Wikivoyage:Travellers' pub

(Redirected from Pub)
Welcome to the Pub

The Travellers' Pub is the place to ask questions when you're confused, lost, afraid, tired, annoyed, thoughtful, or helpful. To start a new topic, click the "Add topic" tab, so that it gets added at the bottom of the page, and sign your post by appending four tildes (~~~~)

Before asking a question or making a comment:

  • Have a look at our Help, FAQ and Policies pages.
  • If you are a new user and you have any questions about using the website, try the Arrivals lounge.
  • If you have a question or suggestion about a particular article, use the article's talk page to keep the discussion associated with that article.
  • If you'd like to draw attention to a comment to get feedback from other Wikivoyagers, try Requests for comment.
  • If you are wanting travel advice on a specific matter see the Tourist Office.
  • If you have an issue you need to bring to the attention of an administrator, try Vandalism in progress.
  • If you are having a problem that you think has to do with the MediaWiki software, please post that on Phabricator instead.
  • If you want to celebrate a significant contribution to Wikivoyage by yourself or others, hold a party at Celebrate a contribution.
  • Discuss issues related to more than one language version of Wikivoyage in the Wikivoyage Lounge on Meta.

Pull up a chair and join in the conversation!

Click here to ask a new question
QA icon clr.svg

Switchable static/dynamic mapEdit

Since there's a big dynamic-map-dislike club around here, going around deleting {{Mapframe}}|staticmap=... , I was thinking - would something like this make the dynamic maps more acceptable? (obviously some better styling would be needed) -- 07:52, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

I like it! --Renek78 (talk) 08:12, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
I saw that you were working on this earlier, and I agree that it's a really good idea and could be incorporated into some articles. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 21:59, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
Interesting. Worth testing out on a few articles, perhaps. Powers (talk) 01:27, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
I don't see how a dynamic map would ever be preferable to a static map in an article that's not a bottom-level destination, but so long as the article doesn't display both maps simultaneously, I won't stand in the way of this idea. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 02:09, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
While helping out with a Wikipedia template (Cyclone map) I monitored/followed some work you may also be interested in: Radio buttons for switching between historical maps and Wikipedia Request for comment: Mapframe maps in infoboxes. -- Matroc (talk) 03:09, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
I would like to have that feature, unless it has drawbacks such as bandwidth use. I often want information that is not available in the static map – and information not available in, or hard to discern from, the dynamic one. One tweak suggestion: try to get identical sizes; when switching back and forth to compare the maps, having to move the mouse hinders keeping focused on the spot being compared (and is also otherwise irritating). --LPfi (talk) 08:08, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Good idea! One other slight improvement to change the "Switch map" text depending on which map is displayed; e.g the dynamic map is displayed, so it says "Switch to static map".--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:59, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Do our readers actually know what static/dynamic map is? Perhaps something like schematic/detailed map could be better? -- 04:46, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
It's misleading to suggest that one variety of map is inherently more or less detailed than the other. A static map can be as detailed or as simple as its maker chooses and so can a dynamic one. The fundamental difference between them from the reader's perspective is spelled out in the current terminology about as plainly as it can be - dynamic maps have a zoom feature when rendered on a browser while static ones don't - which is not to even mention the fact that the current terminology has been in use on this site for seven years and how immensely disruptive it would be to change it. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 04:53, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
It could be printable/zoomable or whatever - the question is if a newcomer sees "Switch to dynamic map", if it would make sense to him. I don't think we explicitly promote the term anywhere outside the pub... ? -- 07:35, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
That's a valid point. "Dynamic map" is certainly used widely in Wikivoyage space pages (e.g. Wikivoyage:Map), but it isn't as far as I know in use anywhere in article space. "Printable" and "zoomable" work as descriptive terms, rather than as name changes.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:33, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
If it's just a question of the labeling for this new switchable map template, "static map" and "interactive map" would probably be clearer for most users. -- Ryan • (talk) • 15:02, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
I like all of the suggested alternative terrms (printable, zoomable, interactive). WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:09, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Great idea! I modified your work to make the style better: User:City-busz/Multimap. Changes:
  • The map can be switched by the thumbnail caption text.
  • The text is changing between "switch to interactive map" and "switch to static map" as needed.
  • The map sizes are identical.--City-busz (talk) 21:22, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
Great idea andree and excellent fine tuning City-busz! I think the next step is to change Template:Regionlist to manage internally the div code and determine the right size for the interactive map. --Andyrom75 (talk) 15:58, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Take a look at Template:Regionlist/Test. I'd like to fetch the height of the image but I don't know how to do it. Any idea? --Andyrom75 (talk) 16:23, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Finally I've done. Now is possible to add just "| regionInteractiveMap=map1" to the Regionlist template and inside the article the relevant "geoshapes". This would be helpful to all the editors that are used with the current syntax. What do you think? --Andyrom75 (talk) 22:50, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Nice work, User:City-busz and User:Andyrom75! I would say it's pretty good for the rollout - we can always improve on it later, if new "requirements" show up. I'd just consider splitting out the static/interactive switcher to a separate template, maybe we'll need it. And perhaps add a switch to prefer the dynamic map (though that might be too hard to implement without duplicating all the code)... In any case, great that it could be done without additional javascript! -- 06:07, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for your work User:Andyrom75! Great to see that it works within the region template. One thing that I noticed is that this solution doesn't work with the mobile view, but I don't know why: --City-busz (talk) 09:41, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
User:City-busz, it's a known issue that collapsable area doesn't work on mobile view. See phabricator:T111565. . --Andyrom75 (talk) 09:51, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Andree, City-busz and Andyrom75, thanks for working on this, it looks great. I was testing it on this edit here and a couple of things I found are:

  • When I toggled to the dynamic map, it kept zooming out. I'm not sure why but was wondering if the zoom parameter should be included to stop this
  • I think it's easy to miss the toggle switch because it's just black text like the description. Is it possible to make it a different colour or stylize it like a hyperlink or do something to highlight it's interactive?
  • This comment is just a nice-to-have, but I think it would be ideal if it the user could specify whether the dynamic map or static map is the default for the page. The quality of both styles of maps varies from page-to-page so it would be nice if we could put the best one forward as the default.

Overall though, it looks awesome. -Shaundd (talk) 16:43, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Shaundd the zoom-out issue is caused by the presence of the railway shape. But honestly I don't know why... I'll try to figure out if your idea can be implemented as a workaround, but I think that the problem is elsewhere.
Good point on the switch label. Is easy to do, we just decide how to customize. I've just made a change.
On the last point I can say that is feasible but I think that the best approach is to show first the static one. Let's remember that Wikivoyage initially was made to be printed, (although nowadays is not common) and once in paper you cannot switch :-). If the static map is awful, well... maybe we should remove it instead of putting it in the background. On the other hand, currently the template assumed to have a static map. If we want to implement officially this template, we can extend it to work also with a dynamic map only (quite easy to do ... but I haven't done it because I don't know if there is a real interest). --Andyrom75 (talk) 17:20, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Shaundd, I've just implemented your suggested zoom and it works; Check it! :-) --Andyrom75 (talk) 17:33, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
@Andyrom75: Cool. I see it centers the map based on all the mapshapes, which in the case of East China, pulls it away from the area of focus. It's an unusual case, but I wonder if it would be good to permit the lat and long to specified (like a normal mapframe) to cover situations like this? I did another test too, at Kootenays, and it works fine as-is. -Shaundd (talk) 19:57, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Shaundd, automatic center is how maps work by default if coords are not specified. Although I like to keep thigs simple, I've implemented the optional parameters regionmapLat, regionmapLong and for uniformity I've change the name of zoom into regionmapZoom. Now you can play with them :-) --Andyrom75 (talk) 20:40, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Andyrom75, I agree simple is better, but I find the auto-center feature of dynamic maps doesn't always hit the best spot so I think it's good to allow users to position the map if needed.
Do you think it's ready to deploy to the Regionlist template? -Shaundd (talk) 21:33, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Shaundd, for me it's fine. Any further feature can be added afterwards. PS Once published, the two articles used for the test shall be adjusted to use again the main template. --Andyrom75 (talk) 22:18, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Shaundd, I've just deployed the template (and updated thw two articles). Template manual is not yet updated; I'll wait few days to get any feedback. --Andyrom75 (talk) 13:16, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Shaundd, I've just added a brief explanation of the new parameters on Template:Regionlist/doc, feel free to improve it. --Andyrom75 (talk) 13:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Andyrom75. I made some copyedits and added a bit more detail about how it interacts with the "group" parameter in the mapshape template. -Shaundd (talk) 05:50, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

One of the best features of WikiVovage is the dynamic map (which is something that no other guide has!). I want to provide maps of Dartmoor villages (showing hills and vegetation - that the default map does not show) and have experimented adding a Maplink layers=M or Relief Map layer=S [as indicated in Wikivoyage:How to use dynamic maps] to Widecombe in the Moor. I cannot get this to work: am I making a rookie error or is the layers functionality disabled RobThinks (talk) 23:22, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

RobThinks, if I understood correctly, you want to set as default the Mapnik or Relief map layer that you can activate manually clicking on the radio button on the right top of the map. In the affirmative case, you could see that near Wikimedia option there is a different icon, this icon means that this service map is provided from Wikimedia server, while the other two layers from external servers. Years ago has been decided to disable the possibility to set as default these layers because user IP (considered as a sensitive user data) would have been shared with a third party without explicit user approval. While the "external service icon" joint to a "manual click" is considered an explicit approval. I hope I've answered to your doubt. --Andyrom75 (talk) 10:19, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Andyrom75. I am beginning to understand, however I believe that other new copyeditors will ask the same questions or scratch their heads like me. May I suggest:
  1. It appears that Wikivoyage:How to use dynamic maps is for copyeditors and we should consider changing its title to 'Wikivoyage:How to construct or make dynamic maps' ?
  2. On the Main Page we should consider a short video, or a link to one, to explain how brilliant Wikivoyage dynamic maps are and how they help filter what a newcomer [a reader] find exactly what they are hunting for [by selecting one of the two radio buttons].
  3. Moving the Basic layers (opaque) and Additional layers (transparent) sections to the end into an 'Deprecated Markup Section', as I believe the layers= tag does no longer functions [from the initial mapframe map]? RobThinks (talk) 00:18, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Blocking Radisson marketersEdit

Hi. I think I should mention that I am now blocking Radisson marketing IPs without warning when they tout. My reasoning for this is that they change IP addresses often and not one of the Radisson marketing accounts has paid any attention to touting warnings or instructions on avoiding default address info in listings in talk page posts nor to any of the content of edit summaries. I don't think we should tolerate promotional, paid accounts creating unnecessary work for us (basically, trying to jerk us volunteers around) by refusing to cooperate. Therefore, at the first example of touting, I block right away. This is the second time I've done that to a Radisson account, after following usual procedure for weeks. And I think we should seriously consider blocking for persistent violation of Wikivoyage guidelines on default address info, too. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:06, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Some context: See User talk: and this edit. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:10, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
I've been correcting lots of Radisson updates lately, maybe 10 or more a day. While I totally agree with your reasoning, I fear that hard reverting these edits may end up with Wikivoyage keeping a lot of obsolete weblink and phone numbers, which is, ultimately, unhelpful to the traveller. Only because of this, I usually go for manual edits, which is a drag, agreed again. If a consensus about a total block of Radisson updates is agreed upon, I'll gladly enforce it from this moment on. Ibaman (talk) 12:23, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
I'm currently only threatening a "block on sight" policy to try to get the attention of a Radisson manager, but I think we should at least be reverting touting posts by Radisson employees and blocking any Radisson account that touts right away after they tout (without trying to block every single account already used by Radisson at this point). I'm happy to tolerate their continually disregarding our attempts to get them to respect Wikivoyage's address content guidelines if you'd like to continue correcting those fields. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:30, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
Should we contact Radisson directly? They have an interest in their listings being up to date, and if the people updating listings do so on orders from some one person, it might be possible to get them change their instructions. –LPfi (talk) 12:35, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
That's a good idea. Perhaps one of our users with experience working in or with hotels as something other than a regular customer would have some insight into who should be contacted. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:38, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
I really hope this works. These edits are tricky stuff, almost malicious, should I say. About half these edits seem to already got the gist and just update the link and phone numbers (these I keep). The other half will change the name from "Radisson Blu" to "The Ultimate Highscale Radisson BLU Hotel, Spa & Lobster Restaurant, Ibiza, Baleares"and insert three paragraphs of flowery promotional prose on "content" (these I revert). Again, I hope that contacting their marketing department, or whatever, works. Ibaman (talk) 12:43, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
The IP I blocked also just deleted some addresses. I don't know what that was about. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:45, 29 September 2020 (UTC) has a list of e-mail addresses. Are these edits all about one part of the world, or scattered around? WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:42, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
For the record, today it was mostly about Finland and Norway, yesterday it was UK and USA, I'd say it's nearly always Europe and North America, but it's really global, on the long run. I already saw India, Thailand, Bangladesh, Australia, Hong Kong, for instance. Ibaman (talk) 16:08, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
The edits that remove addresses need extra scrutiny: I've seen cases where the Radisson hotel in the destination has closed, but an IP editor edits the entry to remove the address and contact information and replace the URL with a link to the Radisson page for that country or region. In effect, this directs readers to a Radisson website even though there is no longer a Radisson hotel in the destination. That seems to be what was going on here. I think the appropriate response in this situation is either to remove the listing or, if a new hotel has opened at the Radisson's former address, to replace it with a listing for the new hotel. —Granger (talk · contribs) 17:14, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I support the initiative to contact Radisson directly. The overall aim of these edits, updating links and contact info across hundreds of listings, is very useful for us, but it's not acceptable that volunteers should be made to run around after paid employees. As Ibaman noted, simply reverting and blocking the troublesome edits is counterproductive because it also reinstates outdated information. As usual, communication is the key to solving the problem. If nobody with industry experience comes forward (I know we have people with such experience, but will not nominate anyone who doesn't choose to come forward), I'd be happy to try to contact Radisson, but must stress that I'll not be able to do so for at least two weeks for several reasons, but first among them being that I currently only have access to a mobile phone.

If we can't get in contact with someone in authority, then we still have at our disposal the spam filter to block new Radisson links, but that would have to be a last resort given the number of hotel brands they manage all over the world.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 18:02, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

In answer to WhatamIdoing's question, these edits have been all over the world. In addition to the countries Ibaman mentioned, there have been edits in the Arab world, for example. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:12, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
Since it is a global effort, we should probably e-mail one of the people listed for the corporate office, rather than a regional representative in their public relations department. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:27, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
Looking on the contact page you linked, there are three regions to the business (EMEA, Asia-Pacific, and Americas), but no single global contact. Perhaps a single email to the most senior relevant person in each region? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 21:39, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
Sounds reasonable. I think the key points we want to make are that everyone working for Radisson must avoid: (1) using promotional language, (2) describing what a hotel location is "near", (3) putting in more than the street address except in countries (notably including the UK) where we've decided post codes (but not city names) should be included. Also, they should delete listings for locations that are closed and shouldn't delete the address and leave a merely promotional link to the company's website. At least some of us are also deleting city names in the name fields of listings for hotel branches. If we consider that promotional SEO, not really part of the title, we need to tell them they can't include it in the name field of their listings, that it will be considered touting, whatever. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:05, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
I think we might want to start with a shorter, more general message. Something more like "It looks like Radisson has hired an employee or contractor to edit Wikivoyage. We'd love to have Radisson entries updated, but we're having trouble with the quality of the work, and they're not responding to our messages. Can you help us contact them?" My recommendation is to focus the PR people on their task (find that person) instead of on our policies. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:41, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I think we should contact the company. It can't be in their interest to have a bad reputation in the travel writer community... Hobbitschuster (talk) 10:32, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps it should be time to establish paid editing policy here if one isn't already created? OhanaUnitedTalk page 19:03, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
It's here: Wikivoyage:Don't tout#Marketers and SEOs. -- Powers (talk) 23:12, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Oh! I have missed that. The exception was not in the lead of Don't tout ("Business employees, like everyone, are welcome to add information to Wikivoyage"). I reworded to reflect it, and added it to Welcome business owners. –LPfi (talk) 08:09, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
Good job making our policies clearer and more present.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:01, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

It still seems that Radisson is a special case in terms of the volume of edits by different IP addresses and the refusal to communicate. I would support a briefer, more targetted email of the kind proposed by user:WhatamIdoing in the first instance, as our first goal is just to open a dialogue with the company and be put in touch with the person responsible for the edits, either the editor(s) or their manager. Once we have that contact, we can go more in-depth with our specific concerns, like what user:Ikan Kekek proposed. Additionally, I would want the Radisson editor(s) to be more available; to stick to editing with just one IP address or, better yet, to create a named account and crucially to reply to on-wiki messages within a reasonable period of time. Without the ability to communicate with them moving forward, I can't see how we can tolerate any editing arrangement with Radisson.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:01, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

A month on, do we still think it's worth contacting the people at Radisson? I haven't had a great deal of spare time since going back to work, so haven't particularly noticed much Radisson action in recent changes of late, but if it's still considered an issue that needs addressing, I'm reaffirming my offer to get in touch with them.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 13:24, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

This (helpful) edit showed up on my watchlist today.[1]Granger (talk · contribs) 17:04, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, I've seen a few, including some not so helpful ones. But my perception, perhaps coloured by lack of patrolling on my part, is they're not as frequent as before.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:09, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
There was also this edit, though, and see also User talk:2401:4900:36C0:B411:D554:2F23:156B:41B1. So yes, I think it could still be worth contacting people at Radisson, although I agree that the edits are not coming as fast and including as much new touting as before, at least for the time being. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:14, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
OK. I'll proceed with that.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:19, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Great! Let us know whether or what kind of responses you get. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:04, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
I'm surprised we didn't already try to contact them; I definitely think we should. If this is someone who was told to go and add all this information, then we need to make it clear to corporate that they're not following our policies and that we may punish them for it by reverting all their edits. If it's an overly-enthusiastic employee who's doing it on their own initiative, we ought to inform corporate so they know someone is making them look bad by being unresponsive and not following our policies. Either way, I see no reason not to reach out to Radisson. --Bigpeteb (talk) 19:55, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
I have seen a few edits where a Radisson listing for a specific hotel has been changed to just point at a general country webpage, when the hotel ceased to be part of the chain. I think that we need to be explicit that if a chain location closes the only permissible edits are to delete the listing or to update it to reflect the current occupants of that location. If the chain moves to another location, even in the same street, then that change is subject to the same rules as new listings - marketeers should suggest the new listing on the talk page. AlasdairW (talk) 22:24, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Good afternoon friends. I had hoped to have a bit more news to share, but it seems like enough time has elapsed without an update.

In the middle of last week, I sent a short email to three senior media contacts in Radisson, outlining who we wanted to get in touch with and why, and the following day I received a reply from the person claiming to be part of the team behind the edits to Wikivoyage. She asked what our concerns were and how we (Radisson and WV) could better work together moving forward. I followed that up on Friday with a much longer email that went into detail about our concerns with promotional language, location touting, and the replacement of defunct listings with generic links to Radisson websites. I also drew attention to their lack of engagement with our messages on-wiki, and suggested that they consider creating named accounts, rather than editing with IPs so that we could more easily communicate.

Since my second email, I haven't heard anything further but tracking of recent changes suggests the edits have stopped (can anyone else confirm?). Ideally we would have wanted them to continue the maintenance of listings while also respecting the rules on touting and responding to messages (which is a point I put to her), but from our perspective a total cessation of their activities is probably the next best thing. Since it has only been potentially three working days since Friday, and there was a lot in my email to digest and maybe discuss among themselves, I remain hopeful of a reply, but won't be surprised if one isn't forthcoming. Either way, I'll let you all know. Best wishes --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 15:35, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for taking are of this and for the update, and do please let us know if there are any other developments. Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:10, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Butterfly effect on map updateEdit

While working on #Switchable static/dynamic map I've noticed that 1 year ago has been updated the map on China, but unfortunately the updated has been done in a bad way: overwriting the existing map.

I'm writing this post hoping to avoid it on the future because this approach will mess up all the other language versions that use the same map. The good approach is to create a new file and let the article of a specific language version to use that new file. In this way all the other language versions are not affected.

This good approach has been followed (I think by chance) on Southwest China, maybe because the old map has a mispelled name, but anyhow this was enough to preserve all the other language versions.

In all this mess, I've notice that the map on East China has not even updated, so the areas described in the article do not match the ones on the map, and for South China no new static map version has been created (it's not mandatory, it's just a choice, but let's consider that it's not uniformed among the other articles). Whomever will take in charge the map update task, please follow the right process, and please share to whomever is interested on this topic to be aware of this issue. --Andyrom75 (talk) 13:38, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

I think that User:Buernia made that update. Maybe talk to that editor about what happened? (It looks right to me.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:23, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Sorry about that. I’ve reverted the coloring of File:Map of China (en).png to the 2012 version. The article in en:voy can reference the bitmap generated by File:Map_of_China.svg. -- Buernia Talk  13:22, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks User:Buernia for taking care about China map and Shaundd for the East China one. If one of you would be available to create a new version of the South China static map would be great. --Andyrom75 (talk) 14:54, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Editing by Listing EditorEdit

I can not edit by Listing Editor. It says, "Error: An unknown error has been encountered while attempting to save the listing, please try again: invalidsection". What should I do? It happened on multiplr pages.-Nizil Shah (talk) 07:01, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Nizil Shah, could you be more specific? Please provide: article, listing & text you tried to change. Thanks, --Andyrom75 (talk) 14:48, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
I tried to edit Gandhinagar with a new listing in See section.-Nizil Shah (talk) 17:34, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
Nizil Shah, sorry for late answer but you haven't pinged me. See history of that page. I've added a new "test listing" and deleted it. Both action with listing editor without any issue.
If your problem persist, you have to provide me also all the data that you insert in any listing editor field. I need to replicate exactly your action. --Andyrom75 (talk) 09:09, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
@Andyrom75: It again happened on Junagadh. I clicked [add listing] in Go section. Than added Name=Girnar ropeway; Price=₹700 normal, ₹400 concessional, ₹350 children; Selected Wikipedia=Girnar ropeway, Content=Opened in 2020 to go from Girnar foothill to Ambaji temple above the hill in 8 minutes. Than Submit. The error says: "Error: An unknown error has been encountered while attempting to save the listing, please try again: invalidsection". I don't know what is happening but I am unable to contribute to Wikivoyage for this reason. Please do something about it.-Nizil Shah (talk) 14:21, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
It also happens when I try to do changes in listing via edit button on the end of each entry. There must be some bug in Listing Editor. It used to work perfectly in past.-Nizil Shah (talk) 14:24, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
I don't see a "Go" section in Junagadh. I edited a listing in Do with the new listing editor and added the described one in Get around (was that your Go?) with the default one. No problems. –LPfi (talk) 14:45, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Nizil Shah, as said by LPfi, there is no "Go" section on Junagadh. Notwithstanding this, I've assumed that you were talking of "Do" section and I've added the new listing as per your description on that section and on its "Religious festivals" subsection, then I've deleted them. All managed correctly through the listing editor (see article history).
Could you check which is the correct section and if there is something missing in what you described? Please let me know also the browser that you are using. FYI I've used Chrome.
If I'm not able to replicate the issue, I'm not able to support. --Andyrom75 (talk) 17:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Even if I change a typo in See section using listing editor, it shows the same error. "Go" section is not there but same issues happen even if I try to edit anywhere with listing editor. I am using Google Chrome.-Nizil Shah (talk) 04:38, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
I'm afraid I'm not able to help you because I use the same browser and I did all the changes you mention and I had no problem. I suppose that you may have issue with your browser version, with you computer or with your internet connection (I exclude your account, but to test it you can be anonymous). Try to change one of this item at time in order to find the issue. Good luck! --Andyrom75 (talk) 07:55, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
You can't actually use mw:safemode to test a gadget, but @Nizil Shah, there might be some advice on the safemode help page that is useful to you anyway. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:55, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

I am not the BT Central vandal (Solved)Edit

Hi I created my first page: Perranporth in Cornwall UK, just a couple of days ago. I was just experimenting, so I copied a section from the existing St Ives page, and just started typing.

Today, back from holiday, I go to my rough draft page for Perranporth, and fill out a bit more detail, delete the St Ives text then try to publish.

Dang, I get autoidentified as vandalising my own page. Its not obvious what I can do now to prove my innocence, publish my edits, etc.

Any clues???

Actually I just needed to create an account and login. Aliks29 15:14, 17 October 2020‎ (UTC)

Good. Welcome. These "edit filters" are rough. They catch some editing patterns typical for certain vandals, but can match unrelated innocent edits. Glad you got around it. (We try to check for false positives and take measures as needed, but we might miss some, and this is manual work that in no way is instant.) –LPfi (talk) 06:22, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Nuremberg U-Bahn extensionEdit

The Nuremberg U-Bahn opened a new station w:de:Großreuth (U-Bahn Nürnberg) on October 15. We should add it to the mapshape. Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:31, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Assuming you mean the diagrammatic map in Nuremberg#Get around, I recommend approaching the map's creator, who is still active on Commons.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 20:44, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
No I mean the lines that show up on the dynamic map. Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:09, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
@Hobbitschuster: Those mapshapes are dependent on data from OpenStreetMap. Once the edit is made there (and it has been made already), it will take a bit of time before this change is visible here as well. Things like these require no action from us whatsoever. This change to the map should be visible here before the end of the month at the latest, or so I reckon. However, changes like these are quite unpredictable as to how quickly they become visible here. It could be visible tomorrow, it could be visible next week, but all we need to do is sit back and wait :)
-- Wauteurz (talk) 22:01, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
As long as somebody at OSM takes care of it. It might be a good idea to check that the update has indeed been done over there, as you did. –LPfi (talk) 06:24, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
It's strange that it still didn't show up, though - it usually takes a day or two, when I was adding various routes from OSM :-/ -- 19:16, 21 October 2020 (UTC)


I wonder if this would be an article worth creating. It's certainly a fairly popular game in many parts of East Asia, and it's certainly possible for people to travel to East Asia to purchase sets and play the game. One of the main issues though is that because it's associated with gambling, in many places, the only way you can play it legally is with family and friends. In addition there are so many different rule sets. Different parts of China have different rules, while Taiwan and Japan have their own rules, and so do we in Singapore, so while the basic gameplay is similar, it would not be practical for us to cover all possible rule sets in a travel article. If we have to pick any to cover, I would say perhaps Cantonese, Taiwanese and Japanese rules are the best known internationally, so these should probably the ones we should cover. Unfortunately, I'm only familiar with Singaporean rules, so I won't be able to write those.

As for tournaments to watch, there is the World Series Mahjong which uses a set of standardised "international rules" that attempts to be the "average" of the Taiwanese, Japanese, Cantonese and all the other regional Chinese rules, so that it is fair to all players regardless of which rule sets they grew up with. However, nobody actually uses those rules in casual settings; they are only used in professional tournaments. The dog2 (talk) 19:34, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Why would the differences in rules from country to country be travel-relevant anyway? Leave that for Wikipedia, I say. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 22:31, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
I don't know the game at all, but my feeling is that travellers who would like to watch or play should at least be made aware that differences exist. Ideally watchers should know enough to understand what is going on, and those who would play themselves should know whether they have a chance to adjust to the local rules. I understand that we cannot teach people strategy, but if the rules are reasonably simple we could explain them, like in Chess, including differences and their impact on strategies. If the rules are more complex than those of chess, or the differences cannot be handled compactly, then concentrate on the general game flow instead. I'd say the rules section in our chess article should be shorter, but there is definitely value in that it is complete. The tactics section could be longer, if additions would help spectators understand the game. The Understand section in all is about the right length, perhaps a little longer than ideal. –LPfi (talk) 07:42, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
@The dog2:, If you are collecting names of users who would appreciate having a travel related mahjong article, count me in. Ottawahitech (talk) 16:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Important: maintenance operation on October 27Edit

-- Trizek (WMF) (talk) 17:12, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

This is the same thing as earlier, but in reverse. The first round took only a few minutes, so if the switch back is equally quick, I think that most of us won't notice it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:52, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

New checkin and checkout properties on WikidataEdit

Now check-in and check-out times (P8745, P8746) can be entered to Wikidata. For instance {{#property:P8745|from=Q56506795}} will return 14:00, the check-in time of the Nile Ritz-Carlton in Cairo.

The times are stored as an entity id. 2PM (14:00) is stored as Q55811610, and 14:00 is its label. With simple Lua scripts, formatting can be made. Now all listing parameters excluding alt and content can be stored to Wikidata (and displayed at the German Wikivoyage, too). --RolandUnger (talk) 11:30, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Religious sites, include and list or not?Edit

I have a conundrum. A random named user added a new category and list specifically for a religious site in Oakland, without anything on it other than its address. It was simply added as "other sights." I had previously included the locally-famous Mormon Temple, because it was just as much a quiet public place with a breathtaking view as a place of worship. (It's closed to the public due to long-term ongoing renovation and such at present.) How do I handle this one? L. Challenger (talk) 05:09, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

An ordinary church shouldn't be listed because that's as interesting as an ordinary convenience store. However, if it's a place of worship of a religion that has only one house of worship in the area, it could be listed in "cope". So if there's, say, one Zoroastrian temple, that could go there, but the x-number of Catholic parish churches and Evangelical churches probably aren't so hard to find. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:38, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
Hold it; your post at Talk:Oakland has a very different phrasing: "Thus far, I've avoided the inclusion of any of Oakland's various and often-amazing religious institutions with the exception of the Mormon Temple - specifically because to list them all would add an entire new list and category for its own sake." My answer to that would be: Create the category and list any religious institution that is likely to be interesting to a traveler. If it's amazing, it should be listed. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:40, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
Part of the conundrum is the adding of a new list to an article that feels... very full as it is. If I start listing places of worship in Oakland alone, it's going to be a long list. If I keep to specifically interesting architecture - it's still apt to be a long list. These are the reasons I'm feeling stuck. The added link was to the Cathedral of Christ the Light - a place with unique architecture that lies very near to Lake Merritt, and is in fact, at the far right of the top image in Oakland's article itself. What should I do? How should I handle this? L. Challenger (talk) 23:44, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
Since that particular religious site is also mentioned in the caption of a photo in the article ("Some of the distinctive skyline of Downtown, including the Kaiser Building and the Cathedral of Christ the Light"), then I think it's a good idea to include its location. A description should be added to say something about it being part of the downtown skyline, and also that it's a Catholic church.
On the general question, the last time I thought about this seriously, I was working on Grinnell. I eventually included, under ==Cope==, the church nearest the interstate highway and the biggest church in the downtown area. The latter has some architectural interest, but my main thought was that if you were stranded, then they were accessible and would help. (The churches in that town have clubbed together to buy gas or pay for a hotel room for the occasional stranded traveler.)
Challenger l, do you think that someone might have fun with a day trip to go look at a bunch of architecturally/historically interesting religious sites in Oakland? If so, then an itinerary might be one way to get it out of the main article while still providing good information. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:38, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
I agree. Challenger l, perhaps this star article may inspire you. But in general, my answer is that if information is really interesting and relevant to travelers, never fear including it. Any time a section gets too long, it can be spun off, with a summary kept in the article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:18, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
Every church that is worthwhile for visitors should be listed, just like museums or any other site. No editor should neglect adding good listings just to avoid making the article longer or complicating a heading scheme. If the heading scheme is a problem, the headings need to be changed not listings deleted or held back from being added. Personally, I think grouping sites with location headings is better than attraction headings. In this case, I'd definitely recommend changing the headings if they are impeding on article improvements. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 11:08, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
I would go with whether it is a site which someone can visit just to be a tourist. Is it a normal expectation that a tourist would come up and take pictures of it? Most of the time, walking into the worship space of a religious site and pulling out a camera would raise some eyebrows. If this is not the case, the site may be worthy of a mention. This would allow exceptional sites such as the Cathedral of Christ the Light to be included while excluding the local Catholic parish. I, personally, would put them in the See section rather than create a new section. If the See section is cluttered, perhaps adding an Architecture sub-heading would help to alleviate link fatigue in the page visitor.
You would not be allowed to pull out a camera in many museums either. But yes, people coming there as tourists could be a criterion – or that a share of tourists would want to go there if they were in the area and knew about it, and would be allowed to enter as tourists (or to have a look from the outside and think it was worth it). –LPfi (talk) 13:43, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
A church with a beautiful facade that's closed to entry is also absolutely worth listing. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:09, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

In light of the coming opening of Berlin Brandenburg AirportEdit

I created an article. Is this premature? No."Schönefeld Airport" has already been relabeled "BER Terminal 5". Unfortunately the lower sections of the article are pretty barren as of now, but I'm sure they can be filled in due time... Hobbitschuster (talk) 13:03, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

It might be. It doesn't appears BER will be a major hub, as most of the destinations are from easyJet and Ryanair, who both operate point-to-point models rather than hub-and-spoke. Thus, as with TXL and SXF, most passengers will probably be origin/destination passengers rather than connecting. (It's hard to find statistics for this, but [2] shows that TXL only had on the order of 15% connecting passengers in 2014.) That said, we do have plenty of airport articles for places with even lower rates of connecting passengers. However, I worry that we get carried away writing about the history of the airport (not terribly interesting to most travellers) and transportation options (important, but belongs to the city as much as the airport) and end up writing very little about the airport itself (primarily the Wait, Eat, and Buy sections). For a comparison, I'm still thinking about submitting a merge request on Orlando International Airport because most of the article is about getting to/from the airport, and the rest just isn't that interesting: the airport is easy to navigate, the food and shopping options are bland, and most passengers won't spend a lot of time there. Can you convince me BER will be any different? --Bigpeteb (talk) 20:11, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
speaking my mind as a traveller: Berlin is surely the European destination I visited the most, and cherish the most, and I'm following this BER trend with a lot of interest since at least 2011. The very tumultuous history leading up to the opening really merits to be digressed. I have already written elsewhere, the subject "Berlin airports" is very thick and rich and chocolatey, since Johannisthal. I'm saddened with the thought of never again arriving or departing at little cozy lovely Tegel, and I'd very gladly help building a "Berlin airports" article up. As for the moment, I'm curious almost to a frenzy about whether the new airport will really start operations on this following weekend. Let's see and then decide, IMHO. Ibaman (talk) 20:41, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
It's certainly an event worth celebrating. I hope they party like it's 2011. ;-) Ground Zero (talk) 20:45, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
As long as the "Terminal 5" situation persists (and it will for a while) the airport is quite complex. It is also busier than the not particularly "hub"-y DUS. Plus someone saw fit to create an article on TXL and we never got around to deleting it.... Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:06, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
Presumably just being a single, larger airport will make the development of a hub more likely in the future.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 21:10, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
The Tegel article isn't all that old, IIRC, but my feeling was always that articles about airports like Tegel or LaGuardia in New York are inessential but fine. I have to make a comment about Dusseldorf Airport, though: It's huge, and I have changed planes from there to Tegel in the past. Anyway, I see no reason to bust people's chops for writing articles about airports that serve major cities and aren't like the 4th or 5th most important and really far flung (so not Islip Airport and so forth). Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:49, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

FYI: I thought food was the best part of travel, I was wrongEdit (koavf)TCM 13:44, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. That's a great story, and I definitely connect to it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:19, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
Ikan Kekek: "I can connect". —Justin (koavf)TCM 17:12, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
@Koavf: Unfortunately even in many places where you can still travel nowadays, restraurants are closed and meeting new people is just about impossible, due to COVID? Ottawahitech (talk) 16:15, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Yes. When we are recommended not to even see our friends, it is not odd that we aren't eager to socialise with strangers. The fewer people you meet, the smaller the risk that some of them carries the disease, and makes you carry it on to some dear one in a risk group. And travellers are hardly the safest one to meet, as they have not stayed isolated in their homes. It is sad, but more or less unavoidable. Thankfully we have the internet. –LPfi (talk) 16:29, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Possible informal discussion for WikiSalon?Edit

We run a monthly small informal online meetup called the Philadelphia WikiSalon. We meet the second Saturday of each month: the next will be November 14. We usually have about 8 people, and spend most of two hours in demonstrations, discussions and questions. There is interest in hearing about different Wiki projects, and we would be interested in having someone drop in to give a quick outline of Wikivoyage. Would anyone be interested in dropping by? It's not formal at all, no need for slides or anything fancy, 5-10 minutes of screen share demo w/ questions would be fine. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 03:15, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

I think more Wikivoyagers are likely to see this if it's in the Travellers' pub, so is it OK with you if I move this there? Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:44, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi, everyone. As you can see, I moved this with permission. Anyone want to do this? Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:01, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Mapshape malfunction detectedEdit

As I was tweaking earlier today (here and here), I happened to notice that markers are not showing on dynamic maps that have the Mapshape template. The mapshape itself does not show either. However, once the template is removed, the markers reappear on the map. I don't understand the code so the best I can do is report this issue. Ibaman (talk) 11:38, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

I see both the maphape masks and markers in both cases (e.g. here), so perhaps some local/temporary issue...? -- 14:58, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
I have the same issues as Ibaman (and don't know how to sign on mobile view...)
It seems that the WFM's mapserver is now stable and working. --RolandUnger (talk) 09:16, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Berlin Brandenburg International AirportEdit

I would appreciate other opinions on which version of some text reads better. Thanks. Ground Zero (talk) 11:48, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Hobbitschuster is refusing to explain his objection, and has reverted thid edit falsely claiming that I made the change "without discussion". Please see the discussion that has been open for a week. It seems that Hobbitschuster and I will not be able to resolve this between us, so another opinion would be appreciated. Ground Zero (talk) 14:57, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
I looked at it when you first posted this, and I couldn't really figure out which thing was the focus of the dispute. I should have asked for more information then. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:44, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
@WhatamIdoing: the edit in question is here. Thank you. Ground Zero (talk) 19:00, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Aknowledge Russia. Novgorod landsEdit

Dear colleagues! I'm happy to present you edit-a-thon competition, that is taking part from November 1 to December 15, 2020 in different language versions of Wikipedia and Wikivoyage. Both of Wiki-projects will have 2 nominations: for articles in Russian, and for articles in other languages with 3 rewardable positions in each. It's organized by Wikimedia Russia and North-West Russia Wiki-Historians UG and its topic will be regions of activity of that UG: Saint Petersburg, the Republic of Karelia, Leningrad Oblast, Pskov Oblast, Novgorod Oblast and Vologda Oblast. Красный (talk) 21:02, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Красный, looks like currently there are only few WV articles there so far... but in any case, it'd be great if some interesting places are covered, to notify us here - we could perhaps xlate it to en:WV (unfortunately I probably cannot help with "real content" for ru:WV, perhaps with some minor technicalities, only)... -- 19:52, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
You also can write articles in en:WV for this competition, if that is what you've tried to ask. We only border the topic of contest, not the language you write in. Красный (talk) 20:02, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
  • We also have a big list of "not so needed, but good to have in any WV" articles. And en-WV only has 10 of them. Красный (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Pages with broken file linksEdit

Hello, fellow editors! Caldas da Rainha is in Category:Pages with broken file links. I'm unable to identify such broken file links in this article. How do I go about doing so? Thank you. --Nricardo (talk) 17:58, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

It was this image, used in a listing template. Images in listing templates mainly appear only when you click on one of the markers on the map, not in the main body of the page, so when there's an issue with one of them it can be a little hard to find. (I found this one by clicking through the markers one at a time until I saw one with red text.) —Granger (talk · contribs) 19:33, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
Thank you, Granger! --Nricardo (talk) 19:55, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Wiki of functions naming contest - Round 2Edit

22:11, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

@Quiddity (WMF): Nice to see you at wikivoyage, but...
I wanted to contact you on your talkpage, but you don't have one on WV, and I cannot write on your meta talkpage. I hope the ping here gets your attention? Ottawahitech (talk) 16:46, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Airport terminal mapshapesEdit

Hi. Could whoever has been doing the mapshapes for airport terminals do their thing at Berlin Brandenburg Airport? It would also be nice to get the map to zoom to the right place, but that's an extra... Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:00, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Philippine languagesEdit

I'm from the Philippines, but could we clarify how should we treat w:Philippine languages here in Wikivoyage? I've been mopping out references to Philippine languages that are not Tagalog as "dialects", and we still not have a firm position on that. After all, referring to the other native languages of the Philippines as dialects is an all-too-common myth (and is disrespectful as well); keeping such references reinforces that and exposes travelers to that misconception (and believing it). --TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 23:23, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

I'd say keep removing such remarks. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:25, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
And plus, there are even some who call English a dialect as well. Fortunately, I haven't encountered that here in WV, though that may get a mention as well in Philippines#Talk.--TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 23:33, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
What would English be called a dialect of? Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:58, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Tagalog/Filipino as well.--TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 00:17, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
That makes no sense. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:11, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
Just for evidence, from an old version of the Calbayog article: "Most people speak and understand English, since the language is taught throughout elementary to college in the Philippines. The local dialect is Waray Waray." I think there are a few other Philippine articles that call some local language as a mere "dialect", but most of those references are now gone.--TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 21:41, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

What is the actual inclusion criteria for the ten most prominent Wikivoyage sites that appear on the front page of

I got curious, after noticing that the one WV site I'm mostly active at.... the Hebrew Wikivoyage, which was previously at the bottom of that list, is now slightly higher at that list (I think it is no. 8 on that list as of now).

Does anyone know what is the inclusion criteria for these ten sites, and by what definition are they sorted by? Specifically I would really what to know what we've done at the Hebrew Wikivoyage in the recent year that made HebVoy not be at the bottom of that list... Is it because we have managed to get a lot more viewers to Hebvoy compared to other Wikivoyage sites that were ranked lower on that list? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 02:35, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

@ויקיג'אנקי: I am also curious: where is the front page (I don't see wv sites on the main page) Ottawahitech (talk) 16:37, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
This question is about WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:46, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
It might be page views or article count, but rather than listening to me guess, I think that MarcoAurelio or Xaosflux can tell you the real answer. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:45, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
@WhatamIdoing: The sorting criteria it's page views per day. Thanks, MarcoAurelio (talk) 16:57, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
See also template. Xaosflux (talk) 17:00, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Interesting to see that the English, German, Italian, Russian,Spanish, Polish, French, Hebrew, Greek and Vietnamese WikiVoyage sites have the most pageviews today. Ottawahitech (talk) 17:14, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
The stats used by the template are those from September, when I last updated them. I am undusting my old Ubuntu laptop to fetch and generate new ones and I'll see if I can update those at least once per month. Regards, --MarcoAurelio (talk) 17:22, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
I've updated the stats and then the portal template. Those changes will go live on Monday morning (UTC) when developers copy and sync. the code from the portals in the servers. --MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:05, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Call for insights on ways to better communicate the work of the movementEdit

ELappen (WMF) (talk) 18:56, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

@ELappen (WMF): Your message confuses me. What movement are you talking about? I remember many talkpage discussions that claimed (rightly or wrongly) that enwiki was not a social network. So is this movement you are talking about confined to small wikis, such as WikiVoyage? Just curious. 16:27, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
The Wikimedia movement, which started with Wikipedia, but now also includes e.g. Wikimedia Commons, Wikisource, Wikibooks and Wikivoyage. It is not a social network, as it instead is a community working for a commons cause, more or less (no, we don't agree on what that cause is exactly). Like a workplace, it still has an important social function for many. –LPfi (talk) 16:37, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Vandals attempting to hijack accountsEdit

There have been 30 attempts to guess my password, and a request to reset my password by an IP. Is this happening to any of you, and what can be done to such abusive IP addresses, when they have no Wikivoyage account? Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:26, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

If I recall, checkuser can be used to see what those ips are DannyS712 (talk) 23:28, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
I have the same situation happening, 8 attempts and 1 request as of the last 24 hours. I changed password anyway, as I do monthly. Ibaman (talk) 23:35, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
Who should be contacted, and with what information? Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:26, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
We don't have any local CheckUsers, so if DannyS712 is right, we would need a steward's help to identify the IP addresses. meta:Steward_requests/Checkuser is the place to ask.
Admins should use strong passwords and two-factor authentication if possible (you can set up two-factor authentication in your preferences). User:WhatamIdoing may know more. —Granger (talk · contribs) 17:18, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
I wonder if it would be simple and straightforward to assign CheckUser status to our bureaucrats (Andre, Evan, IK, Powers etc.), or even to all Wikivoyage admins. It would surely be useful to identify and preempt action by anonymous vandalism sources. Ibaman (talk) 17:28, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Please see mw:Help:Reset password#I’m getting password reset emails that I didn’t request. How do I prevent this from happening? WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:56, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for this. @Ibaman, Ikan Kekek: Looks like this might solve the problem – give it a try and let us know how it goes. —Granger (talk · contribs) 18:34, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
That problem, yes, and thank you, WhatamIdoing. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:06, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
About contacting somebody: The server administrators have access to logs of unsuccessful logins so they have a more complete picture, and can act if there are some especially worrying patterns. I suppose we just have to worry about our own passwords. –LPfi (talk) 20:25, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
A server administrator is a term I never heard before. Is there a place where one could find out what X stewards and Y administrators do? Just curious, Ottawahitech (talk) 16:33, 25 November 2020 (UTC) oh yes add patrolers and rollbackers
Every computer has to be maintained, and it is essential for servers that must not break. You may know the ADMINISTRATOR account on Windows and "root" on Unix. At least some of those doing that kind of maintenance are called developers in the Wikimedia context, but as I don't know whether all are, I used the more general (or specific?) "server administrator". –LPfi (talk) 16:43, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
In Wikimedia parlance, administrators (unqualified) are those who can protect and delete pages and block users. We don't have access to the servers proper, not more than anybody else, via the wiki software interface. Stewards are doing similar things, but in any project, which is good especially for small projects, where no admin may be online. They also have some powers that admins don't have. See meta:Stewards and related pages. –LPfi (talk) 16:58, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Community Wishlist Survey 2021Edit

The 2021 Community Wishlist Survey is now open! This survey is the process where communities decide what the Community Tech team should work on over the next year. We encourage everyone to submit proposals until the deadline on 30 November, or comment on other proposals to help make them better. The communities will vote on the proposals between 8 December and 21 December.

The Community Tech team is focused on tools for experienced Wikimedia editors. You can write proposals in any language, and we will translate them for you. Thank you, and we look forward to seeing your proposals!

SGrabarczuk (WMF) 05:52, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Currency conversions from WikidataEdit

User:Soshial is working on a way to draw up-to-date currency conversion rates from Wikidata for use in the currency boxes of country articles. Can anyone assist? Please see the discussion at Wikivoyage_talk:Cooperating_with_Wikidata#Currency_conversions . Thank you. Ground Zero (talk) 13:32, 20 November 2020 (UTC)


I was looking for prominent/interesting articles to translate to the Hebrew Wikivoyage and I came across the Drones article. Unfortunatly at its current state it is a very short stub, which I think is a shame, as this is a topic that currently is of interest to many people looking to do some drone flying as one of the fun activities they regularly do during various trips they take. I'll be gratefull if some other Voyagers, knowledagble about this topic, would be able to help expand it a bit more (and I'll translate your work to Hebvoy afterwords). ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 22:50, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

I'm actually not sure this article falls within our scope. What, after all, is different about flying drones while travelling than otherwise? I can't see this article evolving much beyond a mix of 1) drone-relevant but not travel-relevant content and 2) a list of jurisdictions where drone flying is legal vs. illegal of the type that belongs on Wikipedia rather than here. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 23:00, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, it's tangential to travel. I don't think the little article that's there now is doing any harm, but I'm not sure I see the point on enlarging on it, unless there are specific regulations about taking drones on planes or other modes of transportation. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:43, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
It is an increasingly difficult subject relevant to tourist spaces (there are many now with drones prohibited signs at tourist locations in Australia for instance) and so complex across a range of interests - legal, administrative and technical - that I agree with Andre being better on wikipedia than here. The actual carying that Ikan identifies, is perhaps as complicated as the requirements for any other technical gizmos when travelling. I am not so sure where that might go. It could get very complicated. JarrahTree (talk) 04:47, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
If many people would consider taking a drone on their travels, I think there indeed is travel related info to include. My impression is there is not a black-and-white legal vs illegal distinction, but more or less tight regulation. I suppose that using a drone could be legal in a country, "except near airfields and security sensitive areas, provided the flight height is low enough and you respect people's privacy". In other countries you might need to have a flight certificate, or keep the drone in sight. Typical restrictions, where to find them etc. might very well be worth an article.
Much of the content could be in a Wikipedia article, but there is currently no one article on this topic, and Wikipedia articles tend to leave out e.g. actual regulations in preference for namedropping them (often without links), and mixing up historic and current regulation. The current w:Regulation of unmanned aerial vehicles has only random pieces of information. There is very much a niche for an article concentrating on practical aspects of using drones across borders at an amateur scale.
Still, it seems we lack the expertise to write and maintain a useful article with more than some remarks and pointers. The current outline (actually: stub) does no harm, but is also of little use. If somebody actually has experience of researching legal aspects and bringing and using a drone abroad, they could probably make it actually useful.
LPfi (talk) 13:00, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
There are often limits on the capacity of Li-Ion batteries that can be carried aboard airplanes. Those are quite commonly set lower than the capacity of even relatively small drones... Hobbitschuster (talk) 13:22, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
Isn't this one of those topics that will just stay as a stub/outline until someone with both passion and knowledge comes along and works on it? As long as it's within scope (which I think it is), there's no harm just waiting for that person to arrive, and if anyone else wants to tinker around at the edges in the meantime, all the better.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 13:36, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
The question in my mind is always "what's a drone"? This might be one of those things that's too complicated and too changeable for a travel guide, but I've seen what I'd call a flying toy for sale in airports, and at least in the past, under some regulations, those were "drones" that would have required registration. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:31, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
I've met a lot of people who are travelling with drones. Because a lot of drones seem to be noisy enough to wreck the serenity of a place, I'm in favour of the "no drones" policies that are being adopted, and not interested in writing an article about them. But i think that they are very much in scope. Ground Zero (talk) 18:58, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
Yes, that's a problem. Writing a good guide that emphasises the ethics might not make the problem worse, though, except if people are droning specifically those serene places. But you are probably right. The drone uses I have been thinking about are all such that they are better done by locals, e.g. the aerial images of all guest harbours of the Great Barbour Book (the yachters' Bible over here, produced by volunteers), or WMSE documenting Kiruna before relocation – those are just one drone session per site, and some others not that much more. –LPfi (talk) 20:31, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Jan Morris has diedEdit

This is her final interview: (koavf)TCM 07:59, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

@Koavf:Thanks for sharing that. Trieste is high on my travel list because of her book. Ground Zero (talk) 13:54, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Global bot policy proposal: invitation to a Meta discussionEdit

Why the apology for posting in English on an English-language website? A bot that knows what language each wiki is in might be handy :-) --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:52, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
MassMessage is rather limited in its ability to customize messages. So the minority of English-language wikis (sometimes) get apologies that are meant for others, and the majority get messages in English. There are two complex scripts that will deliver translated messages, but even with that, MassMessage can't figure out how to translate the subject heading. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:26, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
As you know, WhatamIdoing, I am also concerned about massmessages posted by Global users who have no local talkpage and can therefore not be easily reachable.
However, I am glad you piped in because I have a question about this particular massmessage: Why is fixing a double redirect so important? Ideally, if it does not require huge resources, I believe it is better to leave redirects alone to maintain history. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 15:47, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Ottawahitech. A double redirect happens like this:
  1. Write the article at A.
  2. Move the article to B (A is automatically redirected to B).
  3. Move the article C (B is automatically redirected to C).
At the end of this chain, A redirects to B which redirects again ("double") to C. If you search for/go to A, MediaWiki will not take you through B to C. It will take you to B and show you the redirect page. To get to C, you have to click the redirect link for C.
MediaWiki software doesn't send you straight through because, if it did, you could end up with an endless loop of A redirects to B, which redirects back to A, which is bad for the servers.
Wikipedia editors decided a long time ago that readers probably didn't want to end up at a redirect page, and that they were bad at remembering to search for and find prior redirects to fix them. Also, it's boring work. Therefore they wrote bots that change the redirect from A to B to be a redirect from A directly to C. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:45, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

"Best of" in the region pagesEdit

As all know, WV doesn't have enough editors and we definitely don't have editors in each country nor region of country... For longest time, it bugged me that WV doesn't have functionality like some competitors, where you can easily find highlights of a region. For example, if one arrives to Landes, using WV it's very hard to find what to see there. OTOH, a nearby region Dordogne has quite nice "See" section with the overview. Could we do something about it, without having region-local experts - any idea? We still have no listing "rating" functionality, so that's off the table.

Only thing I came up with is using some incoming users data, if that's available to us. E.g. if someone comes from google, is it possible to find out what were they searching before clicking our article? Or get some search data from mediawiki? (if even someone uses that) I guess we would need per-region histogram of most searched terms... Perhaps it's not worth it/not nearly possible, or worthless data, dunno - comments are welcome. -- 20:18, 25 November 2020 (UTC)