Wikivoyage talk:Template index

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Purpose[edit]

In a previous discussion (WT-en) Evan had indicated it might be a good idea to separate template usage policy from the index of templates, so this page is an attempt to do that. I've not listed all existing templates here since for many of them there is no consensus to use them. That said, I'm sure I've missed some templates that are used. Comments or suggestions are welcome. -- (WT-en) Ryan 04:03, 3 April 2006 (EDT)

that's fine, theyll come in use one day! Makeitordont (talk) 19:05, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Experimental templates[edit]

So, should we make a section for experimental templates -- ones we've started but haven't decided we actually want to use yet. A couple of examples would be the various quickbar replacements and Template:Sidebar. --(WT-en) Evan 07:43, 25 April 2006 (EDT)

Another vote for this idea. How can we progress with it? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 00:55, 20 February 2007 (EST)

hasDocents should be listed here[edit]

In which section it should go? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 00:51, 20 February 2007 (EST)

Quickbar for other purposes?[edit]

Is there a quickbar that exists for pages other than country pages? I.e. one for use in towns that would list information such as population, postal code, area code, time zone (for countries like the US that have multiple time zones) and other little tidbits that you can't necessarily fit into the text of the article but are still crucial for the visitor? (WT-en) L'Aquatique 17:12, 30 July 2007 (EDT)

We created one on the German branch of Wikivoyage. See Madrid, Manhattan or Ko Tao. Unfortunatly quickbars seem to be a bit unpopular on en:, it was even proposed to remove the country quickbar, see here. --(WT-en) Flip666 writeme! • 17:23, 30 July 2007 (EDT)

Template approval process[edit]

Hey there! So I'm just thinking, based on several past conversations and some Star article nominations, would it make sense to have a Template rating system/status? I don't think it's worthwile having multiple levels or anything, but something as simple as "approved template" or "star template", which would make it easier in the future when evaluating a Star nomination. I don't think we're close to having any Star countries, but if we were, as an example, it would be nice if we'd already come to a consensus about Template:Regionlist, and that's it fully hashed out and has met its potential for the most part. Then a Star country would be required to use it, and we'd feel confident that the template was based on a reasonable consensus. The same would go for the new Climate templates, or a bus timetable template on a city page. ??? – (WT-en) cacahuate talk 22:31, 28 May 2007 (EDT)

I think this would be getting more bureaucratic than we need. If a template gets used widely without anyone undoing it, that's de facto "approved" status, via wikiconsensus. When people stop messing with it, it's a "star". And if we want to require a country article to use (or not use) a particular template, then we revise the Star criteria (or Guide criteria, or however strongly we feel about it) to say so. (P.S. A bus timetable template? I'd go around undoing it.) - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 22:54, 29 May 2007 (EDT)

Templates for large and notable special events[edit]

Swept in from the pub:

A while ago I have created a FIFA2010Host template and added this to all cities that will host World Cup 2010 matches in South Africa. The template siply lists the stadiums and links back to the World Cup 2010 article as well as the official FIFA 2010 homepage. Examples are Cape Town, Johannesburg, Durban ...

I'd like to do the same for Euro 2008. Are there any objections if we do this for any major events? Is there any potential drawbacks or issues with something like this that I might be missing? --(WT-en) Nick 04:59, 11 March 2008 (EDT)

template for "see section X of article Y?"[edit]

Isn't it's time to create a template for [[Y#X|section X of article Y]]?

Objections; suggestions on wording; alternative ideas? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 19:20, 1 February 2010 (EST)

I think the wording needs to be customized to the sentence in which it appears; I think a one-size-fits-all solution is too limiting, especially given the minor benefit a template would confer. (WT-en) LtPowers 21:29, 1 February 2010 (EST)
Maybe we can suggest the few typical best wording for this, not as templates? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 03:19, 2 February 2010 (EST)
Have you encountered problems with wording this type of link? (WT-en) LtPowers 09:09, 2 February 2010 (EST)
I think I'm just not sure that the wording I use is really good. If anyone could come up with several examples, it would really help. --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 11:10, 2 February 2010 (EST)
I'm cornfused.... what? – (WT-en) cacahuate talk 01:35, 3 February 2010 (EST)
Yes, I definitely need examples of good wording from native speaker editors here :-) --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 13:10, 3 February 2010 (EST)

Proposed "Completed events" template[edit]

Based on discussion at Project:Votes_for_deletion#Euro_2008, I propose a template {{Completedevent}}. The template would place text in a box reading "This event closed in YEAR and is no longer open to the public. XXXXoptional more textXXXXXXXXXX". It will embed the disclaimerbox template to draw the box. It would look like:

This event closed in 2008 and is no longer open to the public. The next Olympics will be held in London in 2012.

or

This event closed in 2009 and is no longer open to the public.

It would be placed at the top of the page for events which had usable or better articles created for them, and retained as historic pages. Articles for events which never reached usable status would normally be deleted after the event closed, through the vfd process. Most links to the page would be removed so that users would only see these pages if they really wanted them. First parameter is year, second optional parameter is followup text for the second sentence.

The template would provide a consistent and approved method to retain interesting articles for historic purpose. If someone wanted to view all of these, they could simply list the pages linked to template:Completedevent. But if someone stumbled across the page, it should be obvious that wikivoyage is not filled with obsolete information.

If accepted, I can create the template and place it on the six pages we know of which are for already-closed events. The page for Beijing 2008 has been redirected into Beijing but we may wish to revert it and keep (though it was only an outline-level article). Expo 2005, Euro 2008, Rugby World Cup 2007, Vancouver 2010, World Cup 2006, World Cup 2010. --(WT-en) Bill in STL 04:54, 24 August 2010 (EDT)

Looks fine to me, although I think I would prefer a different color than that used in Template:Disclaimerbox. (WT-en) LtPowers 14:21, 24 August 2010 (EDT)
What about re-using the same look & feel as Template:Joke, which serves a similar purpose to the template Bill is proposing? -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 00:03, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
Do you think the border stands out sufficiently against the white background? Maybe either bigger text or bolder box? I think you're right a box at the top of the screen should be centered. Anyone else want a different look to the box?
This event closed in 2008 and is no longer open to the public. The next Olympics will be held in London in 2012.


This event closed in 2008 and is no longer open to the public.
(WT-en) Bill in STL 01:28, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
This event closed in 2008 and is no longer open to the public.
The next Olympics will be held in London in 2012.
-- (WT-en) LtPowers 10:06, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
I'm OK with just about any format that people agree on, but I'd suggest that we try to be consistent across articles so that the format for completed events, joke articles, and other articles that are no longer active is the same. If we go with LtPowers suggestion then I'd recommend updating Template:Joke to match it or (even better) have both templates use a common "archive template" to generate layout. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 10:54, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
The joke template is similar to our article status templates, in color and style. I guess I didn't think of this new proposal as a status template like those, but if it is maybe they should all match (in which case my color/style suggestion is unneeded). (WT-en) LtPowers 14:59, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
I'm also ok with using the same format as the status templates if desired. I like using a standard template to format all of these type of messages which we place at the top of the article. --(WT-en) Bill in STL 15:54, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
I took a stab at the templates. See Template:Topbox and Template:CompletedEvent. I used the format of template:joke, but easy to change. I also added it to Vancouver 2010 to see how it would look; easily removed if appropriate. If this looks right, we can modify Template:Joke to use this as well. Not sure we need the text "and is no longer open to the public." That's sort of obvious. I set up the template to take multiple lines, if needed for other situations. --(WT-en) Bill in STL 23:27, 25 August 2010 (EDT)

Olympics articles[edit]

Swept in from pub:

Do you think Olympic cities should have a banner like the FIFA Cup cities (see Durban for an example) to encourage people to contribute and view Wikivoyage's Olympic pages, like Vancouver 2010. I was reviewing the Vancouver page to see if it could be a CotM, and I wondered why FIFA is given such fanfare with a snazzy banner but not the Olympics. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 21:44, 13 July 2009 (EDT)

Sure, you can create a template and add it to relevant pages. I think we just need to enshrine in policy that these are always temporary and will be nuked once the event ends. (WT-en) Jpatokal 01:09, 14 July 2009 (EDT)
Yes, there had been a (very poor quality) article on the 2008 games. I think part of the reason may be in the fact that the Olympics are held in one city (and maybe a nearby city for 1-2 events), whereas the FIFA World Cup is spread over several cities. Same thing happened with Euro2008. (WT-en) AHeneen 01:48, 14 July 2009 (EDT)
Even if there is only one city, something the scope of the Olympics still should be highlighted. We should create a similar banner for London 2012. If there are other existing pages for places where events will be held, it would be put on those as well. --(WT-en) Bill in STL 17:23, 27 August 2010 (EDT)
Template for olympics was created. Olympics will be held at a dozen cities in United Kingdom plus several districts of London. Template added to each. See Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:London2012 for list of pages. There's still a question about which events are big enough for something like this. Olympics: yes. FIFA world Cup: probably. FIFA Beach Soccer world cup? Should we have templates for the COmmonwealth games, pan american games, etc. See potential list of events at International sporting events. For smaller events, sporting or not, which would impact travelers, we could add a generic "upcoming event" template which would just list the event name, date(s), and link if any to the wikivoyage page for the event or to the official website. Something like Democratic Convention in America takes over a city for a few days; if you aren't going for the convention then you want to avoid it for that week. I've lived in two cities which received visits from the Pope, and in each the city essentially shut down for the day. US Football superbowl. -- (WT-en) Bill in STL 16:59, 1 October 2010 (EDT)

Regionlist[edit]

The Regionlist template doesn't display correctly, probably due to its use of tables. Should we remove the example, or try to fix it somehow? LtPowers (talk) 12:51, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Tag templates[edit]

Swept in from the pub

Can someone who understands mediawiki template syntax take a look at the cleanup tags? For example {{Ifd}} page is in the category Vfd even though that part of the code is in includeonly. Also {{Vfd}}, and others, are including the page Wikivoyage:Template index in category even though there is an ifeq for non main space. --Traveler100 (talk) 09:19, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Pagebanner removed the title[edit]

I added the {{pagebanner}} template without noticing that it would remove the page title. Then I removed it and replaced it by the actual HTML code, but the page title is still missing. What the hell is going on? Fractal (talk) 09:30, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Position and size of maintenance tags[edit]

Swept in from the pub

To separate some discussion above from specific tag proposal. I would like to propose that some maintenance templates be made smaller and/or moved to the bottom of article pages. For example the fact that there is useful text on the German site for Kassel is self-evident and although suggesting someone do some translation work is a reasonable thing to ask I do not think it should be the first thing a visitor to this site reads about the town.

The question is which tags should be moved to the bottom of the page and which should have a smaller footprint on the page? As an example I have created a small option for the translate and districts discussion templates, looks like this:

Other like delete would probably stay large and at top of page. What about the others? As for moving from top to bottom this would be a relatively easy script to write if other agree this is the thing to do. --Traveler100 (talk) 11:55, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

I agree. I can't think of anything but delete that should remain at the top. Perhaps copyvio if we have a template for it (and not remove copyvios on sight). PrinceGloria (talk) 11:57, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Anything that does not impair the ability of the traveller to use the article should be moved to the bottom, to the talk page or out of the way. As article space is traveller-facing, the print version matters, the off-line version matters. Someone carrying a copy of WV on a microSD card isn't going to be able to redistrict the article while they're waiting at the baggage carousel. K7L (talk) 14:46, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
As I said above, if it's something that the average reader could fix, I don't mind it being present in the mainspace. If it gets complicated (say, coordinating multiple pages) or requires technical skills, then I'd rather have it on the talk page. I'd probably keep the translation tag, because that has two purposes: (1) please help us by translating, and (2) notice that if you can read German, the German article is probably better than ours, so you should go read that, too. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:45, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
By categorizing the correct page and not the talk page, we can cross-reference. I can find "guide cities with a style tag" or "merge candidates in Germany" or "outline regions with translation tags" or "countries with two or more maintenance tags". I can run metrics and find where problems are concentrated. If you move tags to the talk page, they categorize the wrong page, the category links to talk pages, and none of the above is possible any longer. I heartily oppose putting any tags on the talk page. I'd be more likely to support completely hidden tags which don't call any attention at all before I'd support moving them to the talk page (for the record, I do not support invisible tags either). The only possible exceptions might be the {{regions discussion}} and {{districts discussion}} tags, since those actually refer the talk page directly, but even those would become pretty pointless if they only went on the discussion itself.
On the other hand, I can support moving certain tags to the bottom, mainly ones which are general or have no obvious place in the article, like {{transcription}}, {{translate}}, {{merge}}, {{merge from}}, etc. Some tags pertain to a given part of the article though, and {{style}} even has a comment field often tailored to the section it's placed in. It'd be weird to put {{crop}} at the bottom too.
I'm also supportive of attempts to make the tags somewhat less conspicuous but I don't want them to appear too cryptic. Perhaps we might use a mouseover to still give some guidance and not lose the comment fields from the style tag, etc.
Texugo (talk) 16:26, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Thinking further, I'm not sure if I could support small tags of the exact type proposed for anything not moved to the bottom. Any tag in the article may need to remain centered or else people will be tempted to craft article layout/images around them. Another thought is that as K7L mentioned, we don't want any tags in the print version- this can be done regardless of what tags look like or where we put them. We should have "noprint"-ed them long ago. As for offline versions, I suppose it probably depends on the download source, but we may have some back end control over that too. Texugo (talk) 16:38, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia moves article quality (stub, start, A, B, C, good, featured) and article importance to the talk page - they're in the WikiProject boxes. Moving all of this rubbish to talk: would allow the cross-reference you suggest? K7L (talk) 17:50, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Moving the maintenance tags and the status tags to the talk page would only allow for cross-referencing between them, but it would completely cut both off from cross-referencing with the geo hierarchy categories, which cannot be moved to the talk page. Texugo (talk) 17:56, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
It'd also cut them off from cross referencing with other maintenance categories generated from non-tag templates like pagebanner, routebox, map frame, etc. Texugo (talk) 17:58, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Not to mention that it would mostly defeat the point of the status templates to put them on the talk page. On WP, different WikiProjects might have different assessments of each article, and the bottom of their articles is already cluttered. Powers (talk) 18:27, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

My own proposal would be to put the somewhat more complicated and contentious issue of placement on the back burner for the moment and start by overhauling the standard dimensions and font sizes and tightening up the wording a little (but still making the same point), so that the boxes are smaller and less conspicuous. Since the {{style}} tag is by far the most common one we have, I'll start there.

When no comment has been entered: we trim the wording a little and reduce the size from this:

to this:


When a comment has been inserted, we cut the standard wording a little more, and go from this:

to this:

We could start by applying this change, using the exact same new style for all existing tags, and all it would take is a few changes to the templates and presto, we'd have smaller, less conspicuous tags. I think it would be great if we could all agree to go at least that far and take that kind of step soon. Then at least we'll have already accomplished something and can continue to discuss the more complicated things like placement issues and complete tag redesigns. It'd be better to take a few steps in a direction we can all agree on first than it would to hold out for more radical overhauls which may never get the necessary consensus. Comments? Texugo (talk) 23:06, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

I agree on decreasing the size while other changes are being discussed. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:38, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Let's see what some others look like when tightened up the same way:
{{crop}}:



{{merge}}:


{{movetodistrict}}:


{{translate}}:
I think these are a substantial improvement, at least as a provisional solution. Texugo (talk) 01:30, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Support the smaller font as first step. Other option I had thought of was a small icon and couple of words with an expand button to get the full text. --Traveler100 (talk) 07:05, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
I agree those look like improvements. The recent Wikimedia-wide font changes had a side effect of making warning boxes bigger (because text was enlarged) and while these new boxes go even smaller than they were before, I don't think they're too small. Powers (talk) 18:20, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Great, that's four supports so far. K7L, PrinceGloria, WhatamIdoing, anyone else, can we all agree this is a step in the right direction? (fingers crossed!) Texugo (talk) 00:46, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
It's certainly better than the huge original banners, but I lost track in the discussion - what's wrong with the small tags to go to the bottom of the article that Traveller100 proposed? Unlike Wikipedia we have very little "down under", but we have the banner at the top, so I guessed this was a perfect solution for us. PrinceGloria (talk) 04:14, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
There are a few issues that will make getting consensus for the original proposal more difficult: they'll draw almost no attention at the bottom (less than I'd like); putting them at the bottom may give us stacks of three or more; reduced size may not be appropriate for centering if we don't move all to the bottom yet right aligning them would interact with content formatting; not all tags can be simply moved because they contain text tailored for the specific section where they've been placed and the context would be lost (style tag instructions, in particular). Rather than getting bogged down in trying to iron out all that and risk getting the whole thing shelved, I figure my proposal of shrinikng them is an at least an interim step that everyone can probably get behind first, while the more contentious and drastic changes are discussed. Texugo (talk) 10:58, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
I would prefer to keep at the top, especially the Translate tags. This is because we really want to get the attention of someone who can help translate! Merge should also be kept at the top because it indicates straight away that the article may disappear soon.
Movetodistrict is usually placed in each relevant section anyhow. Crop is probably the least important and could go at the bottom. Andrewssi2 (talk) 13:37, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

But Andrewssi2, before we discuss changing the placement (which I also oppose), do you have any objection to making them smaller like all the examples I gave just above? We have five supports and no opposes so far... Texugo (talk) 14:49, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

I have reduced text size on the tags but what method did you use to reduce the size of the table?Or is it just the reduction on amount of text? --Traveler100 (talk) 14:50, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
I support the smaller sizes of the tags. Andrewssi2 (talk) 14:54, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Done! Maintenance templates are now smaller. If people still want to discuss changing the placement of templates, further redesign, etc., this might be a good place to draw a line and start a new sub-thread. Texugo (talk) 14:26, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Texugo, you said that you can't cross-reference categories if one is in the mainspace and the other is in the talkspace. That problem has been solved before on other projects. How exactly are you doing this cross-referencing? Perhaps the tools here need an upgrade. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:26, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Quick intersection can do nothing if the categories are not on the same page. Catscan can find category-in-main-namespace vs. template-inclusion-on-talk-page or vice versa but cannot cross-reference categories from each, so it could not find, for example cities + needing translation from German, if the {{translate}} tag were on the talk page. None of the [Mediawiki extensions] can handling categories split between main and talk pages. If you know of any tools I don't know about, please do let me know. Texugo (talk) 22:56, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
This is creating a list based on the intersection of a talk page and many main page categories, so I know it can be done. I've never been very good at CatScan. Have you ever talked to the maintainers about it? WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:16, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
That page is just a list maintained by a customized bot written specifically to crawl the categories and compile the list periodically (and also appears to be comparing tag-x-category rather than category-x-category); it's not a dynamic tool that a non-programmer could utilize to cross-reference whatever they want. And no, haven't talked to the maintainers, since I've never had any interest in developing such a workaround - there are still additional non-technical reasons to oppose putting them on the talk page, even if it made no technical difference. Texugo (talk) 22:02, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Yes, but the fact that a bot has been written to do this proves that it's technically possible to do so, even if the current tool would need to be upgraded to do it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:08, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Not necessarily. Updating that page may very well take a couple or hours or more every time. That is very probably why it's a static page that's updated periodically instead of one that's generated on the fly when you open the page. Just because a bot can be made to spider through and cobble a list together does not necessarily mean that a timely query-and-response tool is right around the corner. Texugo (talk) 15:51, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

"From Wikipedia" template?[edit]

Hi, everyone!

For articles that have a great article in another language that could be translated we have the {{translate}} tag. Once the translation is complete we have the {{translated}} tag to put on the talk page.

Likewise, articles that already have content from Wikipedia get the {{wikipedia}}, but what about articles that could benefit from a "translation" from the corresponding WP article? For instance many of our national park articles could be expanded with (paraphrased, of course!) stuff from their corresponding Wikipedia article where landscape, flora and fauna is described. ϒpsilon (talk) 18:50, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

While I appreciate the sentiment, I think think Wikipedia is a good source for the "Understand" section of every article on this site, so I'm not sure there would be much value in a template that essentially says that someone was industrious enough to look at Wikipedia, but not industrious enough to use that information to update the Wikivoyage article himself. -- Ryan • (talk) • 19:11, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Template for opening hours[edit]

Swept in from the pub

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)

Industrial action[edit]

Swept in from the pub

Should the possibility of it be mentioned, on destination pages?

In London, there was some news coverage about some suburban rail being disrupted by a strike in few days time. (http://www.southernrailway.com/your-journey/strike)

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:15, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Strikes or unrest is possible nearly anywhere, and communications or accommodation can be broken also by e.g. extreme weather. I think mentioning it everywhere where it is possible is overkill. A warning is due where disruption is worse than normally expected, but otherwise I think it is just one more thing to be prepared for as a traveller. A section could be added on Travel basics, Prepare or some similar page, though. --LPfi (talk) 16:49, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
If we have reasonably exact information, like here, and the disruption is significant, I think mentioning it in the article is good. Dates have to be given, so that the info can be removed when it is not relevant anymore (and I'd like a template putting it in a maintenance category when it should be checked or removed). --LPfi (talk) 17:10, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
Wikivoyage is not a news service, and attempts to do so will always be really poor because we can never be up to date and complete. Should we start listing every industrial action everywhere in the world? If not then we are inconsistent.
Usually a warning about a dangerous situation is warranted, but a spot strike at Heathrow on Christmas day really doesn't qualify. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 20:24, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
In the case of Southern Railway, this is a dispute that's been going on for months now, with misery for all involved, including passengers travelling to Gatwick and Luton airports. If someone like ShakespeareFan00 with local knowledge of this disruption wants to put in a notice, we shouldn't stop them just because editors more familiar with other regions don't wish to do so elsewhere. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 20:31, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
There was a discussion for United States some time back about putting in warnings for the 'Federal Shutdown' (where a political budget impasse meant that it wouldn't be possible to keep federal facilities open, including national parks, museums, etc). I'm supportive of those kinds of warnings if they are long term or indefinate. Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:52, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

ICAO template[edit]

I like the IATA template very much, but for the seldom airport that lacks one should we have an ICAO one that works the same? See the Sicily page, I recreated the template's effects with ICAO code. Though I think a template (ICAO|LICP) would be a cleaner solution.

Inferno986return (talk) 22:19, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

We used to have an {{ICAO}} which appeared on many airports which have both IATA and ICAO codes. Wikivoyage:Votes for deletion/March_2014#Template:ICAO We removed it because the scheduled airline tickets all seem to use IATA codes; only the pilots see the ICAO tags. K7L (talk) 10:30, 31 March 2017 (UTC)