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:

  • 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 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!

Experienced users: Please sweep the pub

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

Contents

Map of all POIs[edit]

Hi all,

I created a world map showing all of our listings (that have a latitude/longitude): http://cdb.io/1MtPmXC

It can help when you want to:

  • Spot erroneous latitudes/longitudes (for instance, a lot lack the minus sign, so they can be found in the middle of the sea)
  • Find what article covers a particular place
  • Quickly check whether the places you know is already in Wikivoyage or not
  • See if there are any listings around when you are in an area between articles
  • Find listings that are in the wrong article (there are a lot)
  • Decide how to split/merge/rezone articles
  • Many other uses I guess, let me know :-)

Cheers! Nicolas1981 (talk) 10:29, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

I am going to have to visit one of those hotel in the middle of the pacific ocean :-) --Traveler100 (talk) 13:49, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
That big empty chunk missing from Buffalo is just the kick in the pants I needed to get back to work on Buffalo/East Side. Thanks! -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 14:49, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Nice tool. Can you restrict it to just the main namespace? The example on Wikivoyage:How to use dynamic maps is covering up one of my areas of interest. =) Powers (talk) 15:49, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Great tip, thanks! I will be sure to filter them out for the new version. Nicolas1981 (talk) 02:07, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, Nick! Would it be possible to create such maps for other language versions? --Alexander (talk) 17:58, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
This time I did it manually, but if the tool is popular I will write a script and try to make it compatible with your Russian data. :-) Nicolas1981 (talk) 02:07, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
Nice mashup! Is this using a snapshot of listing data, and if so how often would it be updated? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 02:12, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
I used the CSV file available at http://datahub.io/organization/wikivoyage that I sorted in LibreOffice (to remove POIs with no lat/long) then uploaded to a map generation website, very easy really, not a single line of code, anybody can do it. It is a manual procedure though, so if it gets popular I will write a script to remove time-wasting manual work every time there is a new data dump. Unfortunately we can't do real-time until we put POIs into WikiData (which I expect to happen in at least 3 years). Nicolas1981 (talk) 05:26, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

I fixed some erroneous latitudes/longitudes, but there are lots more. As well as errors with minus signs, a number have lat and long transposed. Nurg (talk) 22:02, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing! I fixed a lot as well, in the areas I know. I suggest everyone help check the areas they know: we have more than 50,000 listings with coordinates, so there are probably mistakes a bit everywhere. Also check in the sea, in deserts, and lone points with nothing else nearby. When you don't know the real coordinates but are sure that the current are wrong, just remove them: no coordinates is better than wrong coordinates. Thanks everyone! Nicolas1981 (talk) 01:39, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Map of all destinations[edit]

I've created a subsection so as not to hijack the discussion about Nick's great work above, but we have a similar clickable map of all destination articles available via http://maps.wikivoyage-ev.org/w/artmap.php?lang=en. I've found this to be a useful tool when trying to see what destinations are available in an area that I'm unfamiliar with, and would love to make this map more prominent on the site if others were interested, possibly on the home page or in the left nav, or at least in the Destinations article. Unfortunately I can't figure out how to load it in an iframe, so the only option appears to be to include it as an external link as the Germans have done under the "Übersichtskarte" heading on their home page. Would others find this to be a useful addition on our site? -- Ryan • (talk) • 18:19, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Having it more accessible from the top page would be nice indeed. How about also showing POIs when there are less than 3 destinations on the page, or with a disabled-by-default checkbox? Nicolas1981 (talk) 02:07, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
The map of all destination articles was revised slightly. The clustering is now accelerated ≈ 100 times. This becomes quite noticeable on slower PCs and mobiles. - This application is written in Javascript. All data must be downloaded to the local computer. Therefore, I would not enlarge the scope of data (eg POI's). Some mobile devices do not have enough memory for it. -- Joachim Mey2008 (talk) 19:09, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
I'f I'm understanding Mey2008's concerns, it sounds like it would be best not to promote the http://maps.wikivoyage-ev.org/w/artmap.php?lang=en map too widely at this time due to performance concerns, so consider my original suggestion withdrawn. -- Ryan • (talk) • 15:31, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Do not withdraw your proposition: if tests show that it makes Wikivoyage better, more easily navigable, or more attractive, then we should create a good Labs instance and run Joachim's code on it :-) Nicolas1981 (talk) 03:54, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
If I'm understanding correctly, I think the problem is that the Javascript runs slowly on some clients ("This becomes quite noticeable on slower PCs and mobiles"). Since it's not a server issue the code would need to be refactored before it could be widely used. -- Ryan • (talk) • 03:57, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
A great solution would be to send only the data that is useful to the current view, if the user zooms on Italy then send more data about the Italy area, if the user zooms further on Policoro then send the data for Policoro. That's how scalable dynamic maps usually work. As you said, it requires some refactoring. But let's not drop the idea just because development is needed :-) Nicolas1981 (talk) 06:20, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
How would duplicates be handled (ie. a city or location that appears more than once in wikivoyage articles) in this proposed world map? - Matroc (talk) 19:48, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
@Matroc: Only markers are shown on this map for articles with the tl:Geo. For tl.listing or tl:marker no markers are displayed here. -- Joachim Mey2008 (talk)
@Wrh2: I have revised the script. It now runs fast and stable on all devices. It is now representable in a mapframe [1]. -- Joachim Mey2008 (talk)
@Mey2008: Thank you! One issue I found is that the "align" parameter does not seem to be doing what I would expect using "align=none". It adds style "tnone", but style "tright" is also present, so the map always aligns to the right. I don't see anything in Template:Mapframe that would assign "tright", so I'm guessing that the Javascript may be doing so? See also User:Wrh2/Sandbox. -- Ryan • (talk) • 04:26, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, never mind, that's being generated from custom JS in my common.js file. Sorry for the confusion, and thanks again for your updates. -- Ryan • (talk) • 04:51, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
This map of all destinations is great! Does it load all of the data first, or little-by-little? How about making this map available somewhere a bit more accessible, in a bigger frame? Thanks a lot! Syced (talk) 04:51, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
All data will be loaded at once (1.3 Mb for en.WV). Needed because of the clustering. - The map frame can be any size (width= height=). The aspect ratio should be about 3:2 (w:h). There is also a full-screen version: http://tools.wmflabs.org/wikivoyage/w/artmap.php?lang=en . -- Joachim Mey2008 (talk) 05:12, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
See Talk:Destinations#Proposed update for a proposal to include this new map on the Destinations page. -- Ryan • (talk) • 18:07, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Edit filter[edit]

Previously posted here. What do you guys think we should add edit filter in Special:Tags which would tag edits containing links. This way we can easily reduce promotional material. --Saqib (talk) 13:32, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

I like this idea. Question: how many edits do we get per day with links? What would the workload be like for the person handling the filter? -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 14:05, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
It is hard to tell number of edits we getting each day containing link but I guess not many. Perhaps those (Ryan, YPSI, IK) who actively patrol the unmarked edits have something to add here. And I don't it will going to increase any workload. On the contrary, it will easy for us to identify the edits containing external links and so we may able to deal with them much quicker. --Saqib (talk) 14:18, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Sounds like a useful idea, but don't we already have a filter for (some) links? ϒpsilon (talk) 14:47, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
I have no sense of how useful this will be, but I certainly have no objection if you all would like to do this. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:23, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
You are right, Saqib, that in the end it will reduce workload rather than increase it. I'm in full support of this idea. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 19:14, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Editing For what it's worth, I went to go add this filter but couldn't... I guess I was right before that no one changed my user rights. I'd be happy to help if you'd like and if not, that's fine as well. —Justin (koavf)TCM 04:02, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Ryan: Not many people responded to this but those who did, seems supportive to this proposal so should we go ahead and enforce the edit filter? I'm afraid I don't have the expertise on this. --Saqib (talk) 21:24, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Sounds like a good idea. Nicolas1981 (talk) 03:03, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
I've created the filter but some changes required. It seems edit filter doesn't work when URL is made from a user account. Anyone who may look into it please? AndreCarrotflower, I've seen you tinkering with abuse filter so perhaps you? --Saqib (talk) 10:41, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Are you sure it doesn't work for edits from a user account? this one was tagged correctly, was it not? Powers (talk) 14:18, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Israel / Antisemitic countries Visa trouble[edit]

We have an article on avoiding a transit of the United States, so this is not unprecedented. As it now stands we mention in some country pages, that they absolutely don't admit anyone who has any kind of evidence (however circumstantial) of having traveled to Israel, while the reverse is not true. Some countries (I think it was Iran) even issue passports with the words "this passport is valid for travel to every country except Israel" (which if it is formulated that way is a tacit acknowledgement that despite their best efforts the Jewish state still exists). I think the scope of such an article would be:

  • which countries are known to make trouble if there is evidence of travel to Israel
  • How you can avoid producing evidence for travel to Israel
  • How travel to Israel is possible if your country of origin doesn't allow it (if it is possible at all) (somewhat analogous to Americans in Cuba)
  • How you get two passports (a frequent method of having the "toxic" Israel stamp in one and the visas for antisemitic countries in another passport) and which countries allow that
  • What problems (if any) you will face if your passport shows evidence of travel to antisemitic countries upon arrival in Israel (I think the thing that will most likely happen is extended questioning and heightened security, which - while unpleasant - is not all that bad)

A note to avoid a flame-war: the term "antisemitic-countries" is used by me in this context to refer to the blatantly antisemitic anti-Israel policy of a handful of countries when dealing with travelers that are in any way shape or form connected to Judaism, Israel or travel to or through this country. It does not imply or generalize anything about the citizens or the inhabitants of said country or countriesHobbitschuster (talk) 13:35, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

To be brief, I think it could be an extremely useful article but should be carefully written, for the same reasons you found it necessary to include the disclaimer at the end of your post. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 13:43, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
It would be preferable to use "Arab boycott of Israel" or similar terms instead of "anti-semitic" to make clear that this is primarily political in nature. The objective is to fight over control of land in the Middle East; religion just makes a convenient dividing line to fuel the conflicts. K7L (talk) 14:15, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
While Iran has an ethnically Arab minority (one of the reasons for the war between Saddam and Khomeini) and Farsi has a lot of Arab loanwords (or so I've been told), it is not Arab in any way shape or form, but still extremely hostile towards Israel. And I think I heard something about North Korea doing the same. And while it is neither the place nor the time to debate this (and beyond the scope of a travel guide) I do think it has to do more with Antisemitism than with who owns what land. The only countries that "lost" land to Israel in a sorta kinda way (except Syria, but there seems to be no Syrian government to speak of) Jordan and Egypt are also among the few countries that made peace with Israel at least on paper. Anyway, we should focus on what is relevant to the traveler. And what is relevant is that some countries make a fuzz about people how are Jews or Israelis or have been to Israel, this I think we should mention and I think we should make and article on this subject, and yes we should proceed with caution, because this issue is way more emotional for most of the world than say... the Rwandan genocide. Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:32, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
We could make a general article on the topic, and therethrough we need to write less about the hot topic of Israel vs. its neighbors. Azerbaijan is almost as anti-Armenian, and at least Serbia, Moldova and Ukraine (how about Georgia (country)?) apparently also have restrictions on some passport stamps or lack of them.--ϒpsilon (talk) 15:10, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
A bit more clarification, Indonesia and Malaysia also have similar entry restrictions for Israeli passports and they are not Arab countries Andrewssi2 (talk) 21:15, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
If I don't misunderstand it, the situation with the countries that User:Ypsilon has described seems to be mostly those sorta kinda de facto countries that are for whatever reason not recognized and get you in trouble in the countries which they "totally belong to" (read: not at all) and breakaway regions such as Crimea that were annexed conquered or otherwise forcibly made part of another politic entity. With Israel we have a whole bunch of countries, including as User:Andrewssi2 thankfully pointed out places that have never even been at war with Israel and don't claim any land in the general vicinity of the Jordan river or the Mediterranean sea. While I do think we have to improve and update our coverage on visa issues one might run into after having been to Nagorno Karabakh or Crimea (the latter being more likely than the former, at least once the major fighting dies down) the whole "we hate Israel" movement didn't arise yesterday and will unfortunately probably keep harassing travelers, Jews and traveling Jews for quite some time. Also while (at least in theory) Transnistria could for example disintegrate or be recognized tomorrow, bearing a major revolution in Tehran the Iranian policy towards Israel will not change in the foreseeable future. Therefore on this front at least I do think it is our biggest fish to fry and we can deal with the minor visa issues later. Either by expanding the article that was originally about issues related to Israel or by updating the various country articles or by writing (a) new article(s) on the various conflicts. Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:42, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
[Edit conflict:]Probably the most useful way to deal with this topic is to make it a general one, with specifics covered in different sections. The topic could be phrased something like Visa restrictions based on travel to unrecognized countries, but a more specific Countries barring entry to travellers to Israel (or "from Israel") topic would be fine, too. I don't think we need to take a position on the extent to which such restrictions are based on hatred toward Jews, rather than pure opposition to Israel and/or unpopularity of Israel in particular countries, but I'd observe that there are no restrictions whatsoever on the entry of Jews with citizenship in countries other than Israel to countries like Malaysia, but Saudi Arabia may be another story. I'm not sure how difficult it is for Israelis to visit Indonesia; I thought it was easier for them to get there than to Malaysia. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:49, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Although Indonesia is a (officially) secular country, it doesn't have diplomatic relations with Israel meaning that Isreali passport holders need to apply for a special visa from the Indonesian Immigration department. Maybe not a draconian as some middle-eastern countries, but seems like a de-facto restriction nevertheless. Andrewssi2 (talk) 21:54, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
It's a de jure restriction. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:38, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Just wondering... might Hebrew Wikivoyage already have such an article that could be translated? Andrewssi2 (talk) 21:54, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
My only comment is to say that I strongly object to the use of "antisemitic" in this context. It is entirely possible to be anti-Zionist and/or opposed to some Israeli policies and actions without being antisemitic; indeed I have seen reports of a group of Orthodox Jews who are fervently anti-Zionist. Pashley (talk) 00:49, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Also worth noting that although generally understood in the West to be specifically about Jews, Semitic-speaking people are actually a broader range of people in the middle-east and north Africa that includes Arabs. Therefore using the term 'anti-Semitic' in the context of the above discussion is not accurate. Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:33, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Andrewssi2, although it might not be factually correct to say "Anti-Semitic" in this context (because technically Arabs are Semitic people too), nevertheless, it is a fact that in some countries around the world I would get into serious trouble just for being of Jewish ethnicity + because of growing up in Israel, due to various long ongoing tensions, political reasons, history. For the same reasons these countries don't want Israeli-Jews to even think of going there, many of these countries also try to prevent people with an Israeli affiliation to travel freely into their countries (to my understanding this is somewhat a result of fears from Israeli spies, collaborators, or secret counter-terrorist agents acting within their borders - see Lavon Affair + 1997 Khaled Mashal assassination attempt + Assassination of Mahmoud Al-Mabhouh). In the recent decades there has also been cases of non-Jewish Israelis whom got into serious trouble in middle eastern countries, most likely ONLY because of their Israeli citizenship (see Azzam Azzam). There was also the Ilan Grapel affair in which a naive Jewish American, whom only got his Israeli citizenship a few years earlier, got into serious trouble in Egypt when the Egyptian authorities arrested him on charges of fomenting unrest in Egypt as a Mossad agent in the wake of the 2011 Egyptian revolution.
At the Hebrew Wikivoyage we have not yet created any Travel topic article devoted to this important topic (I would definitely get to creating it eventually), although, when we do eventually create such an article, I estimate it would probably only focus on presenting information about the countries which don't allow Israelis to enter their borders, and it would probably not focus on how a certain group of countries would not allow the entrance to non-Israelis if they have an Israeli stamp in their passport (simply because such an article would be of no value to 99.9% of Hebrew speakers whom are Israeli citizens).
Either way, by making a couple of searches on Google I have found the following articles which seem to fully address this topic.
I hope this help. ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 03:21, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
[edit conflict:]Can we please not argue about what "anti-Semitic" means? The term was invented by a 19th-century German Jew-hater as a substitute for "Judenhass"="Jew-hatred", substituting "Semite" to use as a "racial" term to define the new racist form of Jew-hatred, and had nothing to do with the linguistic or Biblical classification of Semites as including Arabic, Amharic, etc.
Pashley is of course right, but there's a big difference between being strongly opposed to policies of the Netanyahu government and supporting the abolition of Israel and dispersion of its Jewish majority to who knows where, or worse, and since the whole point of this site's Wikivoyage:Be fair policy is not to have these kinds of arguments, that's all I'm going to say in reply. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:26, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Ikan Kekek, please read my comment again (you can also read History of the Arab–Israeli conflict + History of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict to be more informed about why this is not just resistance to the Netanyahu government polices). I was hoping that my comment above + the links I supplied would help us focus less on the Antisemitism part of this topic, and more on the actual facts relating to how a certain group of countries would not allow the entrance to non-Israelis if they have an Israeli stamp in their passport. I think it is important to stick to the facts about this topic instead of writing that specific governments are Antisemitic or hate Israel (because the truth is more complicated than those simplifications). ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 03:36, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
ויקיג'אנקי, I wasn't addressing you because you were posting while I was trying to post my previous reply. :-) Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:42, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
But just to add: I do agree with you. I posted this upthread: "I don't think we need to take a position on the extent to which such restrictions are based on hatred toward Jews, rather than pure opposition to Israel and/or unpopularity of Israel in particular countries..." Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:46, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
[unindent] Strongly suggest those who have an interest in this subject go forth and create an Article about it. The discussion above doesn't need to be extended on the Traveler's Pub. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 04:25, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
As soon as we agree on a name for said article... And its scope. I would suggest for starters to have it called "Visa problems related to travel to Israel" or sth. like that and deal with the situation regarding Israel and its enemies exclusively and issues related to other countries or pairs of countries to be dealt with later. Hobbitschuster (talk) 13:40, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Create a page called Travel concerns for Israeli passport holders or similar. You can easily change the name later.
By using the term 'anti-Semitic' in the header of this section you have invited a known unsavory aspect of Internet discourse to happen on WV. I'd appreciate it greatly if it was moved away and in a positive direction. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 21:37, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
I agree with Andrewssi2 that we should not use loaded terms. As a Wikimedia site we should just expose the facts without trying to judge who is right/wrong and whether people's motives are political/etc. Just expose the daily life impact on travellers, and give tips on how to avoid unfortunate consequences. I suggest making the article cover not only Israeli passports but also Israeli stamps, so how about Travelling with an Israeli passport or visa? Nicolas1981 (talk) 01:38, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Indeed. The whole point of the Wikivoyage:Be fair policy is to avoid political arguments to the extent possible and just present facts that are relevant for travellers. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:46, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Yeah sorry User:Andrewssi2 the choice of words for the headline was not the best. But I think we must find a title for the article that is a) concise b) mentions who is concerned by this (everybody who has been or plans to go to Israel and a number of countries, some of them Arab) and c) doesn't violate any policies and doesn't incite any kind of unneeded or unwanted political discussion. I think User:Nicolas1981 has made a suggestion that while good can still be improved upon. Thoughts? Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:38, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
I think that Travelling with an Israeli passport or visa is a fine article title. All that remains is to write the article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:21, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Related Q/A: http://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/45465/are-there-countries-where-people-of-a-particular-religion-are-refused-entry Nicolas1981 (talk) 05:49, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

I created a page under the name Visa trouble but it needs work. Hobbitschuster (talk) 00:10, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Possibility of a "Sister projects" report in the Wikipedia Signpost[edit]

Hello, all I'm a volunteer at the Wikipedia Signpost, the Wikimedia movement's biggest internal newspaper. Almost all of our coverage focuses on Wikipedia, with occasional coverage of Commons, the Meta-Wiki, MediaWiki, Wikidata, the the Wikimedia Labs; we have little to nothing to say about Wiktionary, Wikiquote, Wikibooks, Wikisource, Wikispecies, Wikinews, Wikiversity, or Wikivoyage. I'm interested in writing a special long-form "sister projects" report to try and address this shortfall. Is there anyone experienced in the Wikivoyage project with whom I can speak with, perhaps over Skype, about the mission, organization, history, successes, troubles, and foibles of being a contributor to this project? If so, please drop me a line at my English Wikipedia talk page. Thanks! ResMar 21:04, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Addendum, actually we have a lot of coverage of Wiki Voyage, but only with respect to the initial set-up process. Since then we've been relatively mute and I'd like to revisit the topic. Resident Mario (talk) 21:11, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
That sounds like a great idea. Who wants to volunteer? WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:48, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
I will do it, Mario. Harlan888 (talk) 19:27, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Nothing against you, Harlan, but I'm hoping to get experienced Wikivoyagerians (Wikivoyagers?) with an understanding of the strategic organization and direction of the project sufficiently advanced for them to be able to impress it upon others, and you only have a handful of edits at the moment... Resident Mario (talk) 02:31, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Hey, he's better than an experienced WVger, as according to his profile he is a guru! —The preceding comment was added by PrinceGloria (talkcontribs)
I would like to participate. I am an avid reader of the Signpost and a long-time editor here (and at WT before that), particularly involved in dynamic maps, data exchange and other modernization projects. I used to be known as Nicolas1981. Syced (talk) 06:40, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello Nicholas, I was wondering where you've been... At any rate, if more than 1 person would be needed, I am very open to be questioned or asked to write something. In case you would consider it helpful, please leave me your questions on my talk page. Thanks! PrinceGloria (talk) 08:18, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
@PrinceGloria: To keep myself from getting too swamped I'm keeping to one interview per project at the moment. I will almost certainly do a second round a little later on, so you're on my list :). Resident Mario (talk) 15:36, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Dhivehi text not rendering on Mac OS[edit]

I noticed that the Dhivehi text for Maldives does not render on my MacBook. I tried with native Safari, Chrome and Firefox browsers and none of them work. Windows on the other hand has no problem.

Where is the best place to raise this issue? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 02:49, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

[2]. The instructions there seem to be for Lion or something, System Preferences doesn't seem to have any input sources box in Yosemite. Nevertheless, download the package from the link, open and install it. I just did and it works well in Safari and Firefox. ϒpsilon (talk) 12:04, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Template for opening hours[edit]

The French and Russian Wikivoyages have implemented a template for opening hours.

Hours format is one of the most chaotic parts of the English Wikivoyage, so I believe we would benefit greatly from such a template.

Example:

{{Hours|Tu|Sa|8|30|22|}} → Tu–Sa 8:30AM–10PM

I suggest we use the same format, and create the template to output hours according to our time format style conventions. Or has it been done already and I don't know it?

Advantages:

  • Ensure consistent format. Most of us don't know/remember what is the current convention
  • Avoid unfortunate truncations when at end of line

Drawbacks:

  • Not what-you-see-is-what-you-get, as all templates. Maybe this could be mitigated by creating a GUI for the listings editor?

What do you all think? Cheers! Syced (talk) 04:01, 9 April 2015 (UTC)(formerly Nicolas1981)

A cleaner format to read would be a positive move. Do you see this as a template that is used inside the listings templates? Such as
 hours={{Hours|Tu|Sa|8|30|22|}},{{Hours|Su|10|14|}},{{Hours|Mo|Closed|}}

Also not sure about free format with no parameters, could be miss interpreted.

How about 24 hour format (22:00 instead of 10PM)? Would that be possible? Danapit (talk) 07:52, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
I would say it would be a good idea to have the input parameters in the format 22:30 so as to save on input fields. Preferred format will depend on what part of the world you are from. Suggest displaying in 24h format but with mouse over showing am or pm (similar to mouse over on climate temperature table). --Traveler100 (talk) 09:41, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Hmmm.. For consistency's sake, it's not a terrible idea, but on the other hand, the template is actually more typing than the original, it would need an extra attribute to switch between 24h and AM/PM formats to suit our current usage of them, and there are a number of complex yet extremely common formats it wouldn't handle well: restaurants with split lunch/dinner hours (e.g. Su-Th 11AM-3PM and 6PM-11PM), places which are closed on a certain weekday (e.g. Su-We, Fr 8:30AM-10PM), instances where the hours given are for weekends and holidays, etc. Texugo (talk) 11:26, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
We're bound to get weirdness like the "bar and grill" which is the only watering hole in some tiny village, and posts different hours for its British-style pub food than for the beverage operation, and longer hours on weekends, and reduced hours in the off-season, and they go home early on Monday, and... K7L (talk) 13:26, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
This template can't be used everywhere, but it helps to keep things in the same format. Even more importantly, it allows uniform changes of the format across the whole site. Regarding 12-hours vs. 24-hours format, this can be easily put into the template that will read the country property from Wikidata and set individual format for each country. --Alexander (talk) 13:36, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
I am in favor of a template in general, though it may be good to integrate it into the listing editor so that one only has to type in a couple of numbers in a opens and closes thingy and the days it is open. In German there is the useful word "Ruhetag" for the day something (e.g. a restaurant) closes, maybe we can integrate sth. like this into the template as well. (not mentioning the "Ruhetag" makes most people assume there is either none or it is Sunday). Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 13:52, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
I fear the drawbacks are too great. The extra typing and loss of edit-window readability don't really offset what's ultimately a minor improvement in consistency. I'm all for consistency, but this is the sort of thing that only needs to be cleaned up when an article is nominated for featuring or star status. Powers (talk) 00:37, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

In my opinion, the biggest issue with such a template would be that it would confuse potential editors for all over the world, on whom why especially relay on helping developing the website's content. Here's an alternative solution .... we could instead set up a special bot that would go over all articles every once in a while and fix consistency issues such as this aspect. ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 06:03, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Your bot idea is great! Actually, an easy way to start coding this bot is to download the listings CSV file (updated today!) and analyze its "HOURS" column. I am quite busy with other scripts and with GSoC mentoring, any volunteer? :-) Syced (talk) 08:58, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
I am thrilled to see such a bot. I don't know how to write it, and that's exactly the reason why the template has been introduced. --Alexander (talk) 14:35, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

[unindent] I looked at the template's page in fr.voy, and I'm still not sure I completely understand what the user interface would look like and how the user would have to interact with it. Is there a risk of creating more confusion than it's worth? Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:57, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

You will have to write 1|30 instead of 1:30 and Mo|Fr instead of Mo-Fr plus {{hours| in the beginning and some curly brackets in the end, so there is not much difference as long as you know basic wiki-markup. The template can be integrated into the listing editor, which would make typing even easier. --Alexander (talk) 14:35, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
If I wasn't clear before, I agree with LtPowers. I think that bot or not, wizard interface or not, this is a rather over-complicated, problematic and non-comprehensive solution for something that isn't a major problem to begin with, far more trouble than it's actually worth. Texugo (talk) 16:44, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Yes, you should not have to check an instructions page to be able to correct changed opening hours. If the page says "Tu–Sa 8:30AM–10PM", but you know it now closes early on Wednesdays, click edit and see {{Hours|Tu|Sa|8:30|22|}}, the risk is big you won't correct in (not everybody is brave enough to just delete the template and type in the hours). These are small fixes we hope bypassing people would do, and should be as obvious, easy and straight-forward as possible. --LPfi (talk) 21:11, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
In addition to the bot, or at least a report that someone with WV:AWB could clean up occasionally, I'd like to see the GUI editor that Syced mentioned for the listing tool someday. I've reported that request as phab:T95901 just so it won't be forgotten. (talk) 15:32, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
WhatamIdoing, sorry, but I firmly believe it inappropriate to go filing feature requests for things we have not arrived at consensus for. The GUI feature would obviously be dependent on the template proposed above, which several of us have expressed reservations about. Please retract the phabricator request. Texugo (talk) 15:49, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
I have no objection to the phabricator ticket, but this would presumably be a change to the Wikivoyage:Listing editor and not the mw:extension:listings. The extension is deprecated and obsolete as the <listing> tags have all already been replaced by templates by a 'bot script. K7L (talk) 17:16, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Texugo, a GUI feature would not necessarily be dependent upon any template. In fact, writing a script like that might be easier and more generally useful if it wasn't dependent upon any local template.
K7L, I've switched the project to "General or unknown". (We need a Wikivoyage project over there.) Also, if we're talking about a local script rather than the extension, then there's a chance that the Phab folks may reject the task. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:46, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

200th anniversary of Waterloo battle[edit]

The anniversary will be in June, and is sure to attract history buffs.

The French are currently winning with their wonderful article about the sights&accommodation. Will they stay unchallenged? Syced (talk) 04:20, 9 April 2015 (UTC)(formerly Nicolas1981)

Well, please plunge forward. I believe we should cover Waterloo proper and Braine l'Alleud (sp?) in the same article, and I guess the French are going into a bit too much detail. OtBT nomination for the coming months are still "pending further support", so I think there is an ambitious but reachable target. I am doing Belgium at the moment, so I will gladly help. PrinceGloria (talk) 05:59, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
D-Day beaches may be an example to look at for how such articles can be handled. Pashley (talk) 11:41, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Stewards confirmation rules[edit]

Hello, I made a proposal on Meta to change the rules for the steward confirmations. Currently consensus to remove is required for a steward to lose his status, however I think it's fairer to the community if every steward needed the consensus to keep. As this is an issue that affects all WMF wikis, I'm sending this notification to let people know & be able to participate. Best regards, --MF-W 16:12, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Public transport and short and medium length rail systems[edit]

As it now stands the article on urban rail appears to be not to the satisfaction of most of those that contribute to its talk section. That got me thinking, and as some of the possible solutions are rather global issues, I decided to present them here.

As we all know we have (sometimes quite extensive) articles on e.g. rail travel in Germany or even driving in Los Angeles County. What appears to me to be lacking are articles on short to medium length systems such as the S Bahn Central Germany. Now I know some of those systems are can be and should be dealt with in the city or region articles they are relevant to, but some systems (such as the aforementioned) are rather big and unwieldy, have horribly complicated fare-systems or rules (can you enter without a ticket and buy one inside the system? Does your ticket stay valid once you leave the system? What is and isn't integrated? etc.), or cover huge cities (e.g. New York City) and their surroundings. Now I have raised the same issue in the German WV and the answer was basically: We already do that for some cities. Knowing of the "cultural differences" so to speak between the two (just look at the number of articles on German airports like Hahn), we may find the consensus that no such articles are needed. However for some systems, I think we can at least make an exception to the rule (much like huge airports get articles):

  • If the system is ridiculously complex
  • If it is of historic or touristic interest (e.g. some lines of the London and New York system are or may be reasons for travel just like some funicular railways)
  • If it covers a huge area not adequately represented by our region articles and changing the layout of the region(s) would make no sense or be of little benefit besides public transport
  • If integrating the content somewhere else would make that article too large and unwieldy.
  • If ttcf otherwise indicates or mandates doing so

I am open to discussion and would like to hear what you think about the issue. If we do something like that, we can preserve the article urban rail (and later expand it) much like we now have an article on bus travel, that primarily links to that phenomenon across the globe (this article should as well be expanded later, but alas I have limited time...) Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:38, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

I believe we should simply refer the readers to the appropriate websites. We can (and should) advise the readers about the most economical or convenient or otherwise advisable routings as well as particularly attractive ticket types in the destination articles, which is generally being done. I have not come across any case, with Germany in mind in particular, where it wouldn't fit within a destination guide. Describing a system just for the sake of it is better suited for Wikipedia or specialist sites, we are here to advise travellers how to get from A to B, focus being on from A to B and not on the getting part. PrinceGloria (talk) 14:56, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
In addition to what PrinceGloria said above, I think we should strive to keep our info about a city's transit system as much on the city page as we can, so as not to force users to dig through multiple pages; in fact, I think there's been some rumblings about merging that Driving in Los Angeles County page into the Los Angeles page. PerryPlanet (talk) 15:07, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Are you familiar with Verkehrsverbünde? So far we sorta kinda mention their existence in general in the rail travel in Germany article but the individual thingies are hardly ever mentioned at all. And a lot of them cross our traditional region boundaries. And yes they are of value to the traveler, as they often offer (steeply discounted) day or week tickets fro trips e.g. from Dresden to Bad Schandau or from Nuremberg to Bamberg (the VGN which applies there is the second biggest Verkehrsverbund by area after that of Berlin/Brandenburg). So what your proposal be? clutter a bunch of articles in the same region with the same info on how a five day ticket is only worth it if you are between 15 and 23 and use it at least seven point four times, unless you want to drive after two AM but before seven AM? (sorry if that came out too snarky). And the alphabet soups of many an American metro area are hugely confusing as well. Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:27, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
PerryPlanet and others: If you haven't been reading the discussion at Talk:Urban rail, please do. I may not be the best person to summarize the discussion there, but basically, the question is whether that article, with nice pictures, is really the kind of list Wikipedia does better, and should either be redesigned to focus on more practical advice for the traveler or be merged to destination articles as relevant and then redirected to Rail travel.
Without prejudice to that discussion, I do find Hobbitschuster's remark above persuasive, as it sounds like not only would this information be useful for travelers and relevant in a bunch of destination articles (and therefore more appropriate to put in one place and link than to copy a bunch of times) but also that there will be enough to cover to merit an article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:47, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Hobbitschuster, is there any particular reason why more extensive information on the Verkehrsverbünde can't be included in the Rail travel in Germany page? It seems like that sort of information would be a natural fit, and it's an already established, centralized topic page that can be linked to from destination pages. That seems to me like a better place to put that sort of info than creating pages for individual transit systems. PerryPlanet (talk) 20:33, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Sorry that it took me some time to respond... Anyway, here goes.. First the Verkehrsverbünde while they have some things in common are not universally the same, as they are mostly the domain of state or even local politics. Some of them offer through tickets on trains and buses, some some accept Ländertickets, some don't (Leipzig does for example while Dresden doesn't, don't ask me why). The ticketing systems are somewhat different as well although most systems in Germany operate on the proof of payment / "honor system" method, many buses are front-entering only (which means everybody has to have or buy a ticket). Than there is the issue of validating tickets. Some machines sell tickets already validated, some don't sometimes you have to validate day tickets, sometimes you don't sometimes you have to validate day tickets but not week tickets.... It goes on and on and on, and once you've listed all the exceptions, there is not much of a general rule left to talk about (just like with German grammar or English orthography). In short, while we can (and should) update and/or expand the information about the issue in our rail travel in Germany article, I doubt that this will solve the issue. And if you have a look at some ridiculously long (and complex) "get around" sections of some American cities (San Francisco or New York come to mind) I doubt that this is a German issue exclusively. Also if we create separate articles, we get a chance to mention quirky details like a station that is worth a visit all by itself (arguably found in many systems all around the world) or maybe if there is need for it or it might interest the traveler some historical notes or what lines are currently being built or upgraded and will open within the next five to ten years. Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 08:41, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
I am familiar with Verkehrsverbünde so there I go - the only way those are important to tourists and thus should be covered by us is how they enable one to travel to or within a destination. This can easily be covered AND IS COVERED in our German destination articles. We just need to explain how to buy tickets, validate them and just a cursory overview of the fare system. Then for specific destinations and POIs we simply give directions on what station or connection to use to get there. It really isn't complicated. We don't need an article to do that. PrinceGloria (talk) 09:13, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Hobbitschuster, I could conceivably see a situation where you write a travel topic to take the place of a metro area or a region's "Get around" section (e.g. "Getting around the New York City area"), where you cover information on all the modes of transportation available in that area. Of course, there would be resistance to this, since it would require splitting off this info from the main city/region page, but if a Get around section got too unwieldy, I could see something like that happening.
What you're proposing, however, is creating articles for individual transit systems, which strikes me as an invitation to put in a lot of unnecessarily detailed and encyclopedic information about a system that would only be of interest to transit geeks (and mind you, I say all this as a transit geek). If there's a particular station that's worth visiting, why not just note that in the destination page (which we already do - take the example of City Hall Station in Manhattan/Financial District#See)? Is it really necessary to have detailed information about lines under construction? Maybe we don't need to cover info about every possible little rule and exception in the complicated fare system, when more general notes and a link to the agency's up-to-date website will suffice?
There is a benefit to the length of some of these Get around sections, and that is that it forces us as travel guide writers to consider what kind of information is truly essential for travelers to know. It acts as a natural incentive to avoid overwhelming the reader with info, and because there's more eyes on the city page than there ever would be on a transit system page, there's more likelihood that the info would be kept up-to-date. PerryPlanet (talk) 23:08, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Maybe I am biased, but it seems to me that as of now we focus more on driving and flying than on public transport, especially short to medium distance rail. As a matter of fact most travelers to most major cities in developed countries are much more likely to take public transport than a car. I mean, even places like L.A. have an accessible enough downtown area to make a stay without a car feasible and that is one of the most car dependent cities on the planet. But it seems to me the consensus is not even a "not yet" as to creating articles about public transport systems but maybe even a "never" or a "only integrated with other modes". Maybe the way to deal with the driving in LA county article should be to change it to get around Los Angeles county...Hobbitschuster (talk) 12:11, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
User:PerryPlanet, I couldn't have put it better myself. Lots of love, PrinceGloria (talk) 13:23, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
>Maybe I am biased, but it seems to me that as of now we focus more on driving and flying than on public transport
At the risk of being impolite; Hobbit, I think you're biased. Just about all of our huge city pages have much longer sections devoted to getting around by public transit than by car. In fact, L.A. is the only one I can think of that has a longer "By car" section, and even there I think a lot of that is extraneous info that I'm looking to take a hatchet to. PerryPlanet (talk) 23:19, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
I do not consider this remark to have been impolite. In fact, I am all for clarity and directness ;-). And yes if you look at huge cities there is (unsurprisingly) more information about their public transport than their notoriously congested streets. To put it bluntly: It's because no (pleasure-) traveler in their right mind would sit in a traffic jam for hours if public transport can get him/her there in half the time, unless she/he has a sort of car-fetish bordering on the... extreme. But maybe that is just like.. you know, my opinion ;-) Best wishes. Oh and thanks for cutting down the undergrowth ;-) Hobbitschuster (talk) 23:26, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

VisualEditor News #2—2015[edit]

19:48, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Wikivoyage:Vandalism in progress#More CNN Deltalina vandalism[edit]

The saga continues. Fellow Wikivoyagers, speak to me of possible solutions. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 02:22, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Since this user is a low-volume troll who is easily identified, shouldn't the normal process of patrolling, reverting and blocking be insufficient? -- Ryan • (talk) • 02:31, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
I don't not understand this double negation... It seems rather strange that whoever this is has apparently been here before and come back... I hope it stays low level enough to be dealt with through normal reverts... Hobbitschuster (talk) 12:31, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Ryan - I don't understand why we're debating the need for an abuse filter now. The filter was put in place at the beginning of February, with all commenters (including you) in support of it. Furthermore, the recent incident of Deltalina vandalism should have put the lie to the idea that the filter was an overreaction, because the vandal did pop up again and had an edit blocked by the filter. The fact that he knew enough to tweak the wording of his spam to evade the filter means we need to take stronger measures, not weaker ones. Clearly if it was a simple matter of the vandal getting bored and moving on, we wouldn't still be talking about him four months after the whole thing started. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 16:27, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
In any event, the changes I made to the abuse filter after this most recent incident (which I don't want to describe too specifically for obvious reasons) might be enough in themselves to do the trick. If not, though, it would be good to start thinking of a Plan B. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 16:30, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
My concern is that suggestions to use tools like rangeblocks to deal with this user risk collateral damage that doesn't seem warranted when dealing with a troll who is easily handled with the rollback button. My comments when this subject came up previously were: "...it seems to me that this user rarely turns up and is easily handled with the rollback button, but I have no opposition to using the spam blacklist or a similar tool so long as we don't accidentally block any good edits with whatever approach is implemented." That same sentiment holds true now - if this user is causing significant consternation for some editors here then feel free to pursue solutions that won't risk catching good edits, but if we're talking about escalating to more aggressive solutions then I think it's overkill for this situation. -- Ryan • (talk) • 17:27, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Perhaps I misspoke when I said we should use a rangeblock. For all we know, the vandal might be editing from a fixed IP address. (He edits anonymously, but his IP address is invisible; for instance, his last edit was attributed to "2602:304:af53:3e99:30aa:168a:9dd3:9705".) Regardless, my reason for writing this here in the Pub was to hear out any other ideas that might entail less collateral damage. Hopefully they won't end up being necessary, but just in case, I'd like us to keep ahead of the curve on this. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 18:20, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
"2602:304:af53:3e99:30aa:168a:9dd3:9705" is an IP address. It's 16 bytes long, but that doesn't make it invisible or anything else special. w:IPv6 anyone? K7L (talk) 00:51, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
I'm a prose guy, not a programmer. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 03:18, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Igbo phrasebook nominated for star article[edit]

Hello everyone, I've nominated the Igbo phrasebook, spoken in Nigeria, for star article status here. Thanks. Ukabia (talk) 19:06, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Wikivoyage pages connected to (possible) wrong Wikidata items[edit]

Hi, there are these article pages which are connected to disambiguation pages on Wikidata:

Would you please deal with these apparent wrong connections? Thanks in advance :) --Superchilum (talk) 19:24, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

New York and New England use "town" the way other jurisdictions use "municipal township" - as a container municipality for rural areas, unincorporated suburbs and tiny unincorporated villages which would otherwise have no municipal government. If given a choice between a "town" and a "village", or a "town" and a "city", skip the town and take the village as the main community. K7L (talk) 01:09, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
There are also a few pages in Category:Pages linked to a data item for a disambiguation, where the WP page linked is identified on WD with a "disambiguation" attribute. Texugo (talk) 02:52, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Goring and Streatley: I recommend creating a Wikidata page rather than using the Wikidata page of either Goring or Streatley. Syced (talk) 06:15, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the "other projects" links in the sidebar only give space for one Wikipedia link from the Wikivoyage article, which doesn't work out well if a large rural area has a single page here and multiple articles on WP. K7L (talk) 17:19, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Which is an issue, that I fear cannot be fixed, can it? Because while Wikipedia might deem a hamlet of 500 people "notable", this here is a site dedicated to travel and unless the hamlet happens to have a big airport right next to it or is of importance for travel by itself it won't (and shouldn't) get an article any time soon, but its (the hamlet's) existence might be worth a word or two in a "go next" section or region article... Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:37, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
If it has a town hall, as an incorporated municipality it's a notable, distinct entity for a WP article. If it's on the US Census, it gets an article. There was an infamously-huge spam incident in which a w:user:Rambot dumped pretty much the entire (now-outdated) US 2000 census, hamlet by hamlet, into WP as a series of village-level stub articles. That spam seems to have stopped by 2005, but the damage has been done. If back in 2000, 0.34% of the 588 people in w:La Fargeville, New York were of Asian descent, Wikipedia has archived that crucial fact for posterity. That's what, two people? K7L (talk) 22:00, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
And at the same time the German Wikipedia deleted articles on subjects such as Darth Vader... Which of course generated a lot of bad press and Internet backlash... But enough of this. How (if at all) can the issue at hand be solved? Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:08, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Which could be the solution for the articles dealing with pair of destinations? And regarding Hepu, which is the correct item on Wikidata (does it exist?)? --Superchilum (talk) 09:43, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Stability of map server[edit]

Dynamic maps were not showing again for some time this afternoon. If this is going to continue to be a problem, perhaps we should revisit the question of whether we should be using dynamic maps, instead of static maps, throughout the site. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:00, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Or whether we should do something about the stability of the server, or moving to another. I missed most of the discussions on that - what's the status? Meanwhile, everybody willing can start making the missing hundreds of static maps, should be lotsa fun! PrinceGloria (talk) 21:33, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, it's not very practical, but at least those relatively few articles with static maps will have visible maps while the dynamic map server is on the fritz. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:39, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Sorry if I ask a stupid question, but... What's wrong with dynamic maps? Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:42, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
They're fine if they're visible. When the map server is on the fritz, they can't be viewed at all. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:46, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
How so? "Nginx error" is a fine, historic city and well worth a visit. K7L (talk) 21:48, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
"Nginx" - awesome city with stylized gardens on the coast, best food just outside of Tokyo - Matroc (talk) 21:52, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

At any rate - what's the status? I don't notice the lack of maps anyway, as to show them I need to manually change the settings of my browser to non-secure every time I need to see the map. Can we do something about it as well? Or at least add a link to instructions how to make your browser see dynamic maps? PrinceGloria (talk) 22:06, 13 April 2015 (UTC) PS. Making hundreds of static maps is not feasible, but there are many maps in the Commons we can link to - better than nothing.

Dynamic Maps are a long standing issue. Although we have some great volunteers who make great efforts, the map server is basically still an experiment and would never be used for a commercial business.
So the problem is... how to move it from the experimental phase? AFAIK there is no other place we could host it.
I actually think a good solution would be to get rid of the map server completely and replace it with a Javascript control that would call OpenStreetMaps directly. This would also have (significant) technical challenges, but it would remove the dependancy on WMF labs... Andrewssi2 (talk) 03:05, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Has WMF ever been asked for an alternative solution, e.g. hosting on a different server? Whatever holds e.g. the general Wikivoyage stuff seems to act up very rarely. PrinceGloria (talk) 05:00, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Is does act up rarely.. enough for myself (for example) not to be too bothered. However if we do see significantly increased readership (one of our general aims) then that will have the effect of knocking the map server over more frequently. Andrewssi2 (talk) 05:03, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
PrinceGloria, I don't have to change anything in my browser to see the maps, and most other people don't have to do it either. Which browser do you use? Have you checked that it calls tools.wmflabs.org and not other servers (that are not trusted indeed)? --Alexander (talk) 07:10, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

WMF does not allow us to embed any content from third-party sites (OSM included) because this would mean transferring information about your session elsewhere, which is against the privacy policy. Very stupid, but that's how it is. There is no solution other than using tiles on the WMF server, so the best thing to do is to ask WMF directly why they can't arrange a stable map server. Another solution is not to embed any maps and simply link to the wikivoyage-ev.org server that is fully under control and perfectly stable.

Regarding the server load, no, Wikivoyage hardly makes any significant fraction of it. There are lots of embedded maps in Wikipedia nowadays. They generate a lot of traffic. --Alexander (talk) 07:10, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Copypasta from Wikitravel[edit]

Hi, everyone. I've reverted at least a couple of instances of copypasta from Wikitravel in the last few days, maybe 3 instances, and others in the last few weeks. It's often easy to spot because lazy copypasta artists copy listing tags (we use templates now) and "Get out" headings where we now use "Go next". If you see any uncredited copypasta from Wikitravel, please revert it right away and post a note to the offender's user talk page. You can see an example of such a note here.

Note that it is OK to copy and paste from Wikitravel if the user doing the copypasta had actually posted all the content on Wikitravel him-/herself and directly and clearly states that in his/her edit summary. However, even in that case, the content has to be suitably edited as necessary for Wikivoyage style. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:59, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Even if it's not illegal to regurgitate WT content here (with attribution), it's not desirable from an SEO standpoint as it will get us penalised for duplicate content. We do not want to be a word-for-word identical WT mirror. K7L (talk) 14:36, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Yes of course, but there is (or was) at least one user who raised the issue of working on both sites here in the pub, therefore we should make clear how that is possible and that we advise against it for various reasons of which SEO is imho one of the less important ones... Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:49, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Because of the SEO issues K7L and others have cited, and given what (ahem) usually happens when we come across users who edit on both sites, I for one think it's worth looking into establishing a policy of reverting any text added to our site that is identical to WT material, even if it's the same author in both instances. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 23:46, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Not all users who post to both sites are hostile. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:00, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
That may be true, though I haven't seen any who aren't. Nonetheless, I don't think it's unreasonable to require those who contribute to both sites, for SEO purposes, to at least not use identical text. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 00:52, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Or, at the very least, to have a policy of rewording-on-sight any new edits we find that copy WT material, regardless of which site it was posted on first. This is a wiki, after all, and any contributors have to know their text can be altered at any time and for a whole host of different reasons. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 15:01, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
How big is the issue in reality? And another thing: Can we create a thing like a program that automatically detects those copypasta things? Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:11, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
How big is the issue? Big enough for it to be brought up here in the pub, apparently. I don't know how feasible such a program would be, but I imagine we might be able to tackle the problem through regular Recent Changes patrols - all we would need to do is check any suspicious diffs against the analogous WT article. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 16:19, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
User:EranBot/Copyright is a bot that attempts to flag content copied from other sites. Anyone interested in catching copy/paste should add that page to their watchlist. Note that the bot is still in a beta state and that it relies on search engines (which are not updated instantly when a page changes), so if someone makes an edit to WT and then copies it to Wikivoyage a short time later the bot will be unlikely to flag the edit. -- Ryan • (talk) • 16:25, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
I think if we do it only for "suspicious" edits we might well not catch a lot of them. I know that some things are rather obvious (like the different section headings) but others won't imho be caught that easily unless somebody sees whether such a thing would be feasible. I am unfortunately very bad with this newfangled computer stuff, so I can't be of much assistance in that. Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:27, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Main-subject travel topics should match our article section headings[edit]

We currently have a dichotomy in place in the naming of our main-subject travel topics.

On the one hand, we have:

On the other hand, we have:

This is inconsistent. The short, imperative format section headers were selected to make our guides distinctive in a crowded marketplace. There's no reason our travel topics can't match.

We've discussed this before; see Talk:Sleep#Move back?. Objections include search engine optimization (which should be obviated by the redirects) and the unintuitiveness of the titles (again, obviated by redirects, as well as by our established use of the short terms in our guides).

So my proposal is to make all of those main-subject articles' titles match our section headers (at least where possible; it may not be desirable to have a single Drink article, for instance).

-- Powers (talk) 14:41, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

I truly don't see the point. PrinceGloria (talk) 14:54, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Splitting Transportation (presumably, to Get in and Get around) makes little sense as many of the same modes of transport exist in both sections. Crawford (Texas)#By Bush plane is probably "Get in", but Nunavut#By plane might be needed both to get in and to get around between individual remote Arctic villages with no intercity road network. K7L (talk) 15:29, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
I agree that we should rename where possible. As to the transportation issue: All transport is getting around. The only time you ever "get in" to any destination covered here from a point we don't (and shouldn't) cover (as per our sex tourism policy ;-) ) is birth. Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:47, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Birth tourism, while controversial, is an entirely different issue from sex tourism. It basically involves visiting w:jus soli countries to give birth, allowing the baby to claim that country's citizenship. The "get in" section usually infers arriving from a point outside the scope of the current article, so the Toronto Transit Commission might be "get in" to get to Toronto/Etobicoke from some other district of the same city, but "get around" in an article about Ontario. K7L (talk) 17:48, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but it appears to me that you don't understand what I was trying to say. As this here wiki covers or intends to cover every destination on earth and even the moon and space, the only time you "get in" the area this wiki covers from a place this wiki doesn't cover (that being a woman's womb and vagina, unless artificial birth has been developed without my knowledge) is birth. Therefore all transportation on a global scale is getting around. Be that a transpacific flight or a one stop right on a local bus. And sorry for the bad joke ;-) Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:57, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
So we have Get in#By stork and Get in#By UFO? This might be a couple weeks too late for April 1? K7L (talk) 18:51, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
How about Get out#Of my dreams, Get in#to my car... Texugo (talk) 19:00, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
An article on Billy Ocean would violate our Wikivoyage:Bodies of water policy. K7L (talk) 19:30, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Seriously, though, Transportation is something we might want to leave as it is. "Move", maybe would be a good alternative? ;)
As for the others, I don't think it's a fantastic idea but as half of those travel topics already are named in the imperative form like the article headings I guess we rename the rest too for the sake of consistency. ϒpsilon (talk) 19:22, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
I did not notice originally that the first links are to top-level travel topics. I'd retract those changes or rename if they have been so all along - "Sleep" should be "Accommodation" etc. We don't name the guide to Paris the guide to the "City of Lights", as this is more "out of the box". The name of the guide must say what is in the box clearly, and be easily searchable. How we structure the articles and put headings on them is another thing, we do it in a playful way that makes the guide easy to digest. But for article names such "playfulness" does travellers no favours. PrinceGloria (talk) 19:27, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
I have no strong opinion about the names themselves, but I think naming the travel topics like the sections (Get in and around, See, Sleep, Buy etc.) would make keeping some consistency more automatic (as we know where to stick it).
Now the page names and headings, the breadcrumb tree, links to the pages etc. all use different names, at least in many cases. The travel topics are very hard to navigate because of this inconsistency – which also extends to the hierarchy itself and the substance of topic articles. I think both readers and editors would be able to navigate them much more easily if the hierarchy would match headings and possible subheadings of a long star article.
--LPfi (talk) 06:01, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Gloria, I don't understand why these headings are fine for section headings but not for article titles. Can you elaborate? Powers (talk) 15:27, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

I will try to rephrase what I said above - section headings are a great way to make our guides different, a bit playful and, most importantly, easy to digest. When you are already reading a guide about Paris, "get in", "get around", "sleep", "eat" etc. are quite unambigious ("Drink" is a bit ambigious, but that's not the point here). But when you are searching for information about transportation, accommodation etc. you are searching for just that. Our articles should unambigiously say what's inside, not via a series of redirects and an unnecessary explanation. I absolutely do not see any benefit in making the name of some (but not all - see "transportation") names same as headings, as not many people would even notice or understand when faced with it. This is only our internal view of Wikivoyage that makes it somehow logical to have it named the same way - for people coming from outside, "accommodation" is "accommodation", not "sleep" (and accommodation is about more than just sleeping). We should focus on great content, not constant discussing about formalities. It's fine as it is. PrinceGloria (talk) 16:28, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I still don't see the distinction. When you're reading a guide about Paris, "sleep" is unambiguous; I agree. But when you're on a travel guide web site, "Sleep" should be equally unambiguous, shouldn't it? It seems that the context of "travel guide" is sufficient in both cases.
My problem with "Accommodations" is the same as it would be within our articles: It's stuffy, boring, and undistinctive.
-- Powers (talk) 01:15, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
My problem with "Sleep" is that I expect it to contain information (only) about sleeping, such as tips for sleeping on an airplane or what type of bed to request in a Japanese hotel (a mat on the floor isn't going to work for some travelers, especially elderly people). Instead, Sleep doesn't talk about sleeping at all, but instead covers types of buildings you can temporarily stay in/live in. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:09, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
It is worth making the titles of articles easy for the casual reader to find. It doesn't matter much what we call the sleep section in a city articles: "Sleep", "Bed for the night", "Accommodation" or something more obscure would all work because readers will always get to the section by reading to the bottom of the page. But readers will get to topics by using the site search facility, so the title should match the mostly likely term. And I think an article about how to sleep in difficult situations - noisy, hot or uncomfortable locations would be useful. AlasdairW (talk) 23:21, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Now that would just be confusing, if Sleep (the section in our articles about accommodations) didn't at least redirect to Accommodations. As for ease of searching, redirects make that a moot point. Powers (talk) 21:16, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Alastair raises a very valid point - Sleep and Accommodation ar two differrent things. An article on sleeping during travelling, including sleeping on the plane, train or even when no proper accommodation is available, as well as effects of sleeping on the human body with relation to travelling, would be reasonably worthwhile and very fitting for the title, and just like the playful title suggests, interesting to read just for the sake of it. It absolutely should also contain a prominent link to accommodation at the top for those who look for specific, and infinitely less exciting, info on that. Readers who might be under the impression that one = other could be thus easily directed where they should go, while the fact that sleep is not equivalent to accommodation (e.g. a big part of the accommodation business is catering) would be reflected in both guides being separate. PrinceGloria (talk) 21:27, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but this approach is too encyclopedic. The staid Accommodations title is completely contrary to our house tone. Powers (talk) 23:45, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I think that article titles need to verge on the encyclopedic. Otherwise move New York to The Big Apple, Chicago to The Windy City, Edinburgh to Auld Reekie, Perth to The Fair City, and Denver to The Mile-High City. This would fit our tone, but would a traveller find anywhere? AlasdairW (talk) 22:16, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Using slang or nicknames is hardly the same thing. (And probably all of those redlinks should be redirects or disambiguation pages.) Powers (talk) 14:25, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
I know that you think that "Accomodations" is too stuffy to be the title of a page that is actually about accomodations. Here's my question for you: What should the title of the page about actually sleeping be? I'd put it at the obvious title Sleep, but we can't do that, because you've insisted that the content at Sleep be something other than information about actually sleeping. So where would you put this important, missing article? WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:27, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Actually, why don't we start writing an article on Sleep, so that something productive and constructive results from all that? PrinceGloria (talk) 18:09, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
It would never occur to me that we would need separate articles on sleeping and on places to sleep. Powers (talk) 19:13, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Jet lag affects sleep, but isn't a place to sleep. K7L (talk) 01:32, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
You get jet lag after long flights, so having it at Flying would be natural (now it is an article of its own, which is also OK). Sleeping in non-accommodation places fits well in Sleep, even if the article is mostly about accommodation. Coping with nightly noise also fits there. Do we have a real problem? --LPfi (talk) 05:40, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Travel often requires non-standard sleep patterns, not only because of jet lag. Some advice on how sleep patterns my affect your travel experience would be very much in order. PrinceGloria (talk) 07:33, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Sleep disruptions, Sleeping while travelling, or Getting a good night's sleep. You guys are really grasping at straws here, with the only apparent goal being to elide any sort of continuity between our section headings and our article titles. Powers (talk) 13:13, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
I don't know what my opinion is on this issue (maybe I just haven't cared enough to formulate one), but I do think we should all assume good faith on both sides of the argument, which means assuming that the goal on all sides is to serve the traveler well. Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:11, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, of course. I should have said that there seems to be a lack of understanding about how consistency between our section headings and our article titles helps the traveler. Powers (talk) 00:18, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Much better. :-) Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:24, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

[edit]

WT recently added banners too (a bit less panoramic), and I think theirs look better. And moreso, since its difficult to find photos that are panoramic enough to fit the requirements here, we end up with photos that (although the original versions look great) are kinda meh after cropping.

I think it makes sense to change the banner proportion guidelines, either to be more flexible, or to not be such a wide panorama. Any thoughts? Magedq (talk) 22:46, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

See Wikivoyage:Banner Expedition and the developing Wikivoyage:Banners policy page --Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:50, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I much prefer our size, and we had very extensive discussions to reach that 7:1 ratio we decided on. I would really rather not revisit that, and I'm not at all willing to go lax on it and let them have a variable presentation. In the short space of time we've been doing it, we already have a 7:1 custom banner for 1/3 of all articles that should have one, and they are still being added at a regular clip, so I think this is a non-issue. Texugo (talk) 22:54, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
I absolutely agree that the aspect ratio and ToC placement chosen by WT are aesthetically better because non-panoramic images can be used and ToC does not screen relevant parts of the picture. In some cases, this screening becomes really problematic as, for example, here and here (the second one may be OK on a wide screen, but with 14' and the two-line ToC it's not). Changing all banners is, of course, very difficult and hardly practical, but it is true that the current 7:1 version with ToC has its limitations. One simple solution is to put ToC under the banner, as we tried on Russian Wikivoyage. This looks really better in our case, where many ToCs expand to two lines, as Russian section headings are generally longer than their English counterparts. --Alexander (talk) 06:24, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
I do so agree, Alexander!
Did you make any progress with allowing a horizontal ToC to be expanded to show lower levels in the hierarchy - eg H3, H4, H5 headings, etc? 118.101.139.200 01:23, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
I am really happy with our 7:1 ratio and see no reason for changing it, although sometimes it is hard to come up with a crop that looks well. Another thing is the blatantly obvious copyvio of the Pagebanner template at the other site. Danapit (talk) 07:05, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Free knowledge is not only to free to use but also free to steal. What can one do about this? --Alexander (talk) 10:56, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Content is not "free to steal" - copyright law requires re-users to provide proper attribution. This was pointed out to WT twice [3] [4] and they have so far apparently chosen not to do so. -- Ryan • (talk) • 14:36, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Ryan - since WT has failed to respond, the onus is on one or more of the authors of [[Template:Pagebanner]] to draft a formal cease-and-desist letter. Failing that, effectively, the content is de facto "free to steal". -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 15:05, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Yes, that's exactly what I mean. And any cease-and-desist letter can be ignored as well. Even if one goes to the court, chances are... not too high. --Alexander (talk) 16:53, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Incidentally, I notice that IBobi has just blanked the template talk page where the issues were raised. Texugo (talk) 21:22, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
And then protected it, so no non-admin can ever leave a message on the template talk page again. It's like a fascist state over there. Powers (talk) 00:29, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Banners are a form of artistic expression, to give colour and a personality to an article. WT banners are not really banners, they are more like big images, and I am sure that WT editors will "misuse" them to just show stuff, betraying their artistic purpose. That's why our choice of 7:1 was better. By the way, some of their banners are of very low quality. Cheers! Syced (talk) 11:19, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Hm, here the banners are misused in a different way. Could someone explain me the meaning of banners of Minsk Oblast or Beloretsk for example? Their pictures are very nice, but they have nothing to do with the destination. --Alexander (talk) 12:04, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Are they not the type of scenery you might see when passing through those respective areas? Because if not, then they probably aren't something we want to keep. Texugo (talk) 12:17, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
No, they are not. They are simply nice pictures that people found on Commons. --Alexander (talk) 12:41, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
I see. Well, I doubt that the choice of pictures there is actually related to our preferred aspect ratio. For lesser known areas, no matter what the aspect ratio, it's easily possible for someone to put up a not-quite-representative picture without it being noticed, but when similar issues have been pointed out in other articles, we've discussed and fixed them. For me those two particular places are totally obscure and I didn't know any better, but if the images are misleading, then by all means, let's have a look at what other images are available and see what we can't do about making a better, more representative banner. Texugo (talk) 13:19, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
(Maybe) Stupid question: How would you describe the general look of the area in question, User:Atsirlin? —The preceding comment was added by Hobbitschuster (talkcontribs)
Beloretsk is one of the few Russian cities located among the mountains, so any generic banner should feature some mountains instead of grassland and fog, which are totally generic and could be applied to nearly every destination in the world. One very special thing in this city is the enormously long wooden bridge, but we don't have suitable pictures on Commons (in fact, we don't have pictures at all)...
Regarding Minsk Oblast, its most remarkable object is Stalin Line of pre-WWII fortifications. Alternatively, the banner could show a typical rural landscape with a small catholic church, as in Ivyanets or Zaslavl. --Alexander (talk) 16:53, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
I am strongly against anything that even looks like copying WT. From my point of view this other website is a half dead Zombie and we should let the dead rest. Hobbitschuster (talk) 11:57, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
I must agree that the WikiTravel banners look much nicer plaus the way theyre TOC is displays is nicer. I don't care if we copy them as long as we are useful and good looking. After all we copied the whole site from them so what? As to thei site being a dead zombie I think it is much higher than ours in Google and also gets many more visitors and the same amount of edits so probably we can learn something from them. also they only just added banner template and already they have as many as us! Harlan888 (talk) 20:55, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
>they only just added banner template and already they have as many as us!
Now that's just flat-out false. Their own count currently records 3,201 instances of custom banners, while we currently have 8,226. PerryPlanet (talk) 21:18, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Can someone provide a destination article (no link required) in Wikitravel where the banner is superior to that in Wikivoyage?
I looked at a few and all I can tell is that the banner has be be more squeezed to accommodate the annoying advertising bar on the right hand side... --Andrewssi2 (talk) 21:31, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Roma on wikitravel
this is what roma look like to me on WikiTravel. You don't have to see the adds if you turn off and it looks better no? http://wikitravel.org/en/Rome Harlan888 (talk) 21:48, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
[Edit conflict] Harlan888, you are not going to get much agreement here that the Wikivoyage fork amounts to "copying the whole site" from Wikitravel. I invite you to make some content edits on this site, as you have yet to do so. If you'd like to adopt an EU country, Poland needs a lot of work: There are so many Polish towns with wonderful coverage on Commons that lack any article here at all.
All the best,
Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:53, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
No on Rome - the pagebanner at the article on this site looks like a much higher-resolution image. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:56, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
it's because I took a low res screen capture of the page. Check the live page. Not much difference if any. You are splitting hair, talking about resolution. IMO WikiTravel is better. And thank you I have never been to Poland Ikan. But when you copy and paste a whole site to a new domain, that is a copy. I realize we change since then, but come on. Your very thin with arguments today. Harlan888 (talk) 22:03, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Harlan, compare the close-ups: Wikitravel banner vs. Wikivoyage banner. The latter definitely has the higher resolution. PerryPlanet (talk) 22:06, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Harlan, I'm not on Wikivoyage to win arguments. Is that your reason for being here, or do you want to help make this the best travel guide it can be? Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:09, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
You are both too hung up on it. The page at WikiTravel looks better. Period. So we upload a higher res of the same image. Makes no difference to a traveller. And Ikan-- look up. You started the argument, man. Yeesh. No wonder nobody wants to suggest anything. Forget it. Stick with the skinny things. Harlan888 (talk) 22:12, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
You're entitled to believe the WT version looks better, just don't feel bad if everyone else disagrees. Personally I'm happy if the WT pages keep a visibly different format than we do. Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:38, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Well if by "everyone else" you mean you and two other people, out of the dozen that have commented... You're tied with MY everyone, 3 for wv and 3 for wt. Including the OP I might add. So, thanks you for discounting people you apparently don't consider to be your equals. Again, no wonder people are hesitate to edit here.Harlan888 (talk) 23:52, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Three people being yourself and Magedq? OK... I think we know what we are dealing with here :) Andrewssi2 (talk) 02:48, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
User:Harlan888: You said in your earlier edits that you're also on Wikitravel. I'm curious to know your username on WT. I believe you've got one as you seems experienced. --175.110.106.139 00:24, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Ha-ha says the anonomous ip from the wilderness. I'm sure we can agree we have reasons for how we id ourselves. There's anough animousity from here against people who dare to keep editing WikiTravel. Harlan888 (talk) 01:09, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Untrue, only toward those whose purpose in coming here seems to be merely to criticize. And this is the last thing I'm likely to post to you, as I think by now, we all recognize what you are. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:13, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

What they get right[edit]

One thing I think the other site gets right is using a darker background for the text. The higher contrast makes it a lot easier to read IMO. I would recommend darkening the background, or, something else that might work (I haven't tried it so I don't know if it's a good idea or not) is to give the text a black drop shadow. WVGUY1 (talk) 23:11, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

We don't have an article about the Western Warsaw area, even though the Districts section suggests we do[edit]

this area of the city doesn't actually have it's own article

The link in the districts section of the Warsaw article actually sends our readers to an article about the Western Centre, which is a different location (and we already have different articles that cover info about the Western Centre region - Wola, Ochota, and Żoliborz ).

Please help fix this problem. ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 15:03, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

We do have the guide, link was wrong, fixed. We need to fix the districts anyway, see Talk:Warsaw#Districts again. PrinceGloria (talk) 09:43, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Installing Gather on Wikivoyage[edit]

My team has been working on a feature which we think would be highly useful on Wikivoyage and we'd really like to install it on your project as we think you are a community who can really help us grow it into what we think will be an amazing feature for all Wikimedia projects. It's called "Gather" and it allows users to collect personal lists of pages. We hope this will lead to increased engagement in our project, drawing attention to articles and then hopefully leading to more readers/editors.

In future we want this to do so much more, for example to support collaborative list editing, provide different views on lists e.g. watch edits on lists (a la Watchlist)... (feel free to check out our backlog.

As a travel addict, I can see lots of uses for your projects - here are some travel themed lists I have written for example:

If installed it could be available on mobile and via desktop via a beta feature. Thoughts? Questions? Jon (WMF) (talk) 19:56, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

cc. User:Melamrawy (WMF) User:Diablanco User:jdlrobson

There's no downside to installing this extension, right? It's just another bit of functionality for users who might want to use it, and is invisible to everyone else? If so I'd say go ahead and install it so that those who want this type of functionality have it available, although personally I'm not sure that it would be something I would be likely to use. -- Ryan • (talk) • 20:35, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
I'll second that. I might not use it personally but it couldn't hurt as a beta feature, so I'd also say go ahead. Texugo (talk) 20:43, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Fine by me. It'd be nice to be able to tie it into the books extension, to make it easy to print books using a Gathered list of articles. Powers (talk) 19:18, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Sounds very useful, when preparing a trip I usually have a collection of relevant articles open in browser tabs. Any tool would be more convenient, especially if the same list is accessible on mobile. Cheers! Syced (talk) 08:22, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Ryan, it's not entirely invisible to everyone else. Jon just gave you links that let you see his lists, so someone could share a list on Facebook or something. But it doesn't change anything in the articles or anything like that. It's just a list of links and has no effect on the mainspace (except possibly increase page views). WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:22, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Nominations are being accepted for 2015 Wikimedia Foundation elections[edit]

This is a message from the 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee. Translations are available.

Wmf logo vert pms.svg

Greetings,

I am pleased to announce that nominations are now being accepted for the 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections. This year the Board and the FDC Staff are looking for a diverse set of candidates from regions and projects that are traditionally under-represented on the board and in the movement as well as candidates with experience in technology, product or finance. To this end they have published letters describing what they think is needed and, recognizing that those who know the community the best are the community themselves, the election committee is accepting nominations for community members you think should run and will reach out to those nominated to provide them with information about the job and the election process.

This year, elections are being held for the following roles:

Board of Trustees
The Board of Trustees is the decision-making body that is ultimately responsible for the long term sustainability of the Foundation, so we value wide input into its selection. There are three positions being filled. More information about this role can be found at the board elections page.

Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC)
The Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) makes recommendations about how to allocate Wikimedia movement funds to eligible entities. There are five positions being filled. More information about this role can be found at the FDC elections page.

Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) Ombud
The FDC Ombud receives complaints and feedback about the FDC process, investigates complaints at the request of the Board of Trustees, and summarizes the investigations and feedback for the Board of Trustees on an annual basis. One position is being filled. More information about this role can be found at the FDC Ombudsperson elections page.

The candidacy submission phase lasts from 00:00 UTC April 20 to 23:59 UTC May 5 for the Board and from 00:00 UTCApril 20 to 23:59 UTC April 30 for the FDC and FDC Ombudsperson. This year, we are accepting both self-nominations and nominations of others. More information on this election and the nomination process can be found on the 2015 Wikimedia elections page on Meta-Wiki.

Please feel free to post a note about the election on your project's village pump. Any questions related to the election can be posted on the talk page on Meta, or sent to the election committee's mailing list, board-elections -at- wikimedia.org

On behalf of the Elections Committee,
-Gregory Varnum (User:Varnent)
Coordinator, 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of the 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee, 05:03, 21 April 2015 (UTC) • TranslateGet help

"Locate!" search box in "Map of all articles"[edit]

At https://tools.wmflabs.org/wikivoyage/w/artmap.php?lang=en there seems to be a new search box, which is a wonderful idea :-)

It does not seem to work either with the Enter key nor by pushing the button, though... is it being developed right now, or is it a bug with Firefox/Linux? Syced (talk) 08:52, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

The reason is again the WMFLabs server. The response times are too long. Mixed active content (http: / https:) is blocked on WMFLabs server. Please wait for the next update in a few days. On the German WVeV server (http:) http://maps.wikivoyage-ev.org/w/artmap.php?lang=en everything is in order. -- Joachim Mey2008 (talk) 13:20, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Update is done. Search function now also works with the https: protocol. -- Joachim Mey2008 (talk) 12:03, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Localization[edit]

I didn't know there was an interactive map which is automatically updated at https://tools.wmflabs.org/wikivoyage/w/artmap.php?lang=he for HebVoy. From which prominent page/s at the English Wikivoyage is/are there link/s to this awesome map. (I want to created links to that page from similar pages on HebVoy).

See http://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Destinations . You can put it in a mapframe too: {{mapframe|25|6|zoom=1|layer=E|width=600|align=none}}. - The map is updated monthly and used the data dumps. -- Joachim Mey2008 (talk) 13:50, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
I added the interactive map to the parallel page in HebVoy. Although it works, there are two apparent annoying bugs bugs I haven't figured out how to solve yet :
  • In the caption of the map window I get a red notice saying it is missing the unit "BASICPAGENAME". (See link).
  • The search button says "Locate!" instead of
    "חפש!"
    .
ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 14:41, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
The localization for all 17 language versions is still an unsolved problem. The text output come from different modules were written by external authors. The implementation is complex. - This will take time, I suspect. - Joachim Mey2008 (talk) 18:07, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Selection of images[edit]

Another question... how do I modify the {{geo}} syntax so that I would be able to determine which pictures are presented for each destination at https://tools.wmflabs.org/wikivoyage/w/artmap.php?lang=he  ? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 13:03, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Currently will be selected, the first best image with .jpg extension. A control by the Geo template is not possible at this time. But the idea is good and is now on my to-do list. -- Joachim Mey2008 (talk) 14:13, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Welcoming new users[edit]

Hi, everyone!

I just wanted to say that I wish regulars (who watch Special:RecentChanges) would put the subst:welcome (or subst:welcomeanon or subst:tout) on newbie's talk pages more often. Occasionally there are people who make edits over several days without receiving the welcome message. It not only contains useful information, but it's also nice for the new user to see that their edits are acknowledged and welcome. And it's easy to add it too; except for the tout warning, when you're in edit mode you can add it just by clicking the appropriate link at the bottom of the page (on the line starting with Talk templates). Ps. I admit I've myself become a little lazy doing this :P. ϒpsilon (talk) 15:00, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder... I thus far didn't know, how it is done... Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:39, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Is there any reason why we shouldn't automate this? When an account is triggered (or via an anonymous IP) then the appropriate template can be applied to a newly created user page. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 11:04, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
An automated process can't tell a legitimate user from a tout from a spambot, for one reason. K7L (talk) 11:21, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Why would that be a problem? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 11:23, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
We've discussed it before but have always avoided it as being too impersonal -- if a bot posts the welcome, there's no one for them to thank, and no suggestion of a watchful, helpful user whose talk page they could post to if they have questions. Texugo (talk) 11:36, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Being impersonal makes sense. I just wonder if we are missing many potential longer term contributors in the effort to avoid that... --Andrewssi2 (talk) 11:57, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Do we attract longer term contributors by posting an automatic welcome message? It would have to be fairly impressive to make me feel any cosier (if I were new here). And I just feel annoyed when I get a greeting after making a minor correction on some odd language version of Wikipedia. The bot could check for such, but does it? And it may of course be just me. --LPfi (talk) 13:26, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Mark me down as firmly opposed to automated welcome messages. If I were a new user, I would much rather get no welcome message at all than one that came from a bot. The latter strikes me as phony, and frankly begs the question of whether we are welcoming users because we truly want them to feel welcome or as an insincere, dashed-off procedural matter. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 15:19, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

I think a welcome message from a real user is far better than an automated welcome message, but an automated welcome message is probably better than no message at all. Ten years ago when I made my first edits here, getting a message from a real person gave me a point of contact and let me know that an actual person thought my contributions were helpful. However, the welcome message is also a useful tool for pointing users to helpful policy pages and guidelines, and an automated message does not prevent someone from adding a more personal welcome message, so if there is a way to configure a bot to automatically welcome users who meet certain criteria then I think that would be valuable. The criteria I'd suggest would give time for someone to add a personal welcome, but not let so much time go by that the we would risk having the new user lose interest in the site:

  1. User hasn't been welcomed
  2. User has made 10 or more (?) contributions OR the user's first contribution was made more than 24 hours ago

The above are merely suggestions off the top of my head, and would obviously need to be tweaked based on feedback from others, bot capabilities, etc. Is there anyone interested in figuring out the details of what it would take to get a bot like commons:User:Wikimedia Commons Welcome running here, and whether such a bot would allow criteria like the above to be implemented? Or is this discussion mainly theoretical at this point? -- Ryan • (talk) • 15:52, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

I think I could be persuaded to more or less support a bot with the criteria above. Not sure about the number 10, exactly though. Some people probably show up and make 10 edits in the first 3-4 minutes, just putting some stuff on their user page. Texugo (talk) 17:15, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
I moderately often go on a welcoming spree; it is fairly easy, just go to the list of contribs from new editors, type the text {{subst:welcome}} ~~~~ once then copy it to all the other empty talk pages you see.
The only form of auto-welcome I'd favour would be adding something to the new user setup script so that the talk page is created non-empty. That seems much more sensible to me than running a bot later. Maybe just a one-liner linking to Information for new users? Pashley (talk) 18:26, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
I lean toward opposing any kind of automated welcome message of any kind, but if we decide to accept Pashley's proposal, the "sig" on the post should clearly indicate that it's automated. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:29, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
The problem with an automated message is that it cannot differentiate between the types of new users and what kind of welcome message they should get; some start off with almost perfect contributions, others might create a couple of stubs with some text without headings ("because that's the way we do it on WP"?), some are touts or vandals and they need to be notified that their edits aren't OK etc. And among all of those there are both edits by anons and registered users... ϒpsilon (talk) 20:54, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
We can differentiate between anonymous and new registered users. If we inadvertently welcome a tout or a vandal then what is the actual problem? Nothing to stop a subsequent message being placed on the tout's page to stop being touty.
Sometimes I feel that WV is rather behind the times. The largest companies have seriously no issue whatsoever with automated welcome messages and digital communications, and if we are not managing to welcome everyone today (I also accept blame for that btw) then how do we hope to scale in the future with (hopefully) many more users? Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:27, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
The largest companies don't necessarily have the best customer service. I'm not sure we should rush to pattern ourselves after them. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:37, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Digital communications, when implemented correctly, do massively improve customer engagement. Sure there is plenty of hyperbole around this, but the reality is that both consumers and companies are both benefiting as this gains traction.
Perhaps some here are against losing the 'personal touch', which is a position I can understand. I just don't think the rest of the web is still hung up on this any more. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:45, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Of course an automated message is better than nothing (actually, don't they use it on WP?), though I think there should be a delay of an hour or so from the user's first edit, and it should be posted only in the case no one else has found time to post a message. ϒpsilon (talk) 07:42, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
An hour is nowhere near enough if we're going to do this. Supposing a user's first few edits include vandalism or touting that take more than an hour to discover? Any automated script should be made to wait at least 24 hours, in my opinion, if not more. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:49, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
If the user is indefinitely blocked (i.e. a spambot), they probably should not get a welcome message. As far as other wikis, some choose to leave automated messages, and some don't. I'm pretty sure that it's a MediaWiki extension being used to leave the notices, not a bot (though one could set up a bot too). --Rschen7754 20:46, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Some Wikipedias (and other projects) do automated welcoming. Others don't. Some welcome users upon first login and others upon first edit. (Or, at least, I'm often welcomed at projects where I have zero edits but recently visited, so I assume that's the connection.) Others might as well be welcoming by bot, because everyone gets welcomed.

I'm not aware of any good research on the question of whether it works. My suggestion is this: Figure out how to conduct a good experiment and see what the results are. Then we could make a decision based upon things like "It {does,doesn't} help retain users" instead of "I {do,don't} like it". WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:14, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

I've been welcomed in countless obscure Wikipedias in languages I don't even understand, just for making edits replacing WT link templates with {{wikivoyage}}. At least I think they were attempting to welcome me; I'm none too bright and never learned a foreign language, so they could be swearing at me for all I know. :) Nonetheless, we do need to look at the user's initial edits before posting a message to the user page. A user who arrives with a carefully-researched stack of inline citations to reliable secondary sources probably knows their way around MediaWiki and is here in good faith, but that's Wikipedia style and we may need to point out a few key differences. That's not the same message we'd use for a completely new user, which in turn is not the same message we'd use for a vandal. (A spambot isn't going to read a talk page, so is just silently blocked.) K7L (talk) 01:39, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Advice needed for basic ground work needed for Urdu Wiki Voyage[edit]

Hello. There is tremendous amount of enthusiasm among Urdu community to start Wiki Voyage in Urdu. I request you to kindly help by suggesting some basic ground work to make our case strong for Urdu Wiki Voyage.--Hindustanilanguage (talk) 18:46, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

I believe that there is a discussion on this subject at meta:Requests for new languages/Wikivoyage Urdu. As I understand it, concerns that have been raised there are related to a lack of familiarity with Wikimedia practices and standards, so enlisting a few experienced editors who are fluent in Urdu and are willing to shepherd the project forward seems like the most likely path to success. -- Ryan • (talk) • 22:23, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
It is great to see this enthusiasm, and I agree with Saqib that training on the English Wikivoyage first is a good way to make sure the Urdu Wikivoyage will be of good quality. Here is how I propose we work:
  1. Create a new article about a city in Pakistan that does not have an article yet. Create it in your userspace, for instance User:Hindustanilanguage/Shahdadkot
  2. Once you think the article is finished and perfect, post a link here asking for feedback.
  3. We will provide feedback that will allow you to understand everything.
  4. Repeat with another article to check.
Good luck! First feedback: The project name in English is "Wikivoyage", not "Wiki Voyage". Cheers! :-) Syced (talk) 03:29, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

[edit]

Is it ok to use a montage of images on a banner for a city? Like this one File:Chittagong banner.png--AzaanJC (talk) 05:08, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for asking. The answer is no, montages may not be used on this site. See Wikivoyage:Image policy#Montages and galleries. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:15, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Help making a map[edit]

Hello everybody. I just created an itinerary for Ruta de Transito, the transcontinental route through southern Nicaragua that had tremendous importance in the second third of the 19th century and is now marketed by the Nicaraguan government. Besides a nice banner (for which I have made a couple of suggestions) this article lacks a good map. I do not know how they are made, but I could easily point out any factual errors in any map made and would be willing to help if somebody is patient enough to explain it to a digital novice like myself. Thanks in advance and best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:05, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Have a look at the links at the top of Wikivoyage:Maps. The process for creating a map varies depending on whether you want to create a static map or a dynamic map. -- Ryan • (talk) •
It is possible to show GPX traces on a dynamic map; Bertha Benz Memorial Route is the usual example, they're also on both Trans-Canada Highway articles and a few others? K7L (talk) 16:16, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
I am sorry, but I can't make any sense of the map things. Is there just some thing that you can click to insert a map like there is for picture or strange letters? Or do I have to do all that "by hand"? I got as far as searching the coordinates of the westernmost (San Juan del Sur) Easternmost (Greytown / San Juan del Norte) and Northernmost point of the route (Granada) but I don not know what to do with them or how to make them into a map. I am sorry, but I do not understand how this is done at all... Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:38, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
I've added a dynamic map and a marker. Now you just need to plagiarize it and you'll have the points. If you want a "complete route plotted" too, that's a bit time consuming but possible. ϒpsilon (talk) 17:16, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
I added the points. I guess the route is rather self evident. There is one little "nice to have" thing that bugs me, though: the Solentiname islands are not in the right order, as you cannot reach them without going to San Carlos first. I will experiment on how to fix them. I made the "optional" destinations along the route "do" rather than "see" listings in order form them to appear differently on the map. I hope this doesn't cause problems down the line. Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:43, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your help, btw User:Ypsilon Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:36, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Roly Poly: To include or not to include?[edit]

Wikivoyagers native to the USA (Ikan, Powers, Ryan, others?):

I was filling out Buffalo/Allentown and the Delaware District and intended to add a listing for Roly Poly Sandwich Shop to the Eat section, but was honestly surprised to learn that it was a national chain. Now I'm torn on whether to include it. We usually avoid listing chains, but on the other hand this place doesn't have anywhere near the market saturation of a McDonald's or a Subway. And they do serve good food.

So have any of you folks ever heard of this place before? I'm going to write up a listing for it, but I will gladly delete it if others feel it's too well-known to merit mention.

-- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 16:13, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

I've never heard of Roly Poly, although I've been on the West Coast since 1998 and it looks like a franchise that is primarily east of the Mississippi. From their locations list it doesn't appear that they have more than a handful of locations in any given state so I'd say go ahead and list them. There has been a tendency lately to treat our guidelines as if they are instead set-in-stone rules that must be followed to the letter, but if a chain is so sparse that a traveler wouldn't recognize it as a chain then I think common sense dictates that including a listing for it is acceptable. -- Ryan • (talk) • 16:26, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
If it is a common enough chain, it should be listed in the article on Fast food in North America if it is only present in a few cities it should be listed there. Unless of course it is a boring place and the food doesn't taste well... Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:36, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
It looks to be a regional chain, based in Atlanta, with presence in about twenty states. I'd never heard of it. K7L (talk) 16:52, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
I've never heard of it, either. But I think the main point is that you consider it a good place. So in that case, by all means, list it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:28, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Wikivoyage:Requested articles[edit]

I notice that Wikivoyage:Requested articles is turning into discussion and debate as to whether we should have an article on any of a wide variety of topics from a Manhattan skyline guide to the War of 1812 in North America, the history of the Orient Express train, scenic tourist trains or dinner trains and metro/rapid transit systems.

Would it be worth splitting all this discussion out of the main WV:RA list to another page (either Wikivoyage talk:Requested articles or the article Talk: page for the proposed article) and just linking to that discussion from the main list body, so that the list itself doesn't become a debate forum?

There are also a few entries with "X wanted, has been started as an outline but needs work..." (including the main list of attractions); I'm hesitant to de-list these until the new pages have enough text to survive a VfD. K7L (talk) 16:45, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

I guess that's a good idea. I don't really know how it turned into a forum or how it came to look like a talk page in the first place. But the discussion should be well visible, lest somebody create an article for which there is a good reason not to. Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:48, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
It happens because sometimes people request articles that others are not sure we really want or which may not actually fit with WV:What is an article? But yeah, I think it would make more sense for this page to list only the non-controversial requests, and anything where a discussion needs to be had should get moved elsewhere for said discussion. I suppose Wikivoyage talk:Requested articles would be the best place for it. Texugo (talk) 17:01, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Usage of the word "travel(l)er"[edit]

One of this site's heritages (is this a word?) from its time at that other place is the frequent use of the word traveler, often in the idiosyncratic spelling traveller. Now I know we don't have anything against our history or against that other site per se, but maybe we could distinguish ourselves some way or another. Our section headings are not what you would find in "any other old guidebook" and the spelling "traveller" was made to distinguish us to begin with, so maybe we could or should replace it with the word "voyager" or else use turns of phrase like "bon voyage" where appropriate? I know that the name was not a 100% free choice, but just as moon handbooks put moons all over their stuff, we might get ourselves a unique selling point out of something that started off as a second choice. And please don't let this descend into a flamewar, I am merely thinking out loud and will gladly retract the idea if consensus is that we should keep "travelling". Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:29, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

I'd prefer our trademark to be exceptionally well-written travel guides rather than some contrived gimmick. As for the tradition of spelling "traveller" with two L's, I have no strong feelings about it either way but would note that the status quo does no harm and would take a monumental effort to undo (as we would want to preserve the double-L spelling in articles that take Commonwealth English, it would be difficult to assign this task to a bot). -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 22:36, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
I know that tampering with spelling or policies related to spelling is a touchy subject indeed and don't think changing the spelling (unless we do it globally for all articles, which would make it idiosyncratic again) would do much good. However I have seen, that in some places we use the word "traveler" instead of "visitor", "tourist" or other words for the apparent reason of the former name of this site. And as to contrived gimmicks versus good content: Why not both? maybe a contrived gimmick gets us an article in a newspaper or a mention on the interwebz and if we only gain one contributor through that, we have already won a little, haven't we? Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:45, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Actually, if I'm not mistaken, we have traditionally avoided using the word "tourist", both because of its somewhat negative connotations in English as well as to be inclusive of other types of travellers i.e. business travellers, etc. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 22:51, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
As Andre has noted I don't think there is any value in tampering with article content, but if the suggestion is to do a bit of branding by making some project changes such as renaming "Travellers' pub" to "Voyagers' pub" then I don't see any harm. -- Ryan • (talk) • 22:58, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Makes sense.. we are 'Wikivoyagers' after all. Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:21, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Another word for "gimmickry" is "marketing". Let's please keep that in mind. And for those of you who don't know the show "Gypsy", make sure you listen to "You Gotta Have a Gimmick". Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:00, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Travellers are fine. How about writing articles that benefit them? PrinceGloria (talk) 05:35, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
I don't believe the "traveller" in "Travellers' pub" was intended to refer to "wikitravellers" specifically, just to travellers in general. "Voyagers" is a much less euphonious and familiar word in English, though "voyageurs" is lovely and evocative in French. =) Powers (talk) 14:23, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Hobbitschuster's idea is a good and necessary one IF it's necessary to distinguish this series of guides from the Wikitravel ones AND we had a physical presence (in book stores, for example).

Since both are not true, the more important job to be done here is to boost our search engine (read Google in most markets) visibility.

What's being done to persuade Google that this isn't an inferior mirror site to be placed on the second and subsequent pages of search results?

Why have you preserved the inferior naming scheme and weird section headings you inherited? 118.101.139.200 01:15, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

In terms of why certain things about our article organization are the same, it might be more helpful to think of it as that other site being a inherited copy we had to leave behind when most of the editors came here to get away from the corporate dictators. "Inferior" and "weird" might be your opinion about the headers, but we are the ones who came up with the scheme, not those keeping the other site on life support, and a lot of us are rather fond of it. Texugo (talk) 01:29, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
It's understandable that you feel proud of your history and miffed that you were booted out, but you need to move on just as Canada did with its new and distinctive flag (and now even the naysayers concede that was a great move). It's no good having better articles (and maps!!!) if readers can't find you because Google is entirely blind to the quality and accuracy of your writings and just carries on thinking you're an inferior Johnny-come-lately copy, is it? 118.101.139.200 01:54, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
The Other Site maintains an outright hostile relationship towards Wikivoyage. Users who barely mention Wikivoyage somewhere at the site, are blocked indefinitely. We should, anyway, try synonyms for travel and traveller where appropriate; today, they are overused. As said, tourist is not always a good replacement, except in context such as Film and TV series tourism, where the intent is clearly travelling for pleasure. /Yvwv (talk) 01:50, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Use traveller, traveler, tourist, visitor, trip, excursion, expedition and any other word you can think of as relevant; and vary the use through articles. Do not just remove the word from articles, replace it with another relevant phrase. We cannot predict which word someone will use in a search engine. Using a single word too often in a page will actually reduce the search engine rating. --Traveler100 (talk) 04:44, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
On the sub-headings, they may be a little odd but I think they are short and to the point. However I do think each section should have an introductory sentence or two, not just with specifics for the location but to use other key words such as accommodation and restaurants. How about building a thesaurus to help people vary what words are used throughout the site. --Traveler100 (talk) 06:16, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Dead Weblinks[edit]

I know that over at WP there is a bot that tests whether a weblink still works and posts on the article's talk page if it doesn't. What is the procedure over here at WV? Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:14, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

I guess that does not exist, since there are many dead link (mostly listings websites). It would be great to have a tool like the one you describe. Syced (talk) 04:53, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Could we contact the user who created the bot over at WP and ask her/him whether (s)he would be willing to help us get one here at this page? Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:36, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
The obvious people to ask at en.wp are User:Anomie, User:Legoktm, and User:ThaddeusB. Each of them has written bots that do at least something like this at en.wp. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:13, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Well maybe we should contact one of them...?Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:18, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
If we do this, it needs to put such pages in a maintenance category so we can find and work on them systematically. Texugo (talk) 15:03, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
You're right. I hadn't thought of that. Is that difficult technologically speaking? Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:26, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

!!! EUROVISION ALERT !!![edit]

After bidding farewell to James Last (who is one of the few with a reasonable explanation as to why list last "Last Tournee" was not really the last), the Viennesse are growing out their beards in anticipation of the Eurovision Song Contest due to take place there in 3 weeks. And we're about to feature Vienna on our front page tomorrow.

Content to have seen it selected for the front page and awarded the guide status, I was comfortable about presenting it to the world out there, but now I discovered in horror it is anything but one of our prime articles. Even the main article contains outdated info, awful formatting, questionable advice and fragmented, barely legible passages. And I didn't even check all the districts. It would be good to do an emergency brush-up! PrinceGloria (talk) 05:03, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

I have raised the issue before about nominated cites with old district but was overruled as not being important! Agree does not look good. --Traveler100 (talk) 07:40, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Suspect entries[edit]

Cleaning up a number of articles I have found, so far, two articles that include eat and sleep listing that look real but I do not believe they are. They are real names of restaurants and hotels with usually real sounding street names but do not match locations in that city. See Dortmund and Darmstadt edit history and talk pages. I am however finding it difficult to identify who made the entries; appear to be old as they are on Wikitavel and other language Wikivoayge pages too. Any way of identifying the source so can identify other such pages with the same problem? --Traveler100 (talk) 20:00, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

When I want to identify the source of a suspect text for a given page:
  • I do the full history export of this page. NB: it only works with the page having a limited history. For example, for fr:Japon it only retrieves the oldest versions (100Mo export file)! The alternative is to retrieve the full DB dump of Wikivoyage and extract the history of the page (ex: with this script).
  • Then search the suspect text (from the beginning or the end, I cannot remember). I have written a script that searches the author and date for a text given a export file.
This way I was able to find users that entered dozens of accommodations in batch in the French Wikivoyage in the Wikitravel era (and to remove all their contributions). - Fabimaru (talk) 20:18, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Table of contents[edit]

Having just landed at Penang International, I thought I'd look at your George Town article. Huge and informative but lacking a table of contents like Wikipedia or Wikitravel. Since you seem to use the same software is there a good reason for this omission - or is it just an oversight? 218.208.95.130 00:58, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Georgetown (Malaysia) does in fact have a table of contents embedded in the banner. Are you not able to see it?
Also what device / browser combination are you using? Thanks, --Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:08, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
It's rather counterproductive to embed it there since it spoils the hero image and means that many folks will miss it. Your minimalist (but still intrusive) ToC also seems sadly lacking in functionality since, unlike the usual Wikipedia style contents list, I can find no way to expand it to H3 and H4 level headings. If I'm interested in a Splurge level hotel, I don't wish to wade through all the Budget listings to get there. And, of course, it's totally lacking in the mobile view...
I originally used the Chrome browser on an Android LG phone and then, when I eventually got to my hotel, a laptop running Firefox under Windows 8.1 (Ugh!).
Incidentally, this article is named wrongly. Officially (central and local government and UNESCO) it's always been two words George (and) Town since the very first maps were created in the English language. Just because many folks have struggled to use English when their native language was Hokkien, Arabic, Malay or Tamil doesn't mean we should perpetuate the heterodox. 118.101.139.200 01:04, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, moving it is easy. I used to live in Malaysia in the 70s and remember seeing it as one word most often. I did a Google search and found that the two-word version is used a bit more often than the single-word version, so I'll go ahead and move the article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:06, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, (fish soup?). Google often gets things wrong. It's particularly bad on the correct physical location of Spanish cathedrals, for example... 118.101.139.200 01:26, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Fish soup is sup ikan. Ikan kekek is a particular type of fish. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:34, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, WV's table of contents implementation has been badly broken for quite some time. There has been a lot of discussion; see Wikivoyage_talk:Banner_Expedition#Renew_TOC_discussion and elsewhere on that page, but no solution implemented. I'm not sure what it would take to get this fixed. Pashley (talk) 11:33, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Funds Dissemination Committee elections 2015[edit]

Wikimedia Foundation RGB logo with text.svg

This is a message from the 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee. Translations are available.

Voting has begun for eligible voters in the 2015 elections for the Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) and FDC Ombudsperson. Questions and discussion with the candidates for the Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) and FDC Ombudsperson will continue during the voting. Nominations for the Board of Trustees will be accepted until 23:59 UTC May 5.

The Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) makes recommendations about how to allocate Wikimedia movement funds to eligible entities. There are five positions on the committee being filled.

The FDC Ombudsperson receives complaints and feedback about the FDC process, investigates complaints at the request of the Board of Trustees, and summarizes the investigations and feedback for the Board of Trustees on an annual basis. One position is being filled.

The voting phase lasts from 00:00 UTC May 3 to 23:59 UTC May 10. Click here to vote. Questions and discussion with the candidates will continue during that time. Click here to ask the FDC candidates a question. Click here to ask the FDC Ombudsperson candidates a question. More information on the candidates and the elections can be found on the 2015 FDC election page, the 2015 FDC Ombudsperson election page, and the 2015 Board election page on Meta-Wiki.

On behalf of the Elections Committee,
-Gregory Varnum (User:Varnent)
Volunteer Coordinator, 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery 03:45, 4 May 2015 (UTC) • TranslateGet help