Wikivoyage talk:Itinerary status
Change status requirements?
[edit]Have the requirements ever been discussed, or were they just written down when it was decided to have such criteria?
The current status table:
| Status | Name | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Stub | An article with little or no information, or not formatted even close to the manual of style. An otherwise-valid article without an article skeleton template may hold this status briefly; adding an appropriate skeleton promotes the article to "outline". A page which has little or no prospect of becoming an article (or being redirected to an article) would be tagged for speedy {{delete}} or nominated for {{vfd}} if what little information it conveys does not meet Wikivoyage's goals. |
| 2 | Outline | Has at least the normal introductory paragraph (this can be as short as a single sentence describing the region or endpoints of the itinerary) and a template outline laid out for the article. Some of the sections of the template may have content, but not all of them. |
| 3 | Usable | Has at least complete Understand and Get In sections, and a complete point-to-point listing of the itinerary's stops. |
| 4 | Guide | It describes each stop and how to get there. In addition, it suggests sights or side-trips along the way. Listings and layout closely match the manual of style. Should have a custom page-banner. |
| 5 | Star | Has a map showing the route of the itinerary, identifying landmarks (such as cities) along the way. The format either matches the manual of style exactly or is the exception that proves the rule. Prose is not only near-perfect grammatically but also tight, effective, and enjoyable. At least one good-quality photo accompanies the article; preferably 2-3 showing famous or important attractions. |
I think for getting outline status the page should tell what the route is about, not only region or endpoints.
Usable requires "complete" Understand and Get in sections. I think itinerary writers should first concentrate on the itinerary itself. A complete Understand shouldn't be required before star status, and if the endpoints are places that have articles, Get in is not essential. I added Prepare and Stay safe.
I added "informational" and a sentence on issues in "guide".
So what about the following:
| Status | Name | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Stub | An article with little or no information, or not formatted even close to the manual of style. An otherwise-valid article without an article skeleton template may hold this status briefly; adding an appropriate skeleton promotes the article to "outline". A page which has little or no prospect of becoming an article (or being redirected to an article) would be tagged for speedy {{delete}} or nominated for {{vfd}} if what little information it conveys does not meet Wikivoyage's goals. |
| 2 | Outline | Has at least the normal introductory paragraph and an Understand section telling what the itinerary is about. If the itinerary has an established name, the name is stated, as are the endpoints or the region the itinerary passes through. There is a template outline laid out for the article, although all sections need not have content. |
| 3 | Usable | Additionally: The Understand section clearly tells what the itinerary is about, including why somebody would like to follow it and what means of transport the writers have had in mind. Prepare mentions any non-obvious measures that are needed. The Get In section tells how to get to the endpoints from cities for which there are articles, and links those. There is a point-to-point listing of the itinerary's stops. Any essential non-obvious hazards are mentioned in the Stay safe section. |
| 4 | Informative | Additionally: It tells whether the itinerary differs from the region in general regarding lodgings, food etc. and discusses any special issues. Prepare discusses any essential preparations. Get in at least briefly describes the typical ways of getting in. There is some discussion on at least the main stops and main attractions along the itinerary. |
| 5 | Guide | It describes each stop and how to get there. If there are any issues with lodging, food, tickets, fuel or the like, these are described and solutions told. In addition, it suggests sights or side-trips along the way. Listings and layout closely match the manual of style. Should have a custom page-banner. |
| 6 | Star | Has a map showing the route of the itinerary, identifying landmarks (such as cities) along the way. The format either matches the manual of style exactly or is the exception that proves the rule. Prose is not only near-perfect grammatically but also tight, effective, and enjoyable. At least one good-quality photo accompanies the article; preferably 2–3 showing famous or important attractions. |
There is a problem in changing status requirements, in that some articles will not meet the new ones (unless no requirements are tightened), requiring all to be checked. I don't know how to do that rationally, but I don't think the status table needs to be changed. I didn't touch the star status, which have had some more discussion through the nomination process. I also assume that any FTT candidate already covers the additional requirement.