Wikivoyage talk:Scotland Expedition

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Category Tree in Skye articles[edit]

I just noticed that some of the articles (such as Portree have <categorytree mode=pages>Skye</categorytree>. I haven't seen this before and I can't really find much documentation on it other than Special:CategoryTree. Is this something that we should delete, keep or expand to other articles? Drat70 (talk) 01:34, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category trees are in use in a number of articles, and while I'm not a fan - the UI is clunky and editors can't add descriptive text to describe the places in the tree - it's useful information, better than an empty section, and has the advantage of automatically updating when the hierarchy changes. I don't think deleting them without a replacement would be an improvement, but if someone wants to replace a category tree with a curated list of neighboring destinations, including descriptions, then I think that would be preferable. -- Ryan • (talk) • 02:00, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Adding User:AlasdairW to the discussion. -- Ryan • (talk) • 02:11, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Ryan, tree of other locations in the region is better than a blank section but a list of actual neighbouring settlements would be better. --Traveler100 (talk) 06:07, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have used Category Tree as a quick (lazy) way of filling empty Go Next sections. It is inferior to any reasonable manual Go Next section, but does have the advantage that any new destinations in the area are added to the list. AlasdairW (talk) 07:45, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Times and dates[edit]

WV:tdf tells us we should use either the 24-hr clock or the 12-hr clock in an article, but not both. Most Scottish articles use both, and use a wide range of formats. In editing, I've generally gone with whichever format is most commonly used in an article, but it probably makes more sense to pick one format and use it in all Scottish articles to make it is easier for readers. Which reflects local usage? Ground Zero (talk) 21:08, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was under the impression that in the UK it's mostly the 12-hr clock which is used. However, looking at w:Date_and_time_notation_in_the_United_Kingdom#Time this doesn't seem to be that clear-cut. Maybe we have to wait for the input of some UK natives to answer this. Drat70 (talk) 04:37, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It really depends on the context. Timetables use the 24-hr clock, but more informal times, especially spoken tend to use the 12-hr clock. I would not think it odd if I saw "The train is at 19:08, so let's meet at the station cafe at 6pm to have a meal first." At home my kitchen clock uses 12-hr, but my alarm clock uses 24-hr. Local usage really is mixed, but as we are generally giving precise times the 24-hr clock might be better (and also we tend to use lower case am and pm, or a.m. and p.m.). We have a similar mix of metric and imperial measures - I am going to the supermarket to buy a pint of milk and a litre of cola. AlasdairW (talk) 14:11, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
WV:TDF asks us to use one of these two formats: "09:00-18:00" or "9AM-6PM" (yes, all in ugly caps). Shall we wait for others to weigh in? Or just plunge ahead with the 24-hr version? Ground Zero (talk) 16:50, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I would wait a bit longer, I think this kind of questions have the potential to be controversial. Drat70 (talk) 05:28, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I happen to admin pt:voy as well; consensus was achieved there, some years ago, to use always the 24h format (11h-17h, 10h30-18h15 etc. etc.) I understand TDF on en:voy to have this kind of "legal loophole" which is flexible but prone to inconsistency. I hope this kind of consensus is achieved here as well, and will stick to it. My preference would be a 24-hour format. Ibaman (talk) 16:21, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Proposal at Wikivoyage talk:Time and date formats#time template proposal --Traveler100 (talk) 14:00, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]