art exhibitions that beat documenta? I will also see how much stuff we could translate from the de-WV edition on stuff you mentioned. Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:59, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
1) "I have raised the issue of featuring Kassel more than once, at the earliest I think in April 2016. So please don't characterize this as a last minute thing." - There are dozens of articles that we've "raised the issue of featuring" but never got around to actually improving or nominating: off the top of my head, Albany (New York), Denpasar, and Barentsburg are a few examples. You can't equate simply broaching the subject of Kassel being featured to Wernigerode having been a formal nominee for six months already. That's doubly true since Kassel isn't even eligible to be nominated yet, being only at Usable status, which leads into my second point...
2) Several times now, you've mentioned that Wernigerode is "not really a great article" and "not our best work", but for all its outdated information and other flaws, at least it's currently at Guide status. You argue that there are "more deserving nominees", which may be true, but with a great deal of improvement necessary before Kassel is even eligible to be upgraded from Usable, your contention that it's a superior choice to Wernigerode on the basis of article quality makes no sense.
3) "County Fairs tend to attract people from the regional area only. Art stuff tends to attract people globally." - If the Erie County Fair managed to draw 1.2 million visitors over 12 days from within a region that's no great shakes in terms of population yet still "no one would ever call it the preeminent anything", while documenta drew fewer people over 100 days from among a global attendance base, does that not strengthen my original argument about respective attendance figures? Also, to your point about repeat attendees: between admission fees, parking fees, wristbands and/or tickets for carnival rides, not to mention food, your average family of four will spend something like $150 all told for a day at the Fair. If you can afford to do that more than once a season, you can probably afford a trip to Walt Disney World or some other theme park where you can have real fun. So I doubt 1.2 million paid admissions translates to much fewer than that number of individual attendees.
Again, I'm more than willing to give Kassel a fair consideration on its own merits if and when it gets formally nominated. It hasn't been, though, and for now it can't be. Until it's brought up to Guide status, it's pointless for us to be arguing about it here. Why don't you set about improving the article, prepare a nomination once it's a Guide, and for the question of what to feature for OtBP in May, we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.
-- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 02:54, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
Agreed - bring it up to Guide status, then nominate it. If it can't be featured during documenta, the next best thing is to mention documenta in WV:Discover. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:06, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Vandalism filter for invite links?[edit]

So given that some just tried to put an invite link into the article on Prague again can we have some sort of vandalism filter or highlighter for invite links same as we do for the Telstra edit patterns? Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:01, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Do you want an abuse filter, or an entry in the spam blacklist? It's possible to blacklist "uber/invite" links but permit plain "uber" links with the blacklist. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:52, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Whatever works. We can block them (but then we'd have to make sure there are no false positives) or we could make the recent changes highlight them similar to edits by the Telstra person. Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:53, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

The last week of the 1st cycle of Wikimedia strategy conversation[edit]

Hi, I'm Szymon, a MetaWiki Strategy Coordinator. 3 weeks ago, we invited you to join a broad discussion about Wikimedia's future role in the world. The discussion is divided into 3 cycles, and the first one ends on April, 15. So far, Wikimedians have been discussing mainly about technological improvements, multilingual support, friendly environment, cooperation with other organizations and networks.

I'm pinging a few recently active admins. I hope you'll help me with passing along the news, maybe even join the discussion. @AndreCarrotflower, Andrewssi2, ‎Ikan Kekek, WOSlinker, ‎Shaundd:.

Looking forward to your input. Thank you in advance! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 00:46, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Szymon's "real" name is Tar Lócesilion, and I suspect that some of you have encountered him under that name. I encourage you all to take him up on the invitation to talk about what you'd like to see happen during the next 10–20 years. Better mobile experience? Easier cross-language or cross-project integration? Efforts to engage potential editors, maybe with something that uses smartphone-based geolocation to request specific updates and edits? Whatever's on your mind, especially if it's a big idea, it should be proposed now. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:58, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Not a big idea by any means, but today I found myself copying geo-coordinates by hand from de-WV Herzogenaurach to the en-WV equivalent and was thinking to myself: There's gotta be a better way. Hobbitschuster (talk) 02:02, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
@SGrabarczuk (WMF), WhatamIdoing: in Russian Wikivoyage, we came up with a rather long list of thoughts and ideas concerning the strategy and the strategy-building process itself. We have a short English summary toward the end of this page and plan on translating the rest later this week.
As a side note, the Russian-speaking strategy coordinator, who promised to make the translation for us, already disappeared, which kind of tells us what to expect from this strategy in the future. --Alexander (talk) 23:21, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Now we have a full English translation for our vision of the strategy. A significant part of it describes the development of Wikivoyage. Any comments are welcome. --Alexander (talk) 19:56, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Rethinking "Recent Changes Patrol"[edit]

I've had several conversations with new or relatively new users who were more or less freaked out by "stalking" — that is, reading their changes in Special:RecentChanges and making small edits to their work and/or preexisting text in the article(s) they've just been editing. Some have reacted very negatively to this, and we may even have lost some editors permanently over this. I'm not talking about spambots, touters or vandals but good-faith editors who may be a bit sensitive and perhaps quickly frustrated, especially if some of the edits after them are in some way wrong (as is bound to happen at times, given that all editors are human).

So here's the problem: Given that "out of sight is out of mind" and that many small and not-so-small faults in articles have escaped the notice of editors for years, it's very tempting to fix them when "Recent changes" brings them to our attention. The risk if we wait some set period of time before attending to them is that we will get distracted and never go back to those articles. So what to do? Should we risk leaving minor to moderate faults alone, with the possible attendant erosion of the site's quality considered to be a reasonable risk, given the improvements to content from new editors? Or is there even a single, one-size-fits-all answer to this question? Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:14, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

This is not an easy topic. Is part of the nature of a Wiki collaborative site. Also with Wikivoyage consisting of a small active group of regular contributor, it can be a bit intimidating for a new user that maybe more use to blog type web pages than wiki style authoring. I think it is fine to make minor corrections to entries of new users but as for content topics it is always worth talking over entries first with the new user. For more established users I do not think we need to be so cautious (I notice that at least half of edits I make to a long ignored page are followed quickly by other edits), we are more used to this, sometimes harsh, collaborative environment.
On recent cases I know I swooped on a couple of new pages, but in my defence I have worked for some time to get every UK and Germany city page with at least one See and one Sleep on them. If I see a new page in these regions without such listing I feel a need to add an entry. As for other edits I am not totally in agreement with I try and start a conversation first and make edits once the page edits have settled down.
For those long term contributors maybe instead of concentrating on recent edits how about working on the to-dos of a Geographic Expedition or one of the Maintenance categories. --Traveler100 (talk) 07:18, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict)
The short answer to your question is that in any wiki, the content is always more important than preserving the contributors' feelings. Wikipedia is especially explicit about where they stand on the matter - w:Wikipedia:Wikipedia does not need you, w:Wikipedia:You are not irreplaceable, and so on - and, while I've always felt their bluntness to be unnecessarily harsh, in the end that's how it has to be for Wikivoyage too.
However, there are ways to do it more tactfully. For instance, when I find myself "stalking" a new editor on Recent Changes patrol, I usually drop him or her a welcome message on their talk page - not just the standard boilerplate text in Template:Welcome, but something more personalized, such as "Thank you for your contributions on (insert article here). I had to tweak it a little bit because of (insert reason here), but overall you're doing good work, keep it up!" 99% of the time, the message is received positively, and I can mark the whole thing down as a success at both 1) introducing a new user to the collaborative, give-and-take nature of editing Wikivoyage and 2) making him or her feel like a valued contributor to the site. And for that small minority of users who are so thin-skinned that even a friendly explanation like that can't make up for the indignity of being cleaned up after, then as far as I'm concerned we can absolutely throw up our hands and say maybe editing wikis isn't their thing.
-- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 07:33, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your thoughts, guys. We shouldn't lose sight of the issue that Wikipedia has lots of editors and that Wikipedia articles are not supposed to include original research, but we rely on a relatively small number of content-providers who personally know things. So maybe we need to be more careful to try to avoid repelling them and effectively chasing them from the site.
One issue is that some of the changes I like to make are not huge and policy-driven in a major way but have to do with things like capitalization, punctuation, syntax and usage, and some users who are in the process of making edits get annoyed by those. But there's no clear way for me to know when they are pausing or finished with editing a particular article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:44, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
As a new contributor myself (and somebody who has felt stalked) a few initial thoughts (sorry for the length of my response):
  • My impression is that there are a fair number of destination pages that "require work" and that if contributors have time to do work, maybe focus on the bigger issues rather than spending time moving a colon or changing a double space to a single space. It is the out-of-date listings, major omissions, etc. (the "biggies") the "erode the quality" more than the minor niceties. By analogy, when you want a beautiful garden but only have 1 hour a day to work on it, do you spend every hour going over the flower beds somebody else has just weeded or do you spend your limited resource addressing the totally overgrown areas ...
  • When considering leaping on a "Recent Changes" maybe there should be a distinction between adding new or additional content and tweaking phraseology. Distinguish between proof correcting a "work in progress" and a (mostly) complete addition or update (I guess I am not alone in "publishing" a page before I have finished changes.
  • When focusing on "Recent Changes" to make corrections it would seem to erode the quality when the original author (who has local knowledge or done research) has their true and accurate contribution modified to be untrue or have errors all because a subsequent editor wanted it phrased differently.
  • I am unaware of technical implementation details and appreciate that changes can require significant effort (and maybe such a process already exists) but one thought might be a modification to the page status (e.g. outline city tag thingy) where a page can be scheduled for review. Maybe a new page (in the template) defaults to "reviewin:2 weeks" and maybe longer established pages default to "reviewin:1 year". I would guess aspects to WikiVoyage subject coverage are more prone to change or that change happens outside the authors control than would be the case in Wikipedia. For example, restaurants/hotels/etc. open and close, transport services change, etc. affecting WikiVoyage whereas maybe other Wikis the initiator of the change is also a contributor (or has interest in having the Wiki updated). So longer term editors would then focus more on the "Scheduled for Review" lists rather than "Recent Changes". (Any page provided to a user might then also include a warning box "This page is overdue for review", similar to the "outlinecity" info box)
  • Maybe WikiVoyage needs a different type of contributor from other Wikis. Many years ago I used to contribute to the South American Handbook and such resources need a large number of non-specialists updating and maintaining information rather than specialists in specific fields. As people travel they find useful information and maybe errors of changes in e.g. WikiVoyage and provide additions or updates.
  • Of course with any new contributor it needs to be remembered that they only see "where things are" rather than the reasons as to why things got there. But, as I'm new and unknown, I should add that I firmly believe that any idea (however good or bad) can be improved through discussion and input from others. PsamatheM (talk) 09:17, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Very much agreed on the value of discussion. Thanks for giving us some things to think about. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:28, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Suggestion: It is tempting to quickly edit a recent change as "out of sight is out of mind" tends to happen after a few days. We did look at an articles needing attention {{Needsimprovement}} tag a while ago but I think this is a too loud a solution in the cases we are currently discussing. I suggest that people create a folder in the Bookmark function of their web browser, something like "Wikivoyage - articles to revisit". Bookmark the recent change you think needs some attention but leave it a week before going back to it, making any changes and removing from your bookmark list. --Traveler100 (talk) 09:30, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Good idea. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:40, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
When I first started as an IP editor way back when, I found that my edits would "bring back" long forgotten articles to the attention of more established users. I must say I was actually delighted by that and didn't feel stalked (though I guess I had at least a hunch what recent change patrol might entail). It's also a thing that edits by "not established" editors are marked with a small red exclamation point that "more established" editors can remove if they find the edit free of spam or egregious abuse of the English language (sadly quite common here) - it is of course tempting to not only get rid of the exclamation point but fix whichever minor faults one stumbles across. But yeah, I feel we overwhelmed - for example - the person who created Villingen-Schwenningen Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:15, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
In Wikipedia, this problem is handled by putting new articles in the "draft" namespace. Before an article is moved to the main namespace, it must be reviewed by several editors. --FriedhelmW (talk) 16:50, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Wouldn't thatscare away even more newbies even quicker? I always find that WP is way to quick with the "revert on sight" - it's rather hard to get any thing - even a true or plausible thing - to "stick" in WP. This is and should be different here. Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:01, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
I would take any suggestion to encourage new users very seriously, and it is probably accurate to say that you need a thick skin if a seasoned editor starts aggressively jumping on an article you are working on. That said, surely that is how a Wiki works? If anyone doesn't want someone to edit at the same time then they can always create their content in a sandbox int heir namespace and no-one will touch... Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:54, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, but most new users wouldn't know about the sandbox! Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:29, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
I didn't. The mention above made me try but I'm still not sure I have not created some duff page somewhere maybe related to my username. I did search the help and experimented. I probably got it wrong because I have noticed on another user they have a "sandbox" link top of user page (between username and logout) but I've not got one so I probably messed-up - and I consider myself quite technically oriented (having been a software developer for over 30 years). Good idea though (but maybe needs a bit more in help pages and for new users to be pointed towards it? That said, I think it would help but not solve the issue in that it would allow a new user not to have the initial "work in progress" main space page "descended on" - less of a negative if "Change Patrol" changes were made as one or two blocks rather than many different tweaks. Maybe it's the "History" that can make a few changes look worse (each done individually) or lots of changes look better (done as a single "publish"). PsamatheM (talk) 08:42, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Why keep articles for long dead expeditions around?[edit]

If anything they discourage people starting said expedition anew. Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:57, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

I'd agree that the moribund expeditions do not have a good look for the momentum of WV, but does it really so much that it discourages people?
I did create a section for Wikivoyage:Expeditions#Archived_Expeditions along with assigning the {{historical}} template for those expeditions that really looked completely abandoned, since that strategy at least gave the option for someone to pick up an old exhibition in the future. Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:01, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
I think it more likely that a new expedition be created from scratch (as has happened e.g. for Wales or Scotland) than one of the archived ones be revived. Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:13, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
So what are you proposing? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:22, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Deleting at the very least some of them. Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:23, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
I'd suggest archiving somehow. You surely know the general sentiment towards deleting articles here :) Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:04, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
I fear that archiving reduces the already slim chance of someone getting the initiative towards a new expedition even further. Hobbitschuster (talk) 23:11, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
You really think the existence of an expedition in some corner of the site inhibits anything? Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:11, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
From my side, the single greatest inhibitor is the likely lack of collaborators. The existence of an abandoned expedition doesn't actually discourage me in any way. Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:22, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
If anything, I'd think that someone proposing to launch (or re-launch) an expedition should have every right to know the project history and have access to the previous data as a starting point. Some of these are on valid topics (much like Wikipedia's moribund w:WP:TRAVEL and w:WP:HOTEL are potentially-valid topics), were there interested editors to pick these up and run with them. In some cases, something might be dead for valid technical reasons (such as RDF, if we ultimately went with hCard or some other format) or refer to a task already completed (like adding "See" sections to countries or replacing all the WT templates on Wikipedia articles with WV templates or Wikidata links). In others, the idea is valid but we don't have the people (an LGBT expedition would be one example, valid topic but only one or two articles focus on LGBT topics and we don't have the users to justify an expedition, so it rests inactive without prejudice to being reopened if interested users join in future). K7L (talk) 02:52, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
True, why would we want to lose forever the thinking and discussions that went into (for example) LGBT, just because it is not being actively worked on today? Andrewssi2 (talk) 03:04, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
I for one sometimes revive long-dead expeditions. Since I few days I am working hard (in the main namespace) on an Wikidata expedition that was written by a single person ages ago and never edited by anyone else. Syced (talk) 11:47, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Free places to sleep[edit]

Moved from Wikivoyage talk:Requests for comment:

I want to ask that i add somany thing if i add budgetery stay on sleep safe point of vrindavan then what wrong if a traveller that doesn't have money then he can get stay on that ashram if it is for promotion purpose then it is fine. I have to say that i explaining everything that have historically near by places and Ashram having Sidh Bholenath temples. Girriraj Bhawan Bengali Ashram (talk) 03:31, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

@Girriraj Bhawan Bengali Ashram: This is a good point. If you can find places to add these ashrams to Wikivoyage, that would be very helpful. —Justin (koavf)TCM 04:02, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
It's perfectly OK to list ashrams, anyway. Just put each listing in the article for the nearest town. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:09, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
It is possible that I was the one who reverted it because it sounded touty and contained a smiley. Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:36, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Coordinates (GPS) from Wikidata ?[edit]

Come and join this conversation: Wikivoyage talk:Cooperating with Wikidata#coordinates ?. TaBaZzz (talk) 07:33, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Fare hike for buses in Nicaragua[edit]

The semi regular fare hike is upon us again. La Prensa (the main opposition newspaper) has a handy graphic as well showing which buses cost how much under the new prices. We should update articles accordingly if possible. Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:33, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Read-only mode for 20 to 30 minutes on 19 April and 3 May[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:34, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Promote some more users to whatever the status is called that allows you to remove th red exclamation points[edit]

When I do recent change patrol, I sometimes find it cluttered with red exclamation points for edits by users whom I know to be trustworthy (or at the very least as trustworthy as the "regulars") whose edits may sometimes contain typos or the likes, but who certainly do not warrant as much attention as other red exclamation point edits. Can we please move some of those from one category to the other? Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:50, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Admins have the power to do that. Would you like to be nominated to serve as an admin? Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:28, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
User:Hobbitschuster is a member of the Patrollers group, which should give him the ability to patrol edits. Powers (talk) 20:35, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Yes, but that's not what he's complaining about above. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:08, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Oh, right, sorry. That's what I get for being in a hurry. I suppose non-Admins are welcome to nominate users for auto-patrolled status. Powers (talk) 19:29, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Listing Editor in other languages[edit]

So I have been looking around other language editions recently. Is it true that de-WV is the only other language edition not to have the listing editor? An editor at de-WV recently posted to my talk page that he does not intend to implement the listing editor because he considers it the technologically wrong thing to do and he does not want to saddle the community with a maintenance task that might prove untenable. Why is it then used on so many other wikis? Are there good reasons for not having the listing editor (please keep in mind that I know nothing about the technology and code behind all this)? Is the basic code behind it the same for all language editions or does it have to be ported locally every single time? Would it be feasible to have one for all language editions? Is that what is already happening? I just find the vcards on de-WV way too complicated and surely not what I want to have to contend with when I just want to add a restaurant I like. Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:59, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

I am the editor at WV/de who was mentioned above. And I want to point out, that its just a very personal opinion, not the opinion of the WV/de community. I think that local software developments are the wrong way to become a stable feature in future. I think the listing editor has two big problems. It is just useful for the "WV freaks" like us (I am not a fluent speaker - can I use it that way?) - users who edit at home and on their desktop computers. But we need information from travellers around the world, travellers who sit in a cafe in Bangkok or Pretoria and want to add the cafe they currently sit in. But the listing editor does not work in the visual editor and on any smartphone or tablet computer - it's a feature for "us" not a feature for "them" to attract all the travellers on their way around the world. I think we should focus on a better solution that works properly on all devices - and it should fetch data from WD directly, like our listing template. I am want to talk with the WD guys to get a feature to edit WD directly from the local wiki without being directed to WD. .... just talking about editing WV when sitting in a pub in..... Montreal.... any chance for a WV-meeting in Montreal?
Sorry for being silent. I am going to drop a message about the Wikimania here at Easter weekend and ask for needs, wishes, ideas... Hopefully some of your wishes will come true... see ya soon.. -- DerFussi 19:56, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
@DerFussi: Your perspective is valuable and your English is perfectly fine. —Justin (koavf)TCM 22:11, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Just to ask, what is the purpose of discussing this here on the English WV pub? Surely this only impacts German WV? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:44, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
@Andrewssi2: If there are good reasons to not use the Listing Editor then it is certainly worth thinking about that here. —Justin (koavf)TCM 00:02, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
User:Koavf - if there is any suggestion that we may remove the listing editor on English WV then frankly you need to make this topic explicit. You can probably expect a strong reaction though. Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:49, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
@Andrewssi2: Okay. I am not suggesting that. —Justin (koavf)TCM 05:48, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
I can appreciate the limitations of the Listings Editor raised. Useful on large screen devices and I've not tried it on small screens but I can appreciate the value of having somebody sitting at a bar submitting new listings through their Smartphone. And it made me wonder about the potential for a vCard interface. New functionality (and I've no idea what de-WV do) but a means/button to add a listing through uploading a vCard AND, an option for a reader to export a listing as a vCard (and download it to their computer in a similar manner to the .gpx export for destination pages that have geo coordinates. i.e. each listing has a vCard button at the end and user clicks it and listing exported and downloads a vCard they can save/add to their contacts/whatever. Authors/users would not need to know technical details of a vCard, just export and submit from their contacts or export and download from WV. vCards are a well established standard and most contact system recognise and import and export them. PsamatheM (talk) 22:51, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
So how does the VCARD work on the German page? I am not seeing any icons to help input the format (not even the icons we have here for see and sleep) apart from by hand in my browser. --Traveler100 (talk) 06:02, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
We have no different listings for see and sleep. They are similar anyway. We just choose a type as an additional parameter. Check Nanxun. Maybe the section sleep ("Unterkunft") is a good example. No phone number, coordinates, Chinese names and adress in the listing. All fetched from directly Wikidata. The Infobox is empty as well, even the tourist information is on WD. Everything is delivered from WD there. In the edit window just put your cursor into the vcard template and press {T}. This button opens the template in the "Template Master" - works with all templates, not only the vcard. An empty vcard can by added via the edit tools. Can you see it? Not as comfortable as your listing editor. We have some tools but and maybe that's why we were too lazy to setup your listing editor (and due to my limited time I have no time for feature requests after starting it). If somebody else want to add it WV/de, just do it. And i still hope for a better solution as part of the VE and mobile editor. -- DerFussi 10:55, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
You are correct that the listing editor doesn't work "in" the visual editor, but it also doesn't work "in" any of the old wikitext editors, either. The visual editor should not interfere with using the listing editor (and vice versa). Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 21:00, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Well the upsides of vcards and the listing editor are relatively independent of the language edition, aren't they? and if de-WV has good reasons for doing what they do, we should at least hear them. As a writer, I think the listing editor is far superior to vcards, but they do seem to have some functions our listing editor currently doesn't have. Of course we'll always have to weigh functions on one hand and usability on the other. Very often some gimicky function makes stuff needlessly complicated and discourages editing. Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:35, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Don't compare the listing editor and the vcard. You can't do. One is an edit feature the other one is a mediawiki template. You can compare your listings (see, do, eat...) with our VCard (they work similar, there is almost no difference, we just fetch information from Wikidata, and we even intentionally use the same parameters as you). And you can compare your listing editor with our template master to get a form to fill out the template (do not forget, we had the vcard and the old template master for six years already when you joined Wikivoyage in 2012). So i do not understand the importance of the discussion here and on WV/de. Both edit features work in the "classic wiki" only. Thats the issue. And thats why my intention is to focus on talks with Wikidata and VE guys to get easy to use features. Maybe a template favourite list of templates (not called "template favourites") that can easily added when editing an article ("add sight"). The template list could be setup in every local wiki. Travellers sitting in a cafe and not knowing about wikis, don't know abut the existence of templates, and even if they don't know the name of the suitable template. Thats the disadvantage of the VE and template master but the huge advantage of your listing editor. And thats why I will be in Montreal, also for technical talks (what is possible, what not). Maybe we can draft a proper long term feature request for the developing team. I am going to write down some thoughts on meta this weekend and send a mass message to the lounges to join the discussion. -- DerFussi 05:53, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
I repeat: The listing editor does not use "the classic editor". Click here to see what the listing editor looks like. It does not look like a regular wikitext editing window. The listing editor calls the API directly (as far as I can tell from the documentation, anyway). You reach the listing editor by clicking the link that says [Add listing]. If you click an 'Edit' button first, then you are not using the listing editor. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 16:03, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
Of course, I am aware of that. Thats why I wrote above "classic wiki", not classic wiki editor. Maybe i did not talk clearly. Maybe I should have said desktop version. -- DerFussi 17:04, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
But something like the listing editor should become a part of the VE and mobile editor. This would be really cool. -- DerFussi 17:09, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
When phab:T96710 is addressed, then we might get fairly close to that. (However, right now, the visual editor on mobile is rather limited. For example, it can't insert templates unless you have memorized the keyboard shortcut.) Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:22, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Yes, a mobile compliant listing editor would be a great idea for the future. Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:52, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Airline terminology[edit]

In the Planning your flight#Airlines article, I have tried to describe different categories of airlines. The international market is dominated by two categories: the first one being called major airline, legacy carrier, full-service carrier etc, the other one being called low-cost carrier, budget airline, startup airline, no-frills carrier etc. Which of these terms would be most practical to use on Wikivoyage? Should they be used universally? /Yvwv (talk) 13:19, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Or should this distinction be used at all? /Yvwv (talk) 13:21, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
IMHO these are seven distinct categories. --FriedhelmW (talk) 16:28, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
No they're not. Those are broadly speaking two categories that are a bit fuzzy on the edges. One is the "Ryanair-model" where you pay extra for everything, and the other is the "Lufthansa-model" that still seems to think flying is for business and rich people but they still give away free newspapers and the likes. Imho we should avoid both "full service" and "low cost" as they are more advertising than purely descriptive. "Startup" is not an analytical term, especially given the fact that Ryanair is actually older than e.g. Swiss Airlines or Brussel Airlines. Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:57, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Israel needs a new region map[edit]

Quietly and slowly without many here noticing - or so it seems - the regions of Israel have been changed. However, the map hasn't. I think we should remedy this. Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:31, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

borked "go" listings[edit]

I have been trying to add a listing for the railway station of Romanshorn which includes the Wikipedia link. However, this only seems to work when I make it a "listing" type listing and changing it - even manually - to a "go" listing borks up the stuff somehow and the Wikipedia icon disappears. What gives? Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:17, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

    • Works as a listing -- as a listing with type=go -- and as a go template listing for me. -- Matroc (talk) 18:37, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
On a somewhat related note, why are there more listing types than can be found in the editing shortcuts and why does "do" use a bicycle as a symbol (for me at least, getting on my bike is about getting from A to B and not about sport or entertainment) Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:52, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

WikiData wiping out excellent GPS tags and no one cares?[edit]

Hi there again
I mentioned this topic already in the WikiData section, and I would really like to have some input and opinions from others here.
I am not OK with the straight forward usage of WikiData connections to WikiVoyage listing when this wipes out the excellent work that users put into the GPS-tagging of WikiVoyage listings. There is no consensus on which data is better quality- and travelling-wise, and also there have certainly been some mess ups due to the flighty referencing of WikiData contents, like for Mt. Hermon and Wadi Daliyot.
Who guarantees that WikiData users put the same amount of effort into their data creation? Who guarantees the WD and WV listings are even referring to the same? Who guarantees the usefulness of the WD GPS-tags for the travellers?
So, can we please stop with the WikiData tagging of WikiVoyage listings as long as we have no agreement regarding this topic?
Ceever (talk) 18:56, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

There is nothing wrong with placing a wikidata tag into a listing. This issue is about being selective on which values to copy over. In fact I have a number of times corrected wikidata to what is at Wikivoyage, particularly web url and sometimes coordinates. Agree however it would be useful to have some form of compare or selective copy option when transferring information. --Traveler100 (talk) 20:16, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
This is precisely why I've urged caution regarding ceding too much control over the site to Wikidata. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 22:58, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
I agree that this is an issue. One problem I encounter is that when clicking link to take data over from wikidata (usually to get the Wikipedia page and the website), there is no way I can do this without copying over the coordinates as well. It would be great if that could be done only for selected field, so that we can take advantage of the benefits of having the wikipedia page and other information from wikidata but not wipe out coordinates which have been previously added. Maybe a way of getting around this would be to give priority to already present coordinates when data is copied over. Drat70 (talk) 05:53, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
This is precisely why we need better integration with Wikidata. I know I am asking a lot, but here is what I think we should have ideally: I would click "Merge values with Wikidata", and if there is a conflict (Wikidata and Wikivoyage both have a value, and the value is different), the dialog should show me both and ask me which one to use (overwriting either Wikidata or Wikivoyage), or whether to let them as-is, while giving me all of the info I need to decide. In case of an image I would be shown both images side-by-side in high resolution. In case of coordinates I would be show the two points on a map. Would that be difficult to implement? That would eliminate the present problem, and indeed benefit both Wikivoyage and Wikidata. Cheers! Syced (talk) 03:51, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Editing Berlin for clarity, flow, tone and lack of duplications[edit]

So I have written quite a bit of what are currently the top sections of Berlin (i.e. understand and so on). However, it has some problems with mentioning similar things more than once and some others. If you feel like doing some copy-editing for flow and whatnot and trying to expunge some crypto-Germanisms, be my guest. Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:14, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

No takers? Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:11, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

World Heritage Sites[edit]

Supposedly UNESCO is releasing a few thousand images of World Heritage Sites. They will be going here Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:35, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

TIME magazine: "The World's Street-Food Capital Is Banning Street Food"[edit]

I imagine we have our work cut out for us now updating Bangkok and its districts. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 18:39, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

I very much hope protests will make them back down, but we might end up with {{Warningbox|street food riots|Due to a controversial law banning street food, it is absolutely not advised to go anywhere near Bangkok at the moment as government forces and protestors frequently clash}} on all our articles. I cannot imagine the people (not to mention those whose income depends on this line of work) will take this without so much as a letter to their representative. Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:59, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
That didn't take long. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 03:36, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

I started Avoiding travel through Canada[edit]

And will probably be bombarded by notifications that someone somewhere made a link to it for the next months, but I'd be much delighted if the article were to grow and flourish. Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:11, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Is it common for airlines or agents to route traffic from (some random out-of-region non-Canadian point) to (some other equally random non-Canadian point) through Soviet Canuckistan? I'd think the fares would be higher in Canada than the US, so they'd be more likely to err on the side of "we've got this cheap flight through Chicago if you don't mind a concussion, a couple of broken teeth... and that pesky detail that United Breaks Guitars." K7L (talk) 19:20, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Just anecdotal evidence, but when looking for flights MGA-FRA or MGA-BER or similar, there are often a handful via the US and (slightly more expensive) a handful of flights via the country with all the Ys and Zs in its IATA codes. Of course there are also quite often quite some good deals for MGA-PTY-MAD-FRA or SJO-SDQ-FRA or the likes (with really baffling airline acrobatic as to the price logic on occasion; AMS-PTY-MGA being more expensive than FRA-AMS-PTY-MGA being just one of them). Thankfully the still pretty awful but apparently slightly less awful than United Delta is the one that flies to both Europe and Nicaragua among the US carriers Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:34, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Hmm, this is a tough one. My first instinct would be to simply expand the scope of Avoiding travel through the United States and rename it Avoiding travel through the U.S. and Canada, but on closer inspection that's a less ideal solution than I had originally thought: while most of the reasons one would want to avoid travel through Canada apply equally to the U.S. (no sterile transit; uncommonly stringent entry restrictions for those with criminal records, even including minor offenses committed many years ago), the reverse is not necessarily true: there are a good many concerns that are specific to the U.S., with the potential for even more down the line e.g. if Trump tries again to resurrect the Muslim ban. I'm still concerned, though, that if we keep the articles separate there will be a ton of redundant information. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 21:08, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Just an aside point, if you only read the edit summary of this title, it sounds as if I somehow commenced a travel boycott of Canada (which I haven't and don't intend to, for the record).
Anyhoo... I think there are a couple of countries that get relatively easier access to Canada than the US, and the current political leaders are rather different and so may be the inclination of certain groups of people to visit said country. Also, are the US as strict when it comes to past drunk driving convictions? (For the record, I consider drunk driving a serious offense and much more worthy of persecution than a bunch of other offenses, but that's neither here nor there). Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:13, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
God, why do you hate Canada so much, Hobbit? :P
Although I am ignorant of the specific laws, my first intuition is that since the U.S. and Canada are two separate legal jurisdictions and not in a customs union, it's best to keep the articles separate. On the other hand, I expect most of the non-legal stuff (i.e. the actual flight routes) would just be copied directly from one article to another, so there would be quite a lot of content overlap. All the same, for clarity's sake, it is probably best to not jumble up two countries' laws in one article. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:55, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
I am innocent. Evil new media made me do it! Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:15, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
In practical terms, flying between the USA and East Asia via YVR, or between the USA and Europe (or Western Asia) via YYZ is fairly common. For example, you are fairly often offered either option when redeeming United MileagePlus or KLM/Air France FlyingBlue frequent flyer miles. (I've flown through YYZ US-to-international a couple times, and found the document check in YYZ fairly quick and easy; but then I am a Canadian citizen). However, for most passengers traveling between the USA and the Old World and "Canada-less" alternative (a direct flight from the USA to Europe or Asia) is easy to find. One may also connect in Canada when flying between the Old World and Mexico/Central America/Caribbean; historically, it was fairly common for transit passengers on these routes to request asylum in Canada (e.g. during a refueling stop in YQX), so I wasn't surprised when at some point in the 1990s Canada imposed visa requirements not just on passengers transferring in Canadian airports, but on those whose planes merely land in Canada for refueling.
Pretty much all of the travelers who may want to avoid a transfer/stop in Canada will fall in the following 3 categories:
  • (1) Those who travel to/from the USA, have a US visa (or don't need one), and are not eligible for a Canadian ETA or TWOV (i.e. have to get a Canadian visa). They can be easily accommodated by booking a direct flight from the USA to Europe or Asia.
  • (2) Those who travel from the USA to the Old World, who need a US visa but don't have one (because their original US entry visa has expired or been spent), and need a visa for Canada. Same solution as for (1).
  • (3) Those who travel between the Old World (or Australia) and Latin American/Caribbean, and need a transit visa for both USA and Canada. These are the group who are hardest to accommodate, since direct flights between the Latin America/Caribbean and Eurasia/Africa/Australasia are comparatively few (as compared to the itineraries via US or Canada). So it is accommodating this group which should be the main topic of the article. -- Vmenkov (talk) 15:28, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Proposal: Use new modernised version of Extension:RelatedArticles[edit]

Wikivoyage currently shows related articles on a handful of pages where editors have added them for example on the New_York_City page New_York_City_with_children appears in the sidebar (Although it's rather hidden away!) of the desktop skin and does not work on mobile.

It uses the mw:Extension:RelatedArticles extension.

Wikimedia recently enabled a much more visual form of the related pages feature on a variety of projects. I was curious if Wikivoyage were interested in switching from the sidebar view to the footer view?


  • More visual and discoverable
  • It can be configured to algorithmly suggest related pages (you can see how this would look by scrolling to the bottom and clicking on links in )
  • It works on mobile

An illustration can be seen here:

and you can see what it looks like on Vector by looking at Haitian Wikipedia:

No pressure!

If you are interested I can enable it at a time of your choosing, and revert back to the old view if you decide you do not like it. Let me know! Jdlrobson (talk) 22:39, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

I am in favour of having trying this :-) I often fail to discover relevant articles when preparing a trip, and learn about them only after my trip is over. Syced (talk) 05:55, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Jdlrobson, that sounds interesting. Could you elaborate on how this system chooses related pages? I read the descriptions but did not understand much. Thanks! --Alexander (talk) 07:40, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
I think this looks cool! --ButteBag (talk) 14:55, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
The algorithm version uses a CirrusSearch feature which relates pages with similar text. For instance if the phrase "Roman architecture" appears in two articles frequently they would be judged similar. All results can be overriden by editors using
magic word. The results are not always great as with any algorithm. Some pages, especially smaller articled may spit out strange related articles but it's a great way to encourage exploration and create editing opportunities IMO. Jdlrobson (talk) 15:39, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
I've had it turned on at a couple of wikis, and overall I like it. The last time I checked, the three articles it selects were usually next three articles that you'd find if you did a regular search on the current article's title. So for New York City, I'd expect it to list New York (state), Metro New York, and New York City with children, because those are the next in the normal list of search results. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:31, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Personally I don't generally like sidebars (though some for apps they are appropriate). The problem with them is that the sidebar content is invariably a different length from the main content so you invariably end-up with a column (normally in the sidebar) of blank space wasting screen space (many users will probably be on netbooks of small laptops with limited screen space). And on mobile where I don't get a sidebar I also lose the related Wikipedia link from the sidebar. So I think reducing the sidebar is a good thing, moving related links to the bottom is a good idea (including any wikipedia link). Unsure about algorithmically doing it through making "Read More" more prominent (as in the linked example) looks good and may encourage contributors to use it more (which must be a good thing). So I like the proposed change (even though I realise it will not get rid of the sidebar) PsamatheM (talk) 09:41, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Would the Read More be limited to internal WV pages or external web sites and Wikipedia articles also be allowed. I can think of at least one example page I've contributed to where is more than one relevant (non-duplicate, non-overlapping wikipedia article thinking of Blakeney (Norfolk) where Wikipedia has seperate pages on Blakeney and Blakeney Point but WV only really warrants a single page for the two destinations). PsamatheM (talk) 09:41, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
I am not keen on a text based search that takes no account of geography. If I am reading York, I have no interest in New York City, or other random towns that have a York Hotel or York Road. What would be useful is automatic suggestions of places within 100 miles that had the matching text. AlasdairW (talk) 14:07, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Yes it doesn't take into account geography and that's something important to factor in but it's also a little more clever than that for well written pages like York (it shows Bradford and Lincoln). The lack of geographical awareness isn't necessarily a bad thing as it may be useful (at least it is to me) to discover places in countries that the reader hasn't been to that might be related to places in countries they have been. Remember go next is about geography and this would not try to replace that.

As I've mentioned editors can override all articles related pages with whatever makes sense for the community definition of related.

Given the lack of use of related pages (it's on very few pages) and the increased invisibility of putting these links in the footer I would expect turning on the algorithm to increase editing of these results. Jdlrobson (talk) 14:57, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

If the automated results can be overridden then it just becomes part of authoring and maintaining the page. If you manually set the related pages (even just one) does this disable all the automatic ones - so if the automatic ones give "bad results" you can disable all the automated with just one manual one. Or is there some way to add something
{{ related }}
to just disable the automated system if the results are just bad. PsamatheM (talk) 15:12, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
This is currently not supported, but probably could be added. Jdlrobson (talk) 18:01, 26 April 2017 (UTC)


Is it fair to summarise that moving from the sidebar to the footer is uncontroversial but using the algorithm requires a little bit more thought? If so would there be any objections to me enabling the display in the footer? Do I need to create an RFC to do that or can I just do it? Jdlrobson (talk) 18:01, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

User:Jdlrobson, go ahead and make the change. You'll wait forever for explicit consensus here. =) If we don't like it, we'll ask you to switch it back. Powers (talk) 20:35, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Cost subsection for huge cities?[edit]


I just noticed there is no one place to put generalized information about costs in huge city articles. Is this by design? I was thinking about adding a "Costs" subheader within the "Understand" section? Costs in cities can be significantly higher than surrounding areas. It could be a very brief overview of what things cost in the city, specific local taxes, etc. I could instead put slices of the info in the Eat, Drink, Sleep, etc sections... but it feels like collecting this info in one spot would be more helpful for the traveller? Is there a preferred way to handle this? I couldn't find any good examples in the Chicago/DC/SFO articles. In my specific case, Boston is a very expensive city and I'd like to mention something about that towards the top of the article.

Thank you! --ButteBag (talk) 14:54, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

I should think an infobox showing very rough average minimum prices for a limited number of things (hotel room, 2 course meal, pint / glass of the local tipple, most common transport pass / single fare, local tourist taxes like you said) would be very helpful indeed. The natural place for it would be the 'understand' section. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:01, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
I think in general we are a bit light on generalized "what does stuff cost" info compared to dead trees guides that usually have a "if your style of traveling is x expect to pay y for z" in the front cover. For example it would be great to give a general range of - say - hotels in Germany or domestic flights in the US to give people a hint at what to expect. Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:12, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
General cost information goes in Buy. Powers (talk) 20:37, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

New "flag" for certain edits?[edit]

Should we introduce a "flag" - similar to existing flags like "mobile edit" or "smileys" - for edits where an URL is replaced which has not been marked as a dead link? That way stuff like this would be more immediately obvious, without having to look through all edits first. Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:34, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

It's a good idea. You can create a new filter here: Special:AbuseFilter/new Powers (talk) 20:39, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Works set in Berlin[edit]

I opened a debate on Talk:Berlin regarding this addition to the "works set in Berlin" list. I would very much like your input. Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:23, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Where can I find a list of Wikivoyage articles sorted by the amount of articles that exists for each destination in each wikivoyage edition?[edit]

Does such a list exist already or is there any way to generate such a list?

Such a list would be very handy for each Wikivoyage edition (including the English Wikivoyage) to get some more insight into which of the most popular travel destinations around the globe world didn't get yet their own articles (and by focusing on creating those articles, instead of articles of less popular destinations, eventually increasing the web traffic much more significantly for the same amount of work). ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 19:25, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

The problem with this is that most editors are unable to churn out article level prose in more than one to three languages. And even those that can may not want to spend their time writing about New York in Swahili, when they'd much rather cover stuff they personally know and care more about. Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:28, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
I understand that eventually each editor can only produce so much articles, and usually one would prefer to focus on what interests them. I myself have written articles in the Hebrew Wikivoyage for 4 years and 3 months (I mostly translate content from the English Wikivoyage), and I also follow closely after the page view statistics of the articles I have put most work into. Although up until today I have written mostly outline articles on Hebvoy, I have created probably close to a 100 expanded well written articles (some of which took me weeks to finish). Nevertheless, based on the page view statistics... some of them are only read by a few people each month even though a lot of work was put into creating them... simply because people don't necessarily care for well expanded articles if the destination isn't interesting enough to many people (even the Israel article in Hebvoy gets relatively few views every month, probably since most Hebrew speakers aren't interested in reading about their own country when they research travel options/ideas). Because of that, at this point, in order that the the amount of work I put into Hebvoy would eventually yield more interest among potential readers, I tend to prefer focusing on creating the content which is most sought after (rather then guessing what it is). ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 19:44, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
I think most potential users of hebvoy are more likely to use engvoy. First of all because many Hebrew speakers also speak at least passable English and secondly because for travel outside Israel, English is vastly more useful than Hebrew. Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:38, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Possibly... but that doesn't mean that I should give up on Hebvoy. On the contrary, I believe that eventually the English Wikivoyage and the rest of the Wikivoyage editions are going to be a lot more popular, have a lot more writers whom speak many languages, and that even though the English Wikivoyage would probably always remain the biggest edition of Wikivoyage, the existence of the other editions would help us over time produce much more quality content collaboratively, and have many more people around the world involved in this process (and eventually, just like in the case of Wikipedia, in many instances you'll eventually see a lot of content being translated back to the English Wikivoyage as a result). ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 02:25, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Instead, why not translating the articles with the largest number of views (you can get them here for the languages with the largest audience; you can get a rough idea of the audience of each Wikivoyage edition here? I translated pages about Japan from English to French based on both the page size and the audience, but the number of views stay quite limited (though Japan pages in French Wikivoyage have now the second largest audience and pages sizes, after France) so I am afraid that your efforts will only bring limited results. — Fabimaru (talk) 07:30, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Does anyone know if it is possible to produce a list of Wikivoyage articles sorted by the amount of articles that exists for each destination in each wikivoyage edition? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 02:25, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

The relationship are stored in Wikidata, and it may be possible to do a SPARQL query, but after a quick attempt I could not find how to do such a query. — Fabimaru (talk) 08:11, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Ask at and you will have your data soon :-) (and the query to check realtime) Syced (talk) 04:08, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Pedantic analysis tools....[edit]

As you know Mediawiki is to get a new parser. I've been over the past few days (in good faith), been trying to repair some of the templates/pages it's flagged up as having problems.

However, in some cases I've been unable to find a 'stable' fix for many of the errors.

I'm thus coming to the conclusion that I am either too stupid to actually understand what's going on, or that the analysis tool is being pedantic about something that's not techincally broken.

As such I've had enough of trying to work around an analysis tool that is being pedantic about precise nesting, matching of tags etc., Please either take the time to PROPERLY fix the relevant templates once and for all, or make very strong representations to the Mediawiki developers responsible for the new parser/Linter extension about it's inability to recognise otherwise valid situations, so that I'm not wasting my time apparently "breaking" templates, that did not need to repaired in the first place ...

The pages with "apparent errors" are here: ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:44, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

I see what you are saying, some I cannot see what is wrong, others are very subtle. These got rid of errors markings: italics inside italics not sure maybe the web address in content or is there a spellchecker. --Traveler100 (talk) 09:26, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
I've been talking to the Parsing team about this off and on for a few months. The stuff that's flagged is stuff that "works" now but is going to break pages later (probably later this year). User:SSastry (WMF) has been awesome about answering questions, so if you have particular pages that you can't figure out from the documentation on, then let's get a list together and ask him for help. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:37, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
User:ShakespeareFan00, thanks for your proactive work trying to address this. This flow topic is relevant to this discussion. But, this is also the reason why we haven't yet made a wide announcement about Linter since we are trying to figure out the best way to provide actionable guidance. But, we have been discussing whether it might be better and more useful to categorize this in terms of specifying which class of linter warnings/errors to fix to aid which goal. SSastry (WMF) (talk) 01:17, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
User:SSastry (WMF) , Thanks for the response. As a side effect, the Linter extension HAS exposed some things that weren't considered when certain templates were originally designed. Like a template that uses a span, instead of a div, because it wasn't considered that the relevant paramater in the span may contain (multiple) block level elements. Trying to resolve this exposed a futher concern about how "Mediawiki" was scoping where to put end of element markers. (See my last 2 reports on Phabricator for example.) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:53, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Perhaps someone can explain why this template (which should be relatively straightforward to fix so that it WILL work with the new parser is creating SO many issues? , I've tried at least three times to get it to behave in a consistent way, and I'd now like an apology for my wasted time. Thanks.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:32, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
What is the lint error you are trying to fix there? Can you point me to a page / lint error that you encountered? SSastry (WMF) (talk) 17:18, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
The issue was that in the template (pre my efforts) you have a span for styling, inside which is a list. Under HTML5 structuring, you can't put a list (block level item) inside a Span.
I've tried following the last three attempts to fix the 'live' template, put an attempt at a DIV based version here :- Template:Warningbox/sandbox, However if certain (optional) parameters are omitted, there's some undesired whitespace, that shouldn't be there.
Fixing Template:Warningbox should have been a simple effort, but for whatever reason owing to some limitations or other processing Mediawiki does, what should have been simple apparently isn't.
The issue of trying to put 'block level elements' inside a span also crops up with other templates, and may be why a large number of pages are showing up on the relevant Special page, because Template:Listing uses a span internally, despite on a number of pages, the relevant paramater to that template contains block level elements such as lists or wiki-text style paragraphs.
The thought was to convert spans like that to divs, but this ran into a different issue, namely that reported in, meaning that even if the template was converted, paragraphs would still need to be explicitly laid out using <p></p> which is time consuming.
It also doesn't help that elsewhere people seem to have a cultural issues with admitting that using unmatched </p> or <p>, is a 'bodge' to cover up a limitation of what could be a scoping glitch in the parser itself.
I've got a "little list" of other concerns about various 'bodge' or 'clever' solutions that shouldn't be necessary if certain things were properly fixed or re-desgined, but here probably isn't the best place to discuss them. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:43, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
And another thing, which is a very big 'breaks everything' point, is that the colon notation used to indent on talk pages, are technically supposed to be for creating a definition list, NOT for indentation apparently. Of course changing this and getting EVERY talk page updated appropriately would be a massive undertaking. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:46, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
I wanted to clarify something here. Not all the lint errors being identified are related to the replacement of Tidy with RemexHTML. Some lint errors are just markup issues that the new and old parser can "handle fine". But, this is in the same way that humans can understand most grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors just fine. Some of it is definitely pedantic related to cleaning up markup for clarity and being explicit about intentions. Anyway, this will get clearer as we figure out the best way to categorize the lint issues we identify and surface them for editors. SSastry (WMF) (talk) 17:18, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

GPX track not showing up on article[edit]

Hi all, I have created a gpx-track for a sightseeing tour around Hpa-An in Myanmar and uploaded it to the template page. But shomehow when I try to download the gpx for Hpa-An the track is not included. Do I have to be more patient or is there a technical problem? Thanks. -- User:Renek78 10:31, 23 April 2017

Patience won't fix anything. Template:GPX/...whatever... was permanently broken by replacing our old map system with mw:Extension:Kartographer. Furthermore, it wasn't ever intended as a means to get the track into the GPX download, but merely as a way to draw the track on the {{mapframe}} map.
The maps that used Template:GPX/...whatever... need to be fixed, but there is no clear, documented procedure for replacing these. Trans-Labrador Highway, for instance, needs to be fixed before Labrador is featured as one of this summer's OtBP articles. This issue was raised at Wikivoyage talk:How to use dynamic maps#mapframe and GPX traces half a year ago; see also phab:T154908 and phab:T137677. User:Yurik/Sandbox/Gpx1 and User:Yurik/Sandbox/Gpx2 look promising, if the maps were zoomed out to some reasonable scale. mw:Help:Extension:Kartographer has some info. Wikivoyage talk:How to use dynamic maps and Template talk:Mapframe have a bit of discussion on the module:map templates –– {{mapframe}}, {{mapshape}} and {{mapmask}} – but don't specify a procedure for migrating existing GPX traces to GeoJSON in Wikivoyage.
A map like Trans-Siberian Railway#Go might be a welcome addition to a few of the itineraries, were there anything documenting how it was made. K7L (talk) 14:05, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  • I believe I created the Trans-Siberian Railway GPX for the {{mapframe}} using <maplink> (found in Next section). A route can also be created directly in a <mapframe> which may be the preferable method. (see talk page Trans-Labrador Highway). The {{geo}} template uses as far as I can tell the actual {{GPX}} template tile. Yup, it is all still in a bit of flux.
  • As far as Conversion of GPX to GeoJSON - my experience has been somewhat limited to using a text editor while looking at the formats.
  • Documentation is sparse, scattered and rudimentary in places and its easy to get lost (frustrated) as well as the several nuances that may exist to compound the situation.
  • The idea is to eventually have these <mapframe>s stored in Commons so that the data is in one location . Yurik did take GPX template files and converted them (see Yurik/Sandbox/GPX1 and GPX2) and I had corrected a few. -- Matroc (talk) 05:53, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Downloaded the GPX file using Download GPX for this article button for Hpa-An and it has coordinates for multiple locations or points, it did not have GPX coordinates for the Day Trip route; however, the template {{GPX/Hpa-An}} does have the coordinates for drawing of the route. Anyhow, I converted it and created a <maplink> and put it on your page in the Go Next section -- You can edit or remove it if not to your liking. -- Matroc (talk) 08:33, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi Matroc, this is a nice workaround. It would actually be close to perfection already, if this track was included in the gpx file, which can be downloaded via Download GPX for this article. Because that's what it's all about. A traveller, who is interested in this trip needs to get it to his phone/GPS device somehow. Thanks for your support! --Renek78 (talk) 20:09, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Yes I agree. In the case of Hpa-An there is an issue of sorts with the downloadable GPX file and will hopefully be rectified. Putting a route on a map in an article of course is a different matter. -- Matroc (talk) 22:13, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
So use <maplink> directly, and not through templates like {{mapframe}}, {{mapshape}} and {{mapmask}}? I suppose Wikivoyage:How to use dynamic maps#Adding boundaries and tracks needs to be updated to reflect this, and to reflect that {{GPX}} is now permanently broken. K7L (talk) 18:09, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  1. Using <maplink> was just a workaround that I came up with some time ago to meet a particular need to produce the Trans-Siberian Railroad routes before a lot of work was done on templates.
  2. K7L all templates mentioned above are useful, viable and still very much valid. {{GPX}} is not to my knowledge defunct. If at all possible, use the templates is my thought.
  3. There still needs to be a definite discussion as to what to use and when as there seems to be no real consensus of best practice(s). The methods I used evolved around testing and using the Kartographer extension directly (not for the faint-hearted). The basic reason various templates were modified/created was in order to avoid a lot of confusion by using that particular extension directly by the casual editor. After all, what do some of these templates do but produce Kartographer output as far as I can see.
  4. I have found in the past that there are many ways to skin a cat. (ie. mapmask to draw a circular route is possible, mapshape can be used to draw a line), using <mapframe> or <maplink> can be used for routes, polygons, multilines, multipoints, etc.) and through some Lua module functions as well and another module that creates various shapes such as stars, boxes, hexagons, polygons etc. So it boils down to a matter of pick your poison. :}
  5. May be time to gather up all the information about maps etc. and consolidate them, reach some consensus, create more how-to examples and perhaps a Request - Question & Answer pages. Traveller's Pub can too easily be filled up with map discussions!
  6. I am not an expert and do not necessarily have the correct answers, I just hope I have added something useful once in a while. -- Cheers! -- Matroc (talk) 22:13, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikivoyage:How to use dynamic maps#Adding boundaries and tracks needs to be rewritten. It's for the old "poimap2" which expects GPX. If mw:Extension:Kartographer expects GeoJSON, or the method to use the new extension is different from the old one, then what's there now is doing more harm than good as it's only creating user confusion. Following the instructions on that page will not yield map tracks or boundaries. I'd rewrite it, but I only have a very incomplete idea of how to get a GeoJSON track onto a map here. (14:26, 26 April 2017 UTC) I've edited it a bit, not removing anything but shifting the emphasis to creating GPX tracks for conversion to GeoJSON for use in Wikivoyage. It's still a mess, but I believe it's at least factually accurate - though not easy to follow. Hopefully someone else (who is familiar with the templates) will take a crack at it at some point? K7L (talk) 15:43, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

On that matter, would anyone know whether it be possible to use other ExternalSources than explained in the Kartographer documentation. E.g. I got (gpsies ID: wvlbpblefmwwkkap), which would perfectly fit into the Kartographer concept. But I did not find any reference on how to integrate a link into the Kartographer.

Cheers, Ceever (talk) 14:05, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikivoyage at the Wikimania 2017[edit]

Dear Wikivoyage community members. The Wikimania 2017 conference will take place in August 2017. I am going to take part and I hope to meet some other community members. To prepare for the conference properly I would like to know more about all your wishes, problems and ideas related to Wikivoyage. I have created a small site on the meta-wiki where you can drop all your thoughts, wishes and concerns. Feel free to create sub sites if needed. It would be great to have a meeting at the conference venue or anywhere in town. -- DerFussi (talk) -- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:04, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Technical question[edit]

Is it possible to convert page pile # 8670, which contains only Wikidata items, to the names of the parallel article names on the English Wikivoyage? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 05:48, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

I wonder if a SPARQL query (or other Wikidata search tool) against Wikidata could do the trick... I know that one can check a few IDs at a time with a Lua module and output the enwikivoyage info (used on Wikivoyage itself) but not 15,000+ IDs at one time. -- Matroc (talk) 01:06, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Changes to Routeboxes[edit]

Like this one or that one. What should we do about them? Leave as is? Change? Change policy? Hobbitschuster (talk) 00:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikivoyage:Routebox navigation spells out what our policies are and why. The edits you cited go against that policy and should be reverted. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 01:08, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Yes Done -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 01:35, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
On a side note, I think this is something that we could consider allowing, at least in some cases. I've had some instances, where I'd have liked to add in an extra destination in between. Mostly where there are two important stations on the route quite close and I can't decide which one to put as next major destination. Drat70 (talk) 01:38, 26 April 2017 (UTC)


This template seems to be the cause of a LOT of the Lint Errrors, and it seems in part due to the fact that it's being called with multi paragraph sections for listings, despite looking at the coding, not technically having been designed with this in mind.

The current 'live' version, uses SPAN tags, which is fine provided that the content inside such tag is a single paragraph's worth of text, (or what the HTML spec calls 'phrasing content' ( However in some places, and may well be what is leading to the missing end (span) tag errors being generated is that in places so termed 'flow content' ( is being placed inside the span concerned (as a result of it being supplied in a paramater.) This naturally confuses Mediawiki, which attempts to tidy up the resultant mal-formed HTML, and doesn't quite to do it, as it's being asked to do something that is bad HTML structuring (and should not technically work) to start with.

The two relevant SPAN's should under ideal circumstances be replaced with an Equivalent DIV, which should eliminate many of the reported 'missing-end' tag errors.

Some slight-re-ordering of how the remaining SPAN's are handled would also be recommended.

I strongly feel, these may also be the issue with a few other templates as well. Namely that you can't put flow-content where HTML5 (and thus the parser) expects to find 'phrasing-content'.

Can someone PLEASE take the time to examine and repair all relevant templates soon? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:13, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Does this mean that Mantralayam#See is appearing in Special:LintErrors/missing-end-tag because there's a six-paragraph description in the listing? WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:55, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Yes ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:47, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. I spent a while looking at that article the other day, and I never figured out the problem.
Do we want to have six-paragraph-long descriptions in listings? Or even two-paragraph-long listings? WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:08, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
I think that two paragraph long listings are quite desirable for cases where two different attractions are combined at the one address and with the one entry ticket e.g. "palace and gardens", a castle with a museum inside (particularly if the museum is not about the castle's history), or a river that is good for both fishing and canoeing. AlasdairW (talk) 19:47, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Would the issue disappear if one used <br> between paragraphs instead of newlines? -- Matroc (talk) 00:49, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
You mean two line breaks. Only if you are using simple text and line breaks. The real solution would be to overhaul the listing template so you can supply multi-paragraph content in the relevant parameter, also I'd suggest carefully examining where it thinks the italics/bold formatting should be, I've had some listings where due to a combination of formatting the parser ended up with mismatched/striped <b></b> or <i></i> tags.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 07:36, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Deletion Request[edit]

Hi, Could someone delete User talk:Davey2010/Archive 2014 please as it's empty (always has been), I had put a Delete template on it but I'm assuming no one checks the categories like EN Wiki so figured I'd just ask here,
Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 22:30, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Yes Done -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 22:40, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks AndreCarrotflower much appreciated :), –Davey2010Talk 22:51, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Detouting appreciation post[edit]


I'd just like to take a moment to thank everyone for reverting all the garbo edits and spam that people blast into this site. It's a lot of work and I'm surprised how little of it actually sticks around! Anyway your hard work does not go unnoticed. Thank you and carry on! --ButteBag (talk) 00:54, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Yes, thanks everyone! :-) Syced (talk) 04:14, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

The mobile version seems to suck[edit]

I am trying out a smart phone that I will be switching to very soon, and I found that in the mobile version, there are no images on the front page. When I switch to the desktop version on my smart phone, I see the banners for the featured articles (dotm, etc.), but everything is too wide to the right for me to be able to work with it effectively. It's very hard to find recent changes in the mobile version (I couldn't figure out how to do so).

So are the rest of you finding that the mobile version sucks? Is anything planned to improve it? Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:17, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

I raised this a while ago, got no response. Willing to help improve this but have no idea how to do that. How is the format of the mobile addition controlled? Who has access to the code to define what is shown and how the mobile form works? More to the point how can we change it? This is an important topic as most web browsing today is on mobile devises. --Traveler100 (talk) 07:26, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
I asked around, and local admins can make (at least) some changes. See mw:Mobile Gateway/Mobile homepage formatting for more information. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 15:21, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
I think the current mobile view is a result of the limitations with the current architecture.

I had a look at this in a user page User:Jdlrobson/main_page to see how this might be improved.

A few suggestions after looking at this. 1) The map/ links at the top of the page are not as exciting as the content that follows and given search is so prominent in mobile (and branding) it doesn't really add much value there. Consider moving them down or removing them altogether from the mobile experience via nomobile class. 2) The banners are not mobile friendly - Inside the banners apply a mobile friendly min-width: e.g. 260px to the banner-box2 so that on mobile it takes up as much space as it possibly can. Shrink margin top from 2em to 0.2em. Update the css rule in MediaWiki:Common.css to 2em via media query. 3) Stop using a table based layout for Discover/Get involved. Tables are the most unfriendly mobile element you can use - use div's that stack in mobile.

Some limitations with the current design: 1) Mobile doesn't easily allow changing the color of link. The TemplateStyles extension is coming soon which will correct this. This will also allow you to put media queries in the Main page which will improve things a lot. 2) There is a bug that messes up formatting of headings for section collapsing ( will fix). In mean time you may want to use divs or strong tags instead of h2s and h3s in banners. 3) Currently page banners are used for these boxes. The problem with those is they are not ideal for mobile usage (short and wide) and they tend to be lots of kb to download - consider switching to image thumbnails so that they format more nicely on a 320px device. This also impacts the text inside the banners as they have limited vertical space to work with. 4) The carousel JS will not load on mobile. I'm not sure how friendly it is to mobile devices but that can be checked and added if the other problems can be worked out.

Hope this helps! Jdlrobson (talk) 16:52, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Deletion Request again![edit]

Hi, So I tried to be clever and create a divbox .... and then realised after creating it a ton of other templates don't exist either,
So could someone delete Template:Divbox, Template:Divbox/doc, Template:Main other, and Template:Main other/doc please
Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 02:17, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Yes Done. For future reference, rather than posting deletion requests here, you can tag such pages with Template:Delete. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 02:44, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi AndreCarrotflower - Problem is no one seems to check the category for Delete hence my postings here but those were hopefully the last deletions anyway, If there was an admin list I would've happily gone that route, Anyway I'll tag with delete in the future, Thanks for dealing with them, –Davey2010Talk 13:20, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Special:ListAdmins works on all the wikis. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:43, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
...with the caveat than maybe 10% of the accounts on that list are currently active. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 15:47, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for that WAID but as noted by Andre not all are active, I know with WikiTravel when I CSD'd something .. a week later it was still there and so obviously assumed that was the case here, I might just create a table with all active admins then that'd all be my worries solved lol, Anyway thanks all. –Davey2010Talk 20:01, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

The strategy discussion. The Cycle 2 will start on May 5[edit]

The first cycle of the Wikimedia movement strategy process recently concluded. During that period, we were discussing the main directions for the Wikimedia movement over the next 15 years. There are more than 1500 summary statements collected from the various communities, but unfortunately, none from your local discussion. The strategy facilitators and many volunteers have summarized the discussions of the previous month. A quantitative analysis of the statements will be posted on Meta for translation this week, alongside the report from the Berlin conference.

The second cycle will begin soon. It's set to begin on May 5 and run until May 31. During that period, you will be invited to dive into the main topics that emerged in the first cycle, discuss what they mean, which ones are the most important and why, and what their practical implications are. This work will be informed and complemented by research involving new voices that haven’t traditionally been included in strategy discussions, like readers, partners, and experts. Together, we will begin to make sense of all this information and organize it into a meaningful guiding document, which we will all collectively refine during the third and last cycle in June−July.

We want to help your community to be more engaged with the discussions in the next cycle. Now, we are looking for volunteers who could

  • tell us where to announce the start of the Cycle 2, and how to do that, so we could be sure the majority of your community is informed and has a chance to feel committed, and
  • facilitate the Cycle 2 discussions here, on Wikivoyage.

We are looking forward to your feedback!

Base (WMF) and SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 16:21, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Maps changes[edit]

Just in case not everyone here reads the page on meta: m:Wikivoyage/Lounge#Maps_changes. —Justin (koavf)TCM 21:34, 28 April 2017 (UTC)


Dear Colleagues,

Wiki Loves Earth 2017, the photo competition aimed at collecting photos of protected natural areas, has started today. We seek to collect photos that can be used on Wikivoyage and also organize a satellite competition dedicated to page banners. We have held such a competition already last year and received 88 beautiful page banners for Russia, many of them currently used on Wikivoyage.

The submission rules are described here. In short, only banners which are made of your own regular submissions to WLE 2017 are eligible, and they must be uploaded via a special link. If you fancy page banner for a Russian destination, use a different upload link, because we will award a separate prize. The competition runs till the end of May.

All banners submitted for this competition will be evaluated by our jury. We will consider both artistic value of individual banners and their merit for Wikivoyage, namely whether the banner is used or can be used in Wikivoyage articles, how well it conveys the feel of the destination, etc. We will have two small prizes, one for banners of Russian destinations and one for banners from abroad.

If you don't fancy uploading page banners but feel interested in our initiative, you can join our jury and help us in grading the banners. Just leave us a note here or contact us in person, and we will get back to you.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:37, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi Ymblanter . As far as I can tell the 'special link' is actually just the standard Upload Form with a new category ( Category:Page_banners_from_Wiki_Loves_Earth_2017 ) added. Can we just tag banner images with this category? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 06:56, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Yes, all banners are uploaded into the special category. That's the idea. --Alexander (talk) 06:59, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
What happens if someone uploads a Crimea banner? Do the Russians start a war with Ukraine to claim it for themselves? K7L (talk) 13:29, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Nothing happens. Since last year, Crimean natural objects are part of both Russian and Ukrainian competitions. The uploader decides which one he or she wants to be part of. --Alexander (talk) 19:41, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Found a mistake in the dynamic maps. How do we fix it?[edit]

look closely at the dynamic map of Sydney/City Centre - according to this map the water in the bay that surrounds the Sydney Opera House has all dried up. How do we fix this funny mistake ASAP? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 14:48, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Interesting. The source map on OpenStreetMaps (LINK) looks OK, but the cached version on WikiMedia Maps (LINK) has this sudden land fill.
The help page suggests to fix OpenStreetMaps directly. It is possible the somebody vandalized the OSM map and it was cached before it was fixed. Perhaps look again later? Andrewssi2 (talk) 21:41, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
If it does not fix when the caches update, I have seen similar strangeness with water/land divisions under some rendering of OSM. In the case I have previously seen it was where the renderer (one of the best 3rd party rendering apps with an excellent reputation) was mis classifying area classed as "marina" as "water" rather than land, but these strange effects can come from minor issues with the renderer. In my own case it was a small area only apparent where river boundaries extended too far. rendered it fine, app just got land vs water wrong in the detail. Just a thought and I've not looked at why the harbour in Sydney appears empty. PsamatheM (talk) 21:51, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
If you zoom out - eventually the water reappears which may also be a clue - other maps appear to work fine. -- Matroc (talk) 21:54, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Does anyone know whether the images are SVGs? There's some talk this week about w:en:WP:VPT about odd artifacts in SVGs. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:49, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
PNG's PsamatheM (talk) 17:04, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Who can we contact when stuff like this needs to be fixed? No one can do it from the Wikivoyage/Wikimedia community? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 20:16, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Use of { {Climate} } and Source & Attribution For The Information/Data[edit]

Climate box (the { {climate} } template). I notice that Wikipedia where it provides its { { weatherbox } } acknowledges a source for the data. I assume most climate data is "owned" by somebody. For example Leeds has a { { climate } } with what I'd guess is UK Met Office data. Wikipedia has a { {weatherbox } for the same city. The Wikipedia one acknowledges the source. Very useful data for WV and a great feature but how does one stand taking such information from e.g. the UK Met Office web site, particularly without attribution?

Reason for raising it: I think is is so useful I'd like to add some to other cities but I don't want to start major issues where maybe I shouldn't (or should add something) or can we just take the data from Wikimedia and if so should we also add the source link to the "description" of the { {climate} } PsamatheM (talk) 16:38, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

The climate data is not copyright protected (as it is just data). Systematically using climate data from any one source would perhaps violate the EU database right, but usage in a few places is no problem. Thus attribution is not needed for legal reasons, unless I have missed something. Wikipedia needs attribution for any fact for verifiability, but that is not an issue for us. We can attribute the data out of courtesy or to give a link to further information, otherwise an HTML comment would probably be enough (handy for updating). --LPfi (talk) 16:36, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Leave of less presence[edit]

As you might've noticed I have taken on a job abroad and besides my Internet being sketchy at the moment, I also have less time to spend on WV. I hope I'll still be able to contribute but I wanted to let you know, lest you perceive me as just disappearing without word or trace. Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:57, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

@Hobbitschuster: Thanks for the heads-up: you're a familiar face and have many, many welcomed additions here. I hope this is a good move for you and I'm glad that you're still interested in participating as you can. —Justin (koavf)TCM 19:59, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
@Hobbitschuster: Always a pleasure. Best wishes! Cheers -- Matroc (talk) 21:26, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
@Hobbitschuster: Good luck! --Andrewssi2 (talk) 21:32, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
@Hobbitschuster: Thanks for your great work here and all the best with the future mate. Gizza (roam) 23:17, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
@Hobbitschuster: We miss you already! I hope the job abroad gives you new opportunities for travel. Ground Zero (talk) 00:20, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Good luck, and we'll keep the light on for you. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:59, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Best of luck with the new job and home, Herr Hobbitschuster. You will be missed. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 15:08, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
@Hobbitschuster: Good luck, hope to hear from you again. /Yvwv (talk) 15:10, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. I hope I'll have more stable WiFi and a bit of time to edit soon... Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:17, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
@Hobbitschuster: In the wake of what has proven to be the alarming disappearance of many of the most prominent Wikivoyagers (Ypsilon, Ryan, others), you've become more and more a backbone of our editing team. Your inability to contribute as much as before is totally understandable, but I do sincerely hope to continue to see you around here from time to time. Your contributions to our site are greatly appreciated and will be missed. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 23:13, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you all for your kind words. I now have WiFi as it were, but the signal is never strong or stable and many of my days are occupied mostly with work, eating and social calls. I hope I'll find a better arrangement to get some editing time in edgewise in the near future. At any rate, by the time the leaves fall it'll be on to the next chapter anyway. Whatever that may be. Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:24, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

New notification when a page is connected to Wikidata[edit]

Hello all,

The Wikidata development team is about to deploy a new feature on all Wikivoyages. It is a new type of notification (via Echo, the notification system you see at the top right of your wiki when you are logged in), that will inform the creator of a page, when this page is connected to a Wikidata item.

You may know that Wikidata provides a centralized system for all the interwikilinks. When a new page is created, it should be connected to the corresponding Wikidata item, by modifying this Wikidata item. With this new notification, editors creating pages will be informed when another editor connects this page to Wikidata.

Screenshot Echo Wikibase notification.png

This feature will be deployed on May 9th on all the Wikivoyages. This feature will be disable by default for existing editors, and enabled by default for new editors. This is the first step of the deployments, the Wikipedias and other Wikimedia projects will follow in the next months.

If you have any question, suggestion, please let me know by pinging me. You can also follow and leave a comment on the Phabricator ticket.

Thanks go to Matěj Suchánek who suggested and developed this feature! Cheers, Lea Lacroix (WMDE) (talk)

Voting has begun in 2017 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees elections[edit]

19:15, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Hey All. Only a few more hours to vote :-) Travel Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:50, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Multiple Mapmasks with different colors in one map[edit]

Hope it is okay to ask a technical question here. I would like to create a dynamic overview map similar to the one for Berlin. Unfortunately many cities in the world do not have districts with wikidata items as of now. Thus I have to use Mapmask instead of Mapshape and "draw" the boundaries manually. The question now is: Can I add multiple masks with different colors within one Mapframe by using Mapmask? I played around with the parameters a bit, but without success.--Renek78 (talk) 11:37, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Have you looked at mw:Help:Extension:Kartographer? If the underlying extension can do this, that page would say so – the only catch is that it doesn't document our templates as it seems to be assuming that you are calling the extension directly. K7L (talk) 17:56, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
It is probably best practice to use the available Wikivoyage templates if possible. The Help page on Mediawiki for Kartographer is naturally for using the extension itself. Kartographer is used behind the scenes to generate dynamic maps. The templates work with the Kartographer extension to provide some transparency and hopefully avoid some confusion. Their output is basically Kartographer GeoJSON formatted data (which you don't have to code or edit). The templates usually have a documentation page the should be of some help.
I also have seen instances where a Wikidata item doesn't exist or if a Wikidata item exists and there is no corresponding OpenStreetMap data available to do masks and shapes as well as Wikidata items not matching an article correctly. At times it can be frustrating and hopefully things will improve as time goes along. -- Matroc (talk) 21:31, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

@ Renek78 - I am not sure how to do this exactly... but I advise you to look into figuring out how they did exactly that in the Russian Wikivoyage article about Moscow. ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 21:24, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

They look to be storing the boundaries of each region as a template, {{Boundary/Москва/Восток}}, {{Boundary/Москва/Запад}}, {{Boundary/Москва/Север}}, {{Boundary/Москва/Северо-Восток}}, {{Boundary/Москва/Северо-Запад}}, {{Boundary/Москва/Центр}}, {{Boundary/Москва/Юг}}, {{Boundary/Москва/Юго-Восток}}, {{Boundary/Москва/Юго-Запад}}. These are likely called from other templates, not sure which ones. K7L (talk) 02:10, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Yes, region boundaries are stored locally (in the Template namespace). Eventually, they should be transferred to the Data: namespace on Commons, such that all projects could use them. --Alexander (talk) 11:14, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Alexander, K7L, ויקיג'אנקי and Matroc. The Moscow article looks great with those maps in my opinion!--Renek78 (talk) 07:39, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Just found an excellent example of a dynamic region map from user Shaundd. Gonna try to do it in a similar fashion. --Renek78 (talk) 12:39, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi Renek78, I'm not sure which of the two maps you're referring to, but I caution it's just tests and the process isn't very user-friendly for either one. The Vancouver district map was done by editing the map in the Visual Editor. It has tools that let you draw shapes on top of the map and the editor creates the GeoJSON data (I think it's in a box below the map). Once that's done you can edit the properties in the GeoJSON code to change the colour, border, etc. I find it difficult to make nice neat boundaries with this method and it doesn't show other listings and markers on the page. It also puts a lot of data on the page that other editors will need to scroll through when they edit that section. You can get around this by setting up templates like Atsirlin mentioned, but I don't know if those templates exist on English WV.
For the Oregon Coast map, I was testing out the Data page capability in Commons, where, if you have the GeoJSON data, you can store it in Commons and then call it up to display on a dynamic map in another Wikimedia project. It works -- I created pages that store the boundary definition for each region I was testing and then displayed them on a dynamic map on WV -- but there's no template (at this point) to make it easy, you still need to create the GeoJSON data, and I haven't found a way to get it to display other markers like our dynamic maps currently do. If you want to experiment, I'm happy to try to answer any questions, but it's still a work in progress. -Shaundd (talk) 06:26, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Shaundd, in order to display listings, you have to write something like show="see,do,go..." or perhaps show="all" will work as well. --Alexander (talk) 07:13, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Alternative is to retrieve the ExternalData for all 3 within the mapframe rather than using 3 separate maplinks by placing them in an object array within the mapframe and assign group="other". (about 7 lines of code) All you need for result is show="city". As usual, who knows what changes Kartographer will have in future and this approach may become invalid. -- Matroc (talk) 03:19, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Alexander and Matroc. Adding show="city,other" worked. -Shaundd (talk) 06:20, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Wernigerode "Buy" section and the future of Dotm generally[edit]

Hi, everyone. Do any of you know Wernigerode or feel like doing some web research on stores there? The article has been nominated for an Off the Beaten Path feature on the front page. It's a very good article, but the "Buy" section is a bit thin. Any help, especially from people who know the town, would be a good service to the site.

And while you're at it, have a look at Wikivoyage talk:Destination of the month candidates#We're in real trouble. Destination of the Month/Off the Beaten Path/Featured Travel Topic are the shop window of this site, where people who've stumbled in here or arrived at the front page intentionally can be attracted, but choosing good articles for that shop window and getting them shipshape for presentation to online passersby are labor-intensive tasks. All of us have lives offline, but if more of us pitched in a little work every month or even every other month, that would improve things greatly.

If you think this site is valuable and enjoy the front-page features, please consider devoting a little of your Wikivoyage editing time to Dotm every month. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:46, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Maps changes[edit]


I am Paul Norman, a contractor working with the Maps team on Discovery at improving the Wikimedia map styles, infrastructure, and other map-related tasks. My background is as an OpenStreetMap developer, and I am a maintainer of the OpenStreetMap Carto style, the default on, as well as many other components in a standard OSM map rendering setup.

As part of a new style for Wikimedia maps is being developed, and I've loaded the whole planet on one of my servers as a test and demo.

The demo is available at, and through "Compare" on the right-hand side of the interface you can compare it with the current Wikimedia style, OpenStreetMap Carto, and lots of others. Some other things to be aware of when comparing are:

  • The map is displayed with Kosmtik, a design tool with minimal caching, and it might be restarted while I'm working on it
  • Even though the server is faster than production, it may appear slower because it doesn't have everything cached
  • The OSM data on the server is normally within a day of the latest data

Some of the more noticeable style changes are

  • Road colours are different, helping view the overall layout of the city
  • There are fewer cases of subtly different shades of green.
  • Bridges and multi-level road constructions are now handled properly, which should make some areas easier to figure out

I am particularly interested in feedback on

Feedback is welcome, either here, through phab tickets, or by IRC in #wikimedia-interactive on freenode.

Pnorman (talk) 23:23, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

It looks good but the renderer seems to give too much prominence to expressway on- and off-ramps. They show up at a much lower zoom level (lower meaning more zoomed-out) than before, and that makes the expressways look "bumpy". Powers (talk) 01:50, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
At zoom 9, there isn't enough contrast between motorway and primary roads. Perhaps it's because they're rendered with borders/outlines, instead of just a solid fill. Zoom levels 10-12 are better, and 13 is even better still; 9 is definitely the worst. In general, I'd prefer more contrast at all levels; the difference between "dark orange" and "light orange" is too close. --Bigpeteb (talk) 17:49, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
I agree with there not being enough contrast. I prefer the old road colour scheme where the highways/motorways were orange and arterial city streets were yellow. Some other things I noticed:
  • I like how non-motorway highways are better differentiated from arterial city streets at zoom levels 12 and lower
  • I like how the side streets are more muted at zoom levels 12-14
  • I find the bridges are sometimes emphasized too much, particularly on zoom level 12
  • I like that fewer city labels are displayed at zoom levels 10 and above (i.e., 1-10), and seems to be doing a pretty good job at picking the most important ones
  • I much prefer the old multi-hued green scheme for forests and parks. The new scheme emphasizes forest cover too much and covers over designated parks. From a travel guide perspective, those parks can be objects of interest, whereas forest cover usually isn't. A second reason for not liking the new scheme is, where I'm located (Vancouver/southern BC), the coverage is very patchy -- there are blocks of green and white depending on whether OSM has ground cover info or not. It doesn't look good. -Shaundd (talk) 22:52, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Paging @Pnorman:; just making sure you see this feedback. Powers (talk) 00:25, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

I have not been looking into these issues, but one thing I often find dissatisfying with the dynamic maps is that one has to resort to an external source to get the topography. For many parks, topography (and vegetation – also lacking) is one of the most important things you want to see. Also for other places were outdoors activities are important, topography and vegetation would be very nice to have. OSM seems to have topography on the biking map. --LPfi (talk) 06:45, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

To what extent is the issue of relief one where the layer= parameter seems to have no effect (presumably because of the privacy considerations for using externally hosted mapping). I agree that wider flexibility of prominent aspects (i.e. relevant to the page the map is being used on) would be a great enhancement. The current system shows where specific points referenced in the text are but in some situations more is wanted of a map (e.g. a ski resort where terrain would enhance the map or an area with national parks where vegetation ...). I don't know what options can be done with rendering with the mapping data Wikimedia hold and what additional data that it could access. Or, could some way round user privacy where non-Wikimedia hosted mapping is used (e.g. proxy through Wikimedia) PsamatheM (talk) 14:35, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Beta Feature Two Column Edit Conflict View[edit]

Birgit Müller (WMDE) 14:29, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

I haven't tried this out yet, but it's supposed to be good.
Also, Birgit's super nice and helpful, so if you try it and run into any problems, then just ping her. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:18, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Bureaucrat nomination - Ikan Kekek[edit]

Please participate in the discussion over User:Ikan Kekek's nomination for bureaucrat. The discussion is at Wikivoyage:Administrator nominations#Ikan Kekek for Bureaucrat. Powers (talk) 17:16, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Two maps on a page[edit]

I noticed a number of upper level regions -- for example, Poland, Pacific Northwest, Oregon and Washington (state) -- now have both a WV-style region static map, and a dynamic map that highlights the cities and other destinations but doesn't show the region breakdown. Reading through the deployment guidelines in the Dynamic maps Expedition, using dynamic maps in this way breaks a couple of them (only deploy on bottom-level articles and don't deploy on a page with a static map), although usage of dynamic maps seems to have outgrown these guidelines. I'm inclined to say that these dynamic maps should be removed because (1) it's a region guide but the map doesn't show the regions (and the cities are already captured in the static map), plus (2) I'm not aware of any consensus to use both static and dynamic maps on the same page or to use dynamic maps on a non-bottom-level page -- but want to hear others' comments to see if opinions have changed. -Shaundd (talk) 05:33, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

I agree with you and would support removing the dynamic maps from those articles. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:22, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
I'm a big fan of dynamic maps, and I do see recent developments that are getting better at coloring in WV regions. I'm sure they will replace static maps one day.
That said, although I appreciate the effort going into creating these regional dynamic maps, they don't really add value above and beyond the existing static map. I'd agree to remove them for now. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 06:28, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
This came up before, in a couple of bottom-level NYS regions. Adirondacks had both, but ended up keeping the static map on-page with just a link to the dynamic map. NNY is a bottom-level region with just a dynamic map, which was left in place. The difference between the two? Adirondacks is a more complex region as it had one and a half dozen tiny villages scattered across a wide area which was otherwise forest and parkland. Those were grouped into 5±2 subsections on the same page, and presented on a static map.
The dynamic maps are improving. Sure, I'd prefer if the city markers looked a bit more like "● Newport" and less like "⓫" or some arbitrary number; I'd also like to be able to selectively turn off existing OSM labels for cities and POI's if they are extraneous or duplicate the content we're going to add to the map from the local article. We're not there yet.
Nonetheless, they are adequate for a simple bottom-level region -- even if that is use of "dynamic maps on a non-bottom-level page" as these regions have towns and villages under them. K7L (talk) 13:56, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Dynamic maps are better than nothing for a region article, but if there's already a static map there's no need for a dynamic one. They should be removed. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 14:45, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Indian Regions now have dynamic maps removed -- Matroc (talk) 22:55, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
I would think it's got to be more of a case of what is most relevant to the region and what needs to be shown. I think in the Washington (state) the two different maps show different things. The nature of mapping is that different types of map are designed to show different features. So in Washington (state) the static map shows a traveller an overview of the regions but does not clearly show the major cities whereas the dynamic map does clearly show the cities and where they are in relation to each other. Each of the two maps serves different functions and both have their uses to travellers. So I'd think static, dynamic or both must depend what is useful to the wide range of users and that authors/contributors recognise that it is the nature of maps that different cartography always show different things. PsamatheM (talk) 14:18, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
There's no reason why a static map can't show cities. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:02, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
I think it's a question of cartography and emphasis (and scaling). In the Washington (state) example the maps show very different things and thus have very different cartography. Look at the page on a small e.g. phone screen (as many travelling will be) and the static map shows very little detail (it still shows the regions fine but cities are hardly readable). Hence in that example, the different cartography and being handled differently on different sized screens means both maps are very useful serving different purposes. People use a wide range of devices and are seeking a wide range of different information. PsamatheM (talk) 21:37, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
I agree that static maps and dynamic maps can have different use cases, and for that reason, it would be ideal if there was a way to have both on a page provided it didn't look cluttered (which is how I think it looks now when one map is in the Regions section and the other in the Cities section). I was thinking one way around it would be to put maps into a box (or something similar) with a show/hide toggle so the reader could control which map(s) he/she sees. To keep it simple for editors, a template could be created so all that was needed was to enter the lat, long and zoom for the dynamic map, and the name of the static map, and the template would link with mapframe to do the rest. Templating is not my strong point, so I don't know how feasible it is, but just a thought. -Shaundd (talk) 06:39, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Mapshape for Buenos Aires does not work[edit]

Hi all, me again with an issue with Mapshape. Just now I am fooling around with an overview map of Buenos Aires. Coloring the districts via Mapshape works great, but unfortunately I am not able to grey out everything behind the city boundaries. The code is supposed to look like this:

Districts of Buenos Aires

I also checked the OSM relation - it seems to be a closed contour. Any ideas, what is wrong there? Thanks again! --Renek78 (talk) 11:43, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

If you were to add type=geoline to the Mapshape template, the output would show that the line created is not closed - top right on map (coordinates needed to create a polygon have to be complete or closed). -- Matroc (talk) 17:25, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Matroc With Geoline I can see, that something is open at relation Comuna 13. In OSM though it is closed and fine. Recently somebody messed around with this relation in OSM and someone else reverted this edit. Maybe we just need to wait a few days until it is fine again. Thanks for your help. —The preceding comment was added by Renek78 (talkcontribs)
That has happened on a few occasions such as all the water area around Sydney Opera House disappearing. Hopefully it will be fixed soon! -- Matroc (talk) 00:47, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Editing News #1—2017[edit]

18:05, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Does not seem to support listings like the current text editor does (i.e. the buttons to add the different types of listing). I tried it for a bit but fiund it slower to load and visually harder to use than the old one so I quickly switched back. Font too large (and fixed width) meaning you get less on the screen (not an issue for large screen users but some of us use small laptops and I can't see many people on their travels using a 42" monitor, more likely an e.g. 11" screen. If it's going to default to such large text font size (and fixed width font) then it needs options to change the view (i.e. shrink the text and change the font). PsamatheM (talk) 18:26, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Does anyone else think this is an issue?[edit]

Quickbar breaking layouts? Maybe it's just me. --ButteBag (talk) 19:21, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Quickbar on regions and below country level[edit]

I appreciate that policy states { {quickbar} } is only for country level articles, but before I saw that I experimented with it on a UK county and found the result very useful. For Norfolk (England) the result was very good. I took a screen shot but every attempt to upload it failed so can't show it (and as it's not site policy I didn't save the page). But it showed a UK map with the county highlighted, basically showing where in the UK Norfolk was located - where we're talking about geographically. (To see what I mean, I just added { {quickbar} } immediately under the { {pagebanner ...} } line (without the spaces between the {. Is only using { {quickbar} } strict site policy or where is is useful and works well can it be used ? (Prompted to look at it by the topic above!) PsamatheM (talk) 19:57, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Placing a region in context of the country does have some merits, my main concern would be map image clutter. Simply placing at the top pushes the other maps too far down and looks too much (could however consider moving the static map with the main towns down to Get around section). Could also consider placing in Get in section. --Traveler100 (talk) 06:43, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
I would agree that the Get In section seems the most appropriate. And I agree as you say (expressing it better than I did) "placing the region in context". PsamatheM (talk) 08:46, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
Have you looked at any of the other Wikivoyage languages, such as fr: and {{Info Ville}}? A quickbar-like info box on local or regional articles is quite common on some of the other projects. K7L (talk) 16:13, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
PsamatheM, you could make a temporary user subpage which contains Norfolk with the quickbar. Everyone else will then be able to see how it looks without you having to save anything on mainspace. E.g. User:PsamatheM/Quickbar. I noticed that Traveler100 already tested it out but I guess this is something to consider next time. Thanks for trying this out. Gizza (roam) 22:59, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
If you look at the Norfolk (England) History there is a version done by Traveler100 subsequently reverted or use link placing at the top (Traveller100's link/work/example). PsamatheM (talk) 23:04, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
Traditionally we assume that anyone reading a region-level article has previously read the article above it in the hierarchy and so already knows where the region is located within the higher-level area. (A good region map should show some context anyway.) Powers (talk) 01:01, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Traditionally books worked that way but a search engine or a link from another page will place you in any level. --Traveler100 (talk) 02:14, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
I'm more likely to follow the breadcrumbs trail 'backwards' (from a neighborhood to the large city where the neighborhood is located, then to the region where the city is located, and only maybe to the country). Perhaps other people do this as well, especially if the question is more like "Shall I go visit <relative>?" or "Since I have to go to <city> anyway, what else could I do while I'm in the area?" The country-first approach seems like it would work better for "Where in the world shall I go for a holiday this year?" WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:58, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Question about listing editor and banner[edit]

I am considering to provide my little Article about Nanxun here as well. Two questions:

  • As you can see, I have added the Chinese names of all listings. They are stored in Wikidata and fetched from Wikidata by our listing template. And we have additional parameters for the names and addresses in local language. So we can implement our "taxi button" for the mobile version later. How do you store the local names and the address written in local language in your listings? Just add it in parentheses. The help site for the listing editor did not provide any information.
  • I took a panoramic of one canal and would provide it as a banner. The talk page of the property on Wikidata does not provide any information about the minimal size and aspect ratio of a banner file. A help site may be useful. I am sure I can find some information here, but if non wikivoyage users want to use banners in their projects and provide suitable images, they would never find the information here in the local wiki. -- DerFussi 06:21, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
OK, one partial answer: The "alt" field is precisely and by design the place for the local name or non-Roman spelling of any name. You're right that there is no separate field for an address in non-Roman writing. Perhaps there should be, but considering that the "alt" field is used much more often by morons who simply duplicate the name there, I'm not so sure. But wait, are you asking about where on Wikidata to put that information? I have no idea, but isn't that a Wikidata issue most usefully discussed somewhere on Wikidata?
In terms of Wikidata providing or not providing aspect ratio details on banner files: Wikivoyage pagebanners are a Wikivoyage thing. If Wikidata users would like to copy any information they like from Wikivoyage:Banner expedition, that's great, but unless I'm missing something, it's a Wikidata issue that doesn't affect Wikivoyage. If there's a Pub on Wikidata, this would seem like a topic to broach there. Feel free to link this thread. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:36, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. Yeah, I've asked about the place to store the local name here. All necessary information is saved on Wikidata already. But as far as I know, your listing don't use Wikidata directly. On WV/de I save just the Wikidata ID and the description in the listing and thats it. But I think i have to add some information manually here. So I am going to type it in the "alt" field. You sould consider parameters for the names and addresses in local language. I had the idea for a new feature like the "taxi button" offered in apps like the Agoda app. This button could open a popup on mobile phones with a map and on es second screen the text "Please take me to: foo, bla" including the phonenumber + call button. All written in local language. So if you enter a taxi in Bangkok you just have to touch the button in the listing and show it to the taxi driver. Roland has drafted some screenshots a while ago. If you are interested in this kind of feature we should work together.
I do not think, the banner is just a Wikivoyage thing. Once provided on wikidata as a property its open to everybody. There is even an (understandable) suggestion to rename the property and remove the word "Wikivoyage" from it. -- DerFussi 06:56, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
If we need to create a new field for local names, what, then, is the "alt" field for? Just former names of places? I'd suggest removing it, then, because of the prevalence of duplication I mentioned before. But I think there needs to be a way to make the usage of "alt" more clearly understood (by smart guys like you and even by morons, haha). On your point about pagebanners: Of course, anyone can use them, but I don't think it's really a Wikivoyage issue how people use them outside of Wikivoyage. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:01, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
We use it for alternative names (if there is) and used it for the local name. I think its almost obsolete, when a separate local-name parameter is introduced. But we will need a bot that transfer/rename the "alt" parameters to possible new ones. If you consider to introduce local name parameters it could be useful to uses the same names as we do (VCard, see "*-local" parameters). -- DerFussi 08:54, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Lead section images[edit]

Many articles on Wikivoyage do not have images in the lead section. The mw:Extension:PageImages api uses images in the lead of an article as an illustration and exposes it via an API which many sites use.

If you use the mobile site and do a search these page images are used to illustrate the search result. When I'm searching large articles like San Francisco do not show any. It's a shame and I wondered if there was any way we can rectify that via policy change/edits? We could use images outside the lead section (simple config change) but these are rarely the right ones. There is also an unimplemented solution to use Wikidata but that's not available yet. I'm interested in guidance on how to resolve this! Jdlrobson (talk) 08:49, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

The lead image used to be considered important and was right at or near the top of the page. However, we now have pagebanners, so the lead image has become deemphasized. You're able to see pagebanners on the mobile site, aren't you? Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:55, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
The problem seems to be that some mechanisms use the fact that an image appear in the lead section to infer that being a useful image to show. With the banner that image is less important for us and, indeed, it is often better not to have any image there (it conflicts with the banner, and combined with a fact box it uses too much space). We should then provide some other means to find what image could be used to represent the article. For our dynamic maps, mobile and for Wikidata we could invent any method, but it would be nice to use some standard that external sites would recognize. --LPfi (talk) 11:38, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
The banner image probably isn't shown in the search results because of the proportions. Jdlrobson, a screenshot of practical applications might be helpful. I'm fixing your link, but I doubt that most people understand how that extension gets used in practice. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:07, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Recent increase in touting?[edit]

Is it just me, or has there been a marked increase recently of new short lived accounts such as Special:Contributions/Mirandaliu that are just adding hotel listings in Asia and Australia?

Some seem to be listing multiple hotels, so not sure if it is touting or perhaps some kind of SEO technique for a travel web site? This might not actually be a problem, but it is a new behavior pattern so wanted to check. Andrewssi2 (talk) 09:19, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Mobile site header says "wiki voyage"[edit]

The mobile site shows our name as "wiki voyage", with a space.

Is it intended?

Thanks! Syced (talk) 11:41, 15 May 2017 (UTC)


Birgit Müller (WMDE) 14:39, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Join the next cycle of Wikimedia movement strategy discussions (underway until June 12)[edit]

21:09, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Mobile Site: Banner Image Looking Rather Terrible[edit]

Just tried the mobile site on my iPhone 5 and the banner photos are looking "terrible" (being polite). Nothing wrong with the banners (I tested a couple where I knew they were of more than adequate resolution and worked fine on laptop). They are coming out truncated (right side and some of left but not centred) and almost blurred (but not zoomed to cause blurring. I've no idea how to look into what might be the cause (they do look bad!). I'm unable to upload files to WV and seems a bit bad to upload a example of something for sort term to commons, but happy to take some screenshort and post somehwere if that helps anybody diagnose and fix. PsamatheM (talk) 22:06, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

If you decide to do that, then my favorite set of instructions for this may be useful to you: w:en:Wikipedia:Screenshots of Wikipedia. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:30, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Yes, a screenshot would be helpful :-) Thanks for the feedback! Syced (talk) 07:24, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
3 examples. Wroxham and Hoveton looks bad and Norfolk Broads and Wymondham probably illustrate the cause also don't look great.These all appear fine in desktop browser (Safari on Mac).
Wroxham and Hoveton
Norfolk Broads

Screenshots from Safari on iPhone 5S iOS 10. PsamatheM (talk) 09:11, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

n.b. please, if anybody can layout these screenshots on the page better please do edit (and I'll learn how to d it in future. I tried left, centre and right but too big gap. PsamatheM (talk) 09:11, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
The pagebanner template/extension could show the normal image on mobile websites delivered by Wikidata instead of the banner. -- DerFussi 11:51, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
I am just guessing here, but I think there is some kind of "most interesting" algorithm that runs against the banners to generate the mobile banners. You can see it's trying to pick out a focal point within the image, and not simply centering it. Maybe there could be an override option on banner templates? FWIW, the mobile crop of the Boston banner works well, (and probably many others) so I wouldn't throw out this functionality altogether. --ButteBag (talk) 13:47, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
One thought I've had since is that on a desktop/laptop (larger screen) the banner adds a lot and includes the section links/menu. On the small phone screen it contains nothing but takes up a lot of screen space and does not look great. My guess (without trying it) is that if the aspect ratio were maintained and the image shown full width(i.e. a lot smaller vertically) it would take a lot less screen space and generally look a lot better. At the moment it's taking up over 1/3 of the browser screen space! Then with the breadcrumbs you've lost over half the browser screen space in the examples. (OK that reduced/goes as you scroll but not a useful starting point for getting info to the user. PsamatheM (talk) 15:09, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Oh just noticed this. There is an "origin" param you can use documented here: Template:Pagebanner. Disagree about keeping the desktop aspect ratio on mobile, but agree the breadcrumbs and page actions could be handled better (made less tall somehow). --ButteBag (talk) 21:01, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Indigenous heritage in Australia[edit]

Hi everyone. I have proposed that this article be renamed to Indigenous Australian culture. Please share your views on Talk:Indigenous heritage in Australia. Thank you Gizza (roam) 22:35, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Boredom and the birth of the tourism industry[edit]

Maybe some of you will find this interesting. —Justin (koavf)TCM 23:50, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

How we render PDFs will change – feedback?[edit]

Hi everyone,

I’m looking for feedback from people who use the function to create PDFs on the Wikimedia wikis, which feels relevant for the travel guides on Wikivoyage. In short, the main technology we’re using to render them – OCG – is breaking down. The code is old, it’s difficult to maintain, and if we don’t replace it now we might suddenly find ourselves in a situation where we'd have to take it down without having planned to do so.

We have some plans for the future at mw:Reading/Web/PDF Functionality. If you care about the PDF function, please head over there and tell us on the talk page if anything is missing, or if there’s something in there we shouldn’t spend our time and energy on. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 12:24, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Use to often render articles using the function when they were displayed as they appear before rendering. Then took them on trips using laptop. When they changed PDF output to two columns, I had to switch to PDFs rendered by my search engine (i.e., Firefox) in order to retain original format for ease of highlighting and to avoid many page-up/down reading actions on-screen. Now encounter loss of only a few pictures...usually the banner, but no text. If we choose a new "converter", suggest it allow users to designate the basic output format. Regards, Hennejohn (talk) 18:20, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
Left an extensive comment here. --Alexander (talk) 18:57, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
@Johan (WMF): How is that page different from mw:Reading/Web/PDF Rendering? I left a detailed comment on that talk page some months ago. Powers (talk) 23:41, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
Hopefully slightly clearer. Sorry for the confusion; we should probably post something explaining the relationship between the pages – thanks for asking. You don't need to repost anything that was posted there, it's been noted. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 23:51, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
Formerly Wikivoyage used few images to make printed articles more compact and download require less bandwidth. With smartphones/tablets and 3G being more common, we have eased on that recommendation. Now it seems we are back to discussing the images (on the linked talk page).
CSS allows different layouts for different media (desktop/tablet/print/...). I think it would be possible to use that feature, and the possibility to choose between style sheets, to indicate what images to include in different situations. We should be able to make better default choices than the PDF rendering engine. This would need some changes in guidelines and probably some new templates, in addition to the MediaWiki/Electron support.
Do we want a mechanism for marking important and less important images? There is already the suggestion to render some images as larger for offline use, where you cannot expand the image. Other variants?
--LPfi (talk) 07:06, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Yes, there should be a mechanism for marking important images = images needed in the print version. But the problem is that images are included directly without any templates, so we can't define their CSS classes or anything. Placing each image inside a template would be an awkward solution. Therefore, I thought of labeling a few 'important' images with a template, where CSS classes can be eventually defined, and leaving all other images as they are. That would be easiest. --Alexander (talk) 08:39, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Philippines smoking ban[edit]

Hi, apparently there's been a strict smoking ban recently imposed in the Philippines, but I can't understand what exactly it entails, so I'm unable to add it to the Philippines page. Would someone who understands the order be able to add it? Thank you! More news articles here, and here.  Seagull123  Φ  20:15, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Actually, I've just added a short sentence about the ban to the page, but I haven't been able to say much about it.  Seagull123  Φ  20:17, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Companies where you rent a tent/mobile home on a campsite[edit]

It appears we have a rather big blind spot when it comes to camping in general, but this issue in particular. I don't know how well known this concept is outside of Europe, but basically, what companies such as Eurocamp do is they rent spaces at a campsite and then put there own tents, bungalows and whatnot there for customers to rent fully furnished. In essence you get the comfort of a vacation rental or hotel while still going camping and often at a better price than a hotel would've been. Plus you are not bound by what your car can carry and can arrive via train, bus or plane, as the most stuff (tent, dishes and so on) is already there. Should we have a travel topic on that? Should we mention the companies present in campsite listings? Does this phenomenon exist outside Europe at all? Hobbitschuster (talk) 13:26, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

I've seen advertisements for one of these in California. I don't know what that type is called. I asked Mr Google and came up with which has a list of "site options". None of them really seemed to be "tent that is already pitched for you". Perhaps you'd search under w:yurts, w:teepees, or w:cabins? ("Cabin" implies a permanent structure.) A "Park Model RV" seems to be the vehicular version. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:09, 22 May 2017 (UTC)