User talk:Globe-trotter/Archives

Active discussions

Hello Globe-trotter! Welcome to Wikivoyage.

To help get you started contributing, we've created a tips for new contributors page, full of helpful links about policies and guidelines and style, as well as some important information on copyleft and basic stuff like how to edit a page. If you need help, check out Project:Help, or post a message in the travellers' pub.

I just noticed that you were never welcomed! I've now rectified that ;) --(WT-en) Peter Talk 20:54, 9 October 2008 (EDT)


HillversumEdit

You're doing really nice work on Hilversum! I look forward to seeing where you take it. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 22:32, 24 April 2009 (EDT)

I'd like to echo Peter's comment. You've made some great improvements to Hilversum! (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 01:16, 27 July 2009 (EDT)
And in case you didn't notice, Hilversum has now been nominated for Destination of the Month—contgratulations! --(WT-en) Peter Talk 17:39, 3 August 2009 (EDT)


Gooi VechtstreekEdit

I'm not too sure what happened here. Did you mean to wind up with a blank article? --(WT-en) Peter Talk 17:29, 3 August 2009 (EDT)

I messed it up, the page has to be deleted, but I don't know how that works. The original article is Gooi and Vecht Region. (WT-en) Globe-trotter 01:02, 4 August 2009 (EDT)

Netherlands regionsEdit

Just double checking whether you meant to replace your earlier comment here [1]. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 13:50, 7 August 2009 (EDT)

Yes, I meant that haha. I changed my opinion :) (WT-en) Globe-trotter 13:53, 7 August 2009 (EDT)

Lumphini Park?Edit

Why did you move Lumphini Park out of Bangkok/Silom into Sukhumvit? It's right next to Silom and there's even an MRT exit from Silom station into the park. (WT-en) Jpatokal 06:54, 11 August 2009 (EDT)

In the article of Sukhumvit, it says: For the purposes of this article, the Sukhumvit district is defined broadly to include everything south of Phetchaburi Rd (Phayonyothin) and north of Rama IV (Silom). Lumpini Park is north of Rama IV, so I figured it would go there. (WT-en) Globe-trotter 07:18, 11 August 2009 (EDT)
You're allowed to use common sense here, and that sentence is supposed to mean that "everything between Silom and Phayonyothin is Sukhumvit". I'm moving it back. Nevermind, it looks like you already did... (WT-en) Jpatokal 23:37, 11 August 2009 (EDT)

Thanks...Edit

...for helping clean up Bangkok, that data dump from TAT (all the random listings on the main page) has been a real bitch to get sorted out. (WT-en) Jpatokal 03:20, 15 August 2009 (EDT)

Yes, it's an absolute mess and should be cleaned up. I suggested Bangkok as a CotM to make it better, as the potential is definitely there. (WT-en) Globe-trotter 10:37, 15 August 2009 (EDT)
At the rate you're working on it, you'll be finished before it can be selected for CotM! But why'd you nuke eg. the Bamboo Bar from Rattanakosin? (WT-en) Jpatokal 03:00, 20 August 2009 (EDT)
With the new Yaowarat region, I figured the Bangrak area could not be with Rattanakosin anymore, as it would make a strange island west of Silom. I think Bangrak would fit better with Silom anyway, as Oriental is like 300 meters from Silom Rd. We could add this part to the Yaowarat district as well, but I think it's not a Chinese area. I made the districts like this: http://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Image:Bangkok_regions.png , though I am still working on it. I'd like to have some suggestions on the regions, whether they're OK, what to change, etc. As I am still working on it. (WT-en) Globe-trotter 07:54, 20 August 2009 (EDT)
Talk:Bangkok#Regions.2Fdistricts_of_Bangkok (WT-en) Jpatokal 07:58, 20 August 2009 (EDT)
Did my best to root out the Do section, though there are probably room for improvement :) one section (Cultural Performances) needs a re-writeup since I moved out all the listings to districts, not in a small part thanks to your awesome map, but at any rate, I think it's an improvement. Just imagine if we could save another major destination like we did Rome. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 19:35, 15 September 2009 (EDT)

Radio HilversumEdit

Great page on Hilversum. For those of my generation (55+) Radio Hilversum was a mark on a dial of the old-fashioned valve radios. That was about all we knew of the place. You indicate it was a media town but might like to specifically mention why Hilversum appeared on all our radios. While you are at it, I don't understand the phrase >the notorious infrastructure system< and you should correct "amount" of people to number of people.(WT-en) Shep 14:30, 15 September 2009 (EDT)

Status of Ubud ArticleEdit

I see that you reverted my edit which changed the status of this article from guide to usable. Why is that please? The article does not closely follow the Wikivoyage manual of style which is a requirement for guide status. Virtually every listing in this article is a bullet with random prose. Very few listing templates are used which is surely a requirement? I made this point when changing the status on the article talk page --(WT-en) Burmesedays 09:44, 21 September 2009 (EDT)

Climbing Mount BatukaruEdit

It is arguable either way. Personally I prefer it in the Tabanan article which I designed to cover the western part of the central region. You are correct that with the road through Jatiluwih now being passable, Mount Batukaru is accessible from south of Bedugul. Lots of folk approach the climb from Sanda though (I have climbed the mountain 3 times from this direction) and the start of that ascent route is not accessible from Bedugul. If it does go into the Bedugul article then the preamble to the Bedugul article will need to be changed and Pura Luhur Batukaru would also need to be moved. From a purely practical viewpont that would also leave the Tabanan article very thinly spread.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 10:40, 21 September 2009 (EDT)

Netherlands mapEdit

Just a heads up so you don't miss this comment. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 16:55, 19 October 2009 (EDT)

Hilversum mapEdit

Has this map been changed yet? ( I dont know what it looked like before so can't check for myself) (WT-en) Peter (Southwood) Talk 16:18, 29 October 2009 (EDT)

Hilversum makes it to StardomEdit

Hilversum appears to be accepted for star status. See the nominations page. Congratulations on your efforts. -- (WT-en) Peter (Southwood) Talk 01:39, 8 November 2009 (EST)

Don't forget to add the star to the top of the article. =) (WT-en) LtPowers 10:37, 9 November 2009 (EST)


New Bangkok mapEdit

Thanks for your work on Bangkok. Please have a look at comments here. Thanks! (WT-en) Texugo 22:24, 6 December 2009 (EST)

London BoroughsEdit

Why did you delete the audit update of where we stand with London boroughs from Talk:London? I am finding it very difficult to navigate that discussion and think it really helpful to have an updated list (which others can correct or add to). I am thinking it may have been a mistake (?) so am reverting for now. Cheers :) --(WT-en) Burmesedays 09:05, 8 December 2009 (EST)

No problems.. I figured as much. That sort of thing happens to me here sometimes when I have multiple screens open. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 09:29, 8 December 2009 (EST)

West BaliEdit

I noticed that you bulleted the See and Do sections of West Bali. I had understood that the See and Do sections of a region article should be in prose format and not listed bullet points? See here for example. Cheers. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 10:00, 10 December 2009 (EST)

Thailand MapEdit

That is a very nice map! Great work. And I must say, the colour scheme goes beautifully with its neigbours Cambodia and Laos. Very well done. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 08:10, 15 December 2009 (EST)

Oceania regionsEdit

Why change countries to regions? They are all countries in the list. Regions should go above when Melanesia, Micronesia and Polynesia are discussed. (WT-en) Shep 06:47, 23 December 2009 (EST)

PatrollingEdit

Hey Globe-trotter,

Seeing all the work you've done on the CoTM, I'd like to point you to another task that could really need some help - the Recent changes patrol. As I've just pointed out in the pub, at the moment me and Burmesedays seem to be doing the lions share of the patrolling, but the more users involved in this, the less tedious it gets - the ultimate goal is making sure no edits go unpatrolled - About a quarter sometimes up to half the edits on English wikivoyage, are ones that need to be reverted, so it's a pretty essential task to keeping WT clean and useful for everyone.

If you want to help, try go to your preferences (up on the top right), once there select the recent changes tab and check the "Enhanced recent changes (JavaScript)" option. If you go back to the recent changes page now, edits will be grouped together, and edits that has not yet been patrolled will be marked with a red exclamation mark on the left side of the time-stamp in the summary. If there are any red exclamation marks try clicking on "(diff/X changes)" and above the summary you'll be able to click [Mark as patrolled] if everything is in order, or (undo) if it's spam, vandalism or touting - if unsure just leave it and someone else will come along and check it.

Of-course everyone one is welcome to contribute with whatever they feel like doing, just wanted to make sure you knew about his task. The more users involved in making sure there are no red exclamation marks on the recent changes page, the less tedious it get's. Personally I think a good approach is clicking on the "diff/X changes" on everything unpatrolled while holding down the ctrl button to open them all in new tabs, and then just go through them methodically

Cheers, --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 21:17, 28 December 2009 (EST)

London cotmEdit

Since you were so instrumental in making the London cotm our most successful collaboration of all time, I thought you might like to look over the results. Thanks again for your help! --(WT-en) Peter Talk 14:13, 1 January 2010 (EST)

How to draw a mapEdit

I have finally re-written this and would be grateful for any input you have (especially as I used your Thailand map as an example :) ). My thinking is on Peter's talk page, so I will not clutter your page and repeat it here. Cheers. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 07:55, 8 January 2010 (EST)

tyEdit

--(WT-en) Ola346 14:45, 8 January 2010 (EST)

Israel mapEdit

I just realized that we didn't list the Territories as a country needing a regions map, but it would be nice if you could create one for them from your Israel SVG, graying out the de jure Israeli side, but preserving the visual info regarding de facto control. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 17:13, 13 January 2010 (EST)

Ah, and you should see Talk:Gaza Strip#Strip vs City vs nothing. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 17:18, 13 January 2010 (EST)
Yes, looks great! The only thing I'd recommend (for the Israel map as well) would be to increase the text size on the key—it's very hard to read right now, and it might be possible to get it large enough where it could be readable in-article. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 17:34, 13 January 2010 (EST)
Really good job on both of those maps GT. Really good. For the text in the key box you might want to look for a more condensed font or play with the kerning. It ought to be somehow possible to make that text readable in-article. Great job. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 21:04, 13 January 2010 (EST)

Diacritic-letters in article namesEdit

Although I don't want to nitpick around, given the explicit permission to use diacritic letters at the second sentence of Project:Naming_conventions#Romanization, I have to admit that I do not entirely agree with you in your unilateral action of moving Uludağ to Uludag and I am not entirely satisfied with the explanation of "moved as the character is not used in wikivoyage".—(WT-en) Vidimian 19:34, 25 January 2010 (EST)

I already moved it back, you are completely spot on. This is the reason I started that topic there, to get some more clarity on the issue. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 21:15, 25 January 2010 (EST)

ThailandEdit

Good call, finally someone taking the bull by its horns and start sorting out this mess. A round of applause from me good sir :o) --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 11:36, 2 February 2010 (EST)

I second that and will be helping soon! Shouldn't Thailand be the CotM for February? Or did I dream that? --(WT-en) Burmesedays 11:39, 2 February 2010 (EST)
Thanks! It is the CotM for February :) --(WT-en) globe-trotter 11:46, 2 February 2010 (EST)
And a khop khun khrap from me as well! I'm really glad you're doing this. (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:25, 5 February 2010 (EST)
How much work are you planning to do on Ayutthaya‎? I find the "See" listings are actually surprisingly informative, but I saw just now you are planning to add your own descriptions - what gives? automatic reaction to all the junk they've uploaded, or are you planning some really thorough work here? --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 12:08, 7 February 2010 (EST)
Yes, I know this is the most rigorous move I've done, but as I wrote in the description, I'm going to give it a big overhaul throughout the month. The listings are still on the Talk page, will also use that information to make something nice of the See section. As you might see, it's more of a mess than it looks-- some sights are even listed twice! --(WT-en) globe-trotter 12:30, 7 February 2010 (EST)
I think the general principle of sticking all the TAT stuff, good and bad, onto a Talk/Listing page is smart. It is then easy for any user to go to that page, pick out the useful bits and place them back into the article. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 04:32, 8 February 2010 (EST)

Hi! I work for almost a year on Ko Samui and saw you made some bigger edits. I'm fine in general with your edits but will do a partly revert on the medical part as this is important for travellers. There are so many accidents and people should at least know some of the more reliable clinics... (WT-en) jan 04:22, 8 February 2010 (EST)

I listingified the hospitals listed now, a big improvement from the situation before I think! (with 20 hospitals we were not far off from being the Yellow Pages..) --(WT-en) globe-trotter 11:38, 8 February 2010 (EST)

Sorry, I have to heavily disagree with you on this issue. Why are you removing the information about Thailand from TAT into the reaches where normal users can't find them? (i.e. history or talk page) They've proven extremely useful for me (I've spent here working and travelling over a year), as only thanks to them I have discovered some really great sites off the beaten path no foreigner even knows about! The TAT listings of hotels are very informative and give perfect pricing overview, along with names/addresses. I think you're doing not a good job at all by simply removing it. Also, I don't understand the redirection of the provincial pages to provincial capitals since provinces are so much bigger and contain information on different regions (March 12, 2010)

I have not removed any information, I have moved the TAT dump to the Talk pages because it was a quicker way to sort out Thailand. Just look at how Thailand was 6 months ago, probably the most messed up country on all of Wikivoyage. You can still access all the information.
About the listings, when people who actually travelled to the destinations add information back, they will add personal traveler experience and improve all the articles. What happened before is that TAT placed all the listings in there (neglecting the Wikivoyage Manual of Style) without adding any information on services, pricing, positives and negatives, etc. This doesn't give an incentive to other Wikivoyagers to contribute and thus led to Thailand not further improving (instead for a few articles which TAT mess up — such as Mae Salong. If you have visited a listing, add it and put a good description to improve the articles.
The provinces is a bit the same story. The provinces are not proper travel regions, because they are very fragmented. In Wikivoyage we use regional groupings with about 9 cities in them. Most provinces in Thailand evolve around one city, for example Lopburi. Lopburi does not only cover the Amphoe Lopburi, but it also covers other attractions in the vicinity. Wikivoyage does not follow the regions a country uses, simply because they happen not to be practical. I think the way its done now, Thailand is cleaned up nicely, we have proper travel regions and the articles look interesting again. But anyhow, please plunge forward and improve them the way you see fit. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 04:29, 12 March 2010 (EST)
Our Thailand scheme is unrecognisably superior to the mess it was in a month ago. That excellent structural work has gone hand-in-hand with cleaning up the articles. If there are specific listings from the TAT data dump that you wish to see back in the articles, (only those for which you have personal experience), then please do reinstate them. Everything has been kept, as globe-trotter explained. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 04:37, 12 March 2010 (EST)

I note you're still keeping an eye on Nakhon Ratchasima. I've been working on it single-handedly for ther past few months. It was just a big, messy, skeletal list when I started on it but it's coming along now. Any advice regarding the article is always welcome (it gets pretty lonely slogging away on an article alone!) and a fresh pair of eyes may notice problems/omissions/deficiencies that I can't. Obviously, things like bars and restaurants still need filling up but any other constructive criticism is always welcome. (WT-en) Promphong 04:13, 16 June 2010 (EDT)

Talk:Berlin#District_StructureEdit

Hi! How about my proposal? (WT-en) jan 12:27, 18 February 2010 (EST)

Hi! I replied on the talk page. (WT-en) jan 11:59, 29 March 2010 (EDT)
Hi! Thank you for the districtification of Berlin. I think we might had a misunderstanding but Schöneberg is part of City West as discussed on the talk page which was also agreed so and is so in the map. You moved the Schöneberg part to South which is wrong. I changed the affiliation. (WT-en) jan 10:23, 31 March 2010 (EDT)
Thanks for notifying me of this mistake, oops! I guess I got a bit confused when moving the info :) Also thanks for the edits you've made. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 11:44, 31 March 2010 (EDT)

Bangkok mapEdit

Whoah! This looks amazing. (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:07, 23 February 2010 (EST)

Thanks! :D Put a lot of work in it and it turned out nicely :) --(WT-en) globe-trotter 06:22, 24 February 2010 (EST)

Admin nominationEdit

I have just nominated you for admin. Please comment there to let us know if you accept! --(WT-en) Peter Talk 19:32, 8 March 2010 (EST)

Western SaharaEdit

You deserve a medal for volunteering to do that map. And I thought Mauritania was boring =). --(WT-en) Burmesedays 10:05, 10 March 2010 (EST)

Yes, sometimes I don't know what I'm thinking :D :P --(WT-en) globe-trotter 11:00, 10 March 2010 (EST)

Samui South CoastEdit

You are right, that was a mistake. I was confused by the region template being used. I think we should use the city template for this kind of articles, --(WT-en) ClausHansen 09:40, 15 March 2010 (EDT)

AdminEdit

Welcome to the admin club! Check out the Project:Administrator's handbook for how to use your shiny new buttons. (WT-en) Jpatokal 07:01, 28 March 2010 (EDT)

Thanks! :D --(WT-en) globe-trotter 08:18, 28 March 2010 (EDT)

RomaniaEdit

Sorry, I reverted. (WT-en) Mistertalk 15:10, 29 March 2010 (EDT)

Thank you! (WT-en) Mistertalk 15:24, 29 March 2010 (EDT)

Thailand articlesEdit

Dear Globe-trotter,

I appreciate your work at Wikivoyage, but I strongly disagree with the way of handling the TAT information. I consider myself pretty much a skilled user, but it took me almost a month where the amazing listings (yes, I've visited many of the places) have been disappearing. Simply removing it (I had to fish for it in the History) is what I consider vandalism. Sorry for the harsh words, but removing it also removes it from the search index and if the user wants to find some information on some local stuff, he/she is left with city article with virtually no useful information.

What I propose is following: Putting back the articles with a template such as this one: This article or section does not match our manual of style or needs other editing. Please plunge forward, give it your attention and help it improve! This way, people would be able to learn about the stuff, visit it (such as I did) and later contribute and write about it. Look , I've spent in Thailand over a year and traveled somewhat extensively especially in the south. Had you deleted the articles soone, I wouldn'tve had a clue as to what to visit, how to get there, I wouldn't've had any ideas for all the perfect trips I could do, using TAT information (hotels, local waterfalls, islands, tunnels, etc...) So, in turn, I wouldn't be able to contribute about it later! The TAT listings are actually very informative and from my own experience I can say they truly hepled find some of the real gems of Thai South (and also other parts of Thailand, to a certain extent).

Tomas

All the TAT information is still there on the relevant talk pages. The structure of the articles was awful with the TAT listings, but I am pleased you managed to find some useful information from that. I would encourage you to go to the TAT information and reinstate to the main articles anything that you found helpful in the real world. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 22:09, 29 March 2010 (EDT)
I knew that getting the Thailand articles and structure cleaned up would get some resistance, but eventually it has all been for the better. Thailand is one of the most visited countries in Asia and its reflection on Wikivoyage has been worse than could be expected from a major destination like it. The reason has been that all the articles were a complete mess — thats why I put so many hours into cleaning them up, and hope to encourage other travellers to add their own travel experiences instead of these enormous lists. No listings are removed at all, they can still be found on the Talk pages (or by visiting TAT), and I did that to encourage users to place back the listings with their own useful information. Placing the style tag already happened in many articles, but no one is willing to sort out thousands of listings (for obvious reasons, just moving them to the Talk pages has taken up many many many hours, days and weeks). Anyway, the Thailand articles will now organically grow over time with useful information from travellers themselves instead of being a Yellow Pages-like mess. Please plunge forward and add your valuable experiences, thats eventually what Wikivoyage is for :) --(WT-en) globe-trotter 22:51, 29 March 2010 (EDT)
You may have missed my point. Sorry my post is long, but please read it till the end. Actually, all information was useful for me. I'll try and give an example: See Kamphaeng Phet page now. There's virtually no information. Suppose I am an ordinary PC user and don't know anything about history in wiki. How do I know what am I supposed to visit? However, if I take a look at TAT stuff, I can find that for example Khlong Lan National Park interests me. I can find great deal of information on history of the Old City, wealth of information on other interesting sites to choose from. How can I start contributing, if I don't know where to go in the first place?
Another example: Take Yala province and TAT hotels listing. From the list I can easily see price range and addresses and decide where I will spend a night and presonally information like "You can choose a 'kareoke' girl off of the wall when you come in for 200 baht, but that's standard around these parts." I consider totally off-topic.
Another one: Trang has amazing waterfalls. It was very easy for me to work out a detailed itinerary from TAT listings. And actually the idea to visit them came solely from TAT information - before it was moved (I spent a good deal of time finding it later, but I already knew it was there). Now there's no way I would even get a notion that there are some waterfalls in Trang (apart from an IMHO vague remark in the 'See' section, much less how to get there to actually see them. Again, consider people are not so skilled as to visit talk/history page.
P.S. I'd gladly plunge in and improve some articles as soon as I finish traveling. But please, leave some information for normal users there, so they now, where they can go! Or put a big sign, or something - the info from TAT is here and here. But better still I'd recommend to keep it back, although I realize you spent many hours removing it - so that I can, say, search for attraction like Khao Luang National Park and it'd come up in search results. Now I only get Khao San (hardly an attraction). But I visited the real Khao Luang NP and Ban Khiri Wong in Nakhon and again, thanks to TAT. Now I wouldn't have had a clue Ban Khiri Wong exists because the search for Khao luang would come up empty. Am I being a little clearer now?
Conclusion:
1) A common PC user doesn't have a clue about History/Talk page or TAT, let alone their website.
2) Interesting places are not indexed now; so how can people visit them if they do not know about them?
3) It erodes (at least) my trust in WT. Now I feel like I have to see the history of every information-poor page. --(WT-en) Babach 04:17, 30 March 2010 (EDT)
You can use the strong language, but I perfectly understood your point the first time. My advise is the same: if you want to add all the TAT information back in a proper manner, I am all for it. Turn the articles into something nice, such as Mae Salong. Just dumping enormous messy lists will disencourage other Wikivoyagers to add their own listings, not encourage them as you imply. We have seen many examples of this before in Wikivoyage, just look at the history of the Sleep section in Rome. Thailand was one of the most neglected destinations in Asia, and the messy state of decay they were in have contributed to that fact. Listing hundreds of Sleep and other listings is not a goal of Wikivoyage.
1) That's only their loss if they don't know how Wikivoyage works, our job is to make a great travel guide, not to be the Yellow Pages or tourist agency. Wikiravel has a different goal.
2) It works like this for every destination. Wikivoyage articles start out blank, travellers add their experience and the article organically grows. We don't start out dumping tourist agency listings in every Wikivoyage article, we start out empty and let travellers add their own experiences.
3) You don't have to look in the history, all listings are perfectly listed in the corresponding Talk page.
The three examples are exactly how it works: you have visited them, please plunge forward and make the articles shine. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 12:11, 30 March 2010 (EDT)

BangkokEdit

Hi (WT-en) globe-trotter, please use 43°C (110°F) or 110°F (43°C) in places like the US (as per Project:Manual of style). BTY nice work on that article. (WT-en) felix 21:22, 9 November 2010 (EST)

I appears was only half right. My apologies, upon my reading of the Project:Measurements I note that both forms are considered acceptable.According to the Temperature styleguide the following is how temperatures should be displayed. I had already edited the section before I went and checked. Although personally I dislike the WT manual of style interpretion of times I do think that the 43°C (110°F) or 110°F (43°C) form works better than spelling it out. If my edit offends you are quite entitled to undo it as you are establishing the temp formatting for that article with your edits. (WT-en) felix 21:44, 9 November 2010 (EST)
from Project:Measurements
  • Celsius = degrees Celsius or °C
  • Fahrenheit = degrees Fahrenheit or °F

Nahr_al-BaredEdit

Regarding this edit, please use Talk:Nahr al-Bared for further discussion as the archive pages are meant solely to archive completed discussions. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 17:05, 16 May 2010 (EDT)

Ampersands in article namesEdit

Wikivoyage has issues with ampersands in article names, so I've moved West Estonia & Islands to West Estonia and Islands. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:45, 26 May 2010 (EDT)

Thanks! :) --(WT-en) globe-trotter 14:22, 27 May 2010 (EDT)

Speedy deletesEdit

Per Project:Deletion policy#Speedy deletion there is no need to list speedy deletes on the VFD page. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 12:10, 20 June 2010 (EDT)

Ah allright thanks. I thought it was still required. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 12:15, 20 June 2010 (EDT)

VlaamsEdit

Would you mind going over AndreasAndreas' recent edits on Flemish? Given his erroneous insistence that Swedes and Scandinavians can communicate effortless with Germans in their respective native languages, and his vigorous Austro-Bavarian crusade, I don't have much faith in his linguistic additions.

Yes this seems to be a user with a linguistic agenda. I've changed some of his recent edits, especially in the Flanders article. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 08:04, 29 June 2010 (EDT)

Offline discussionEdit

I'd like to add you to an ongoing Google Wave discussion relevant for admins, but would need to reach you by email. To preserve your anonymity, you could create an ad hoc email account, associate it with your Wikivoyage account, and then email me. I will reply to that email with a Google Wave invitation, for which you can also create an ad hoc @googlewave.com account, to continue to preserve your anonymity. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 08:54, 8 July 2010 (EDT)

New Orleans/Other parts of townEdit

Good day. Could you please explain on the talk page (or link to a Wikivoyage policy explaining) what the major problem is with New Orleans/Other parts of town? Thanks much. Cheers, (WT-en) Infrogmation 20:16, 31 August 2010 (EDT)

Laem YaiEdit

Hi g-t! A anon user has started a new district/beach in Ko Samui which i suspect is the hotel terrace management. I haven't been to Thailand since early 2009 so i'm a bit uncertain if this has really developed? I would delete vfd it but maybe development is really fast at the island. What are your thoughts? (WT-en) jan 10:37, 14 September 2010 (EDT)

I'm not really well-known in that area, but it seems like there is not that much to do there. At least not enough to warrant its own article. I'd say we merge it into Nathon. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 16:36, 14 September 2010 (EDT)

Map over HungaryEdit

Hi Globe-Trotter! Sv: is working on the guide to Hungary and we really like your map. However - it needs to be translated into swedish. If I provide you with the swedish name tags, would you like to help out, using your english map as its base? I have no idea how to create maps... hence my question.

  • CZECH REP = TJECKIEN
  • SLOVAKIA=SLOVAKIEN
  • UKR=UKR (in swedish: UKRAINA)
  • AUSTRIA=ÖSTERRIKE
  • ROMANIA=RUMÄNIEN
  • SLO=SLO (in swedish: SLOVENIEN)
  • CROATIA = KROATIEN
  • SERBIA (Vojvodina)=SERBIEN (Vojvodina)
  • SERBIA=SERBIEN
  • BOSNIA AND HERCEGOVINA=BOSNIEN-HERCEGOVINA
  • Transdanubia=Transdanubien
  • Lake Balaton= Balatonsjön
  • Central Hungary=Centrala Ungern
  • Northern Hungary=Norra Ungern
  • Great Plain=Stora ungerska slättlandet
  • Belgrade=Belgrad

Thanks a million! (WT-en) Riggwelter 12:36, 19 September 2010 (EDT)

Khao San RoadEdit

Hi. Fantastic work on Bangkok. I wish I had your attention to detail. Just checking Khao San Road as I am due to be at an early meeting on Phra Atit in a couple of weeks and want to avoid possible traffic jams when heading there. A couple of points seem to be in contradiction of Wikivoyage rules. The Banglumpho market photo has a recognisable individual in the photo and I thought the rules forbid photos of businesses. Is the Tom Yum Kung restaurant sign that remarkable? Anyway, keep up the great work. (WT-en) Shep 14:23, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

I believe the "no faces in pictures" rule does not apply to markets, as there will always be people walking around there in public. See [2]. If this is still a problem, I can also use another image, as I have some others of the Banglampoo Market as well.
About the pictures of businesses, I really wouldn't know how else to make the Eat, Drink and Sleep section more interesting. I did not add the Tom Yum Kung picture for promotion, but to give an idea of the sign-chaos at Khao San Road at night. If this goes against policy, it could be removed, but I think its a nice picture to fill up the gap. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 15:07, 22 September 2010 (EDT)
I'm certainly not insisting as I am not very good at following the rules myself. Rather, I was pointing out what some of the more pedantic Wikivoyagers might highlight. (WT-en) Shep 09:41, 23 September 2010 (EDT)

Bangkok/Yaowarat and Pahurat Star nominationEdit

It is now over a month since the last comment, and there don't seem to be any unresolved problems. Go ahead and clap on the Star. -- (WT-en) Peter (Southwood) Talk 04:05, 14 October 2010 (EDT)

Bangkok climate editsEdit

Globetrotter, yes you are correct about the apostrophe usage 1900s vis-à-vis 1900's. I must have had a delusional apostrophic moment but please try not to be so offensive. It was an aberrant yet in good faith edit. I am quite sufficiently capable of reading and writing in the English language. I do not concur that I need to "learn" English as you have suggested as I already have a sufficiently adequate grasp of the language to engage in day to day communications. Sufficient at least to be able to comment that the short section on the climate of Bangkok is very clumsy in style and a little verbose in the method of delivering the required information. I note that you have recently done a considerable amount of very good work on that article. I have not dwelt upon the edit histories to confirm if you are directly responsible for the content of the section dealing with the climate in Bangkok, (such as "around or over 30°C (86°F)". However, that section on climate is lacking the finesse of the rest of the content you have been adding and would certainly benefit from a thorough re-write. As you apparently consider my linguistic skills to be inadequate I will leave you to take care of that yourself without any impediment that may arise from my own perceived insufficiencies. (WT-en) felix 02:21, 15 November 2010 (EST)

The "learn English before changing" was solely meant for this edit, not on your English language skills as a whole. And you're completely right that I shouldn't have responded this way. That said, if you feel like you can improve the article, go ahead and make the appropriate changes. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 21:41, 15 November 2010 (EST)

time to celebrate Bangkok?Edit

I put a lot of work in it the last months. Bangkok now scores the number 1 place on "bytes per district"

BTW, isn't it time to celebrate the milestone yet? ;-) --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 01:31, 28 November 2010 (EST)

Okay :D --(WT-en) globe-trotter 02:37, 28 November 2010 (EST)

EmailsEdit

Just a heads up that I sent you a couple emails that urgently need your attention! --(WT-en) Peter Talk 17:15, 28 November 2010 (EST)

Please kindly explain why you keep the wrong info about Internet serviceEdit

Dear Globe trottter,

With all my respect,we are really thankful to you to promote and write good article about Rattanakosin Island area. It's very helpful for all readers.However, we don't understand why you keep adding the same content about internet service at Niras Bankoc.It's totally untrue that we charge guests for internet 1 baht per min. All we have is just free wifi internet connection for all guests with thier own laptop or notebook.If they have no any device, we always recommend guests the cheap solution to use internet cafe next door .It's very cheap 20 baht for 1 hour. This also proves that it's quite impossible for us to charge guests the internet for expensive rate. Sometimes we even give the front desk's working desktop for guests to use for free in case of emergency or even free print out document. It would be great if you reply us your explanation for doing this or if you or your friend are our old guest and experienced the unfair internet charge, please let us know when you or your friend stayed and which our staff who charge you the internet.We will investigate about this issue. Thank you for your understanding.

Regards, Niras Bankoc Hostel

I just add back the information that was already present. I think we can safely remove the bit about the bad computers, but you also keep adding and modifying other information that is clearly wrong. For instance, that it is a short and easy walk to the Grand Palace -- this is totally unjustified as it is at least a 30 minutes walk and some roads don't have sidewalks (including Bamrung Muang Road). I am very familiar with this area. But I agree with you that maybe it's better to stay with the facts instead of these subjective judgements. Let me try to make some changes to this end. Maybe I'll also come over and have some coffee sometime to check out the place myself. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 05:20, 22 December 2010 (EST)

Dear Globe trottter, Thank you for your understanding and re-editing.Our key request is only to remove the wrong information about internet although we are still very confused about internet charge.It's very unacceptable because we like other travellers also really hate all all hidden charge or even we always keep warning our guests about scams in Bangkok.About walking distance to the grand palace,it might be subjective thing but it's okay..no big deal. You may find more honest reviews from our real guests on hostelworld or hostelbookers or search "niras bankoc" you may find some bloggers talked about us. If you have a chance,please feel free to visit our hostel and coffee shop to prove the truth about our hostel.

Could you correct the information about who made wine first in Europe ?Edit

On the page about Europe when you move down to information about wine the information is incorrect . Republic of Georgia has 7000 years of wine history and the Republic of Moldova and Romania have 6000 years of wine history. Experts in wine all agree that the people who first produced wine are from the region where Georgia is today and the Dacian people made wine before the people from Greece, so it was not the people from Greece that made wine first as listed in the wine information . Thanks from a wine importer in Chisinau Moldova .

Anyone can edit information on Wikivoyage, so plunge forward and change it yourself! --(WT-en) globe-trotter 23:43, 26 December 2010 (EST)

Japan status reversionEdit

Hi Globe-trotter. I might have been too hasty in reverting on that one. I take your point. I didn't even notice that it had been districted (for lack of coloured squares and colour coded map). As far as it being a guide, it is complete enough, just the formatting could use a polish (in my opinion). I will un-revert it anyway. - (WT-en) Cardboardbird 07:41, 29 December 2010 (EST)


Khao San Road MapEdit

I have re-uploaded the svg, but there seems to be a problem and I dont know what to do about it. Please try opening it and let me know if it works. • • • (WT-en) Peter (Southwood) Talk 01:37, 10 January 2011 (EST)

TryavnaEdit

Thank you for your edits to my work on the Tryavna entry. (WT-en) RobertSullivan1973 02:35, 14 January 2011 (EST)

Anytime! It's starting to look good :) --(WT-en) globe-trotter 05:51, 14 January 2011 (EST)

DotM FrankfurtEdit

Hi! May i ask you a favour? We are a bit short of nominations for DotM. Frankfurt is a content-wise sound article that was only slushed because it lacked a map. We don't need districts because it is compact enough, airport is within the city limits and trade fair location as well. I would be very welcome and i would take care of the xl mess which is fast done. Thank you very much in advance and best regards, (WT-en) jan 09:46, 18 February 2011 (EST)

Talk:NyírtassEdit

Can you comment on Talk:Nyírtass about a merge issue? Thanks! -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 16:46, 18 March 2011 (EDT)

Food Tours ListingEdit

I was noticed that you remove my contribution on food tours listing. Your reason is the food tour can't not be listed. According to this http://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Wikivoyage:Activity_listings#Tour_listings. "Tours can be listed on Wikivoyage as long as they constitute a value-added activity. If a traveler could fulfill the substance of the tour on their own, the tour should not be listed." Culinary tour is a new category of travel, just like biking tour, and it constitutes value added to the area. Please advise the different between culinary excursions and biking excursions. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 99.115.46.147 (talkcontribs)

Sorry for your company, as food tours are a fun activity, but the rules are meant to be followed. According to me (and as far as I can judge, the community), a food tour is not a value-added activity. Everyone could buy and try different kinds of Thai food by themselves. In fact, the restaurants listed in the guides already give a good overview. Usually, a bicycle tour would also not be listed, but Bangkok is an exception as you cannot bicycle around the city safely without having a guide (or knowing the area in great detail). --(WT-en) globe-trotter 17:32, 11 June 2011 (EDT)
I respect your judgement since you are an experienced contributor here. However, I think it is very debatable what is value added. Most food tours around the world that I have been to usually bring travelers to restaurants or local eateries that are "not tourist-adjusted". So these tours do support local neighborhoods that most of them are not within reach by most travelers. Furthermore, across wikivoyage community, there are a number of food tour listings. I hope standard across community is the same. To name a few http://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Miami/South_Beach#Do

http://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/San_Francisco/Chinatown-North_Beach#Do http://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Stratford_(Ontario)#Do I hope this issue is raised to get a wider discussion on the wikivoyage community. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 99.115.46.147 (talkcontribs)

Hello. Thanks a lot for bringing the issue to the WT community. Just wonder what is your final thought? I think many people still think that it is OK to list food tours. As one contributor pointed out, we have agreements with vendors. The food served by each vendor are only in sample sizes. Therefore, visitors can try several dish from several vendors (and several food styles) in a single meal. This certainly cannot be done if visitors have limited time to spend (and they cannot order sample size for themselves too). It would be grateful if you can revert. If there is any problem with the content, please feel free to edit.
Yes, I have discussed this with the community on the "Travellers' Pub" page, and it seems like food tours are OK. You can add back your food tours, but they should be listed on the subsequent district pages. It seems like you offer food tours in Yaowarat and in Bang Rak, so you'll have to add them to the Yaowarat and Phahurat page and the Silom page (for Bang Rak). --(WT-en) globe-trotter 07:40, 20 June 2011 (EDT)

time formats revisitedEdit

Given your interest in the time formats discussion and/or the star nomination that was almost sidelined over this matter, I thought I should let you know I've reopened the discussion. Hopefully (unlikely perhaps, but hopefully) we can reach a more definitive conclusion on this matter. (WT-en) PerryPlanet Talk 00:45, 23 June 2011 (EDT)

DOMEdit

Hi there (with apologies for a cut and paste message). I am trying to muster up some interest again in the now almost moribund Destination of the Month feature. This used to be one of our more dynamic initiatives with lots of debate. Sadly, that is no longer the case. I have made some new nominations to try to get it going again. If you have a moment please pop over there. And some nominations would be good if you can think of any! Thanks. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 10:22, 9 July 2011 (EDT)

Geldrop-MierloEdit

Hi Globe-trotter, thanks for your fixes on Eindhoven. Geldrop-Mierlo is 1 municipality nowadays, so "Geldrop (and Mierlo)" doesn't seem right, I guess, and neither is "Geldrop and Mierlo" as I wrote it before. What would be best to do? Just leave out Mierlo all together and refer to the "place" Geldrop rather than the municipality? Thanks, (WT-en) Justme 12:07, 29 July 2011 (EDT)

you welcome. advices ?Edit

Hello Globe-trotter,

That's not many contributions. I would do more if I could but still not very efficient with wikivoyage editing while travelling at the same time. I'm doing a Round The World trip, so there will be a lot more update, but if you know some tools links to easier editing online or offline, it would be much welcome.

Thanks also for your contributions. You seem to have done really a LOT ! —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) Juju22b (talkcontribs)

IspartofEdit

Hi Globe-trotter. You changed that ispartof-tag on Vaals into ispartofSouthLimburg. Could you perhaps explain what that tag does? I don't seem to see the difference or get the use. Should I place that tag on all the town in this area that I've been filling/creating? Thanks, (WT-en) Justme 11:51, 9 August 2011 (EDT)

Yes. It shows the region the article is placed under. Under the title of the article (Vaals), it gives a breadcrumb trail showing its underlying regions. If the IsPartOf is missing or wrong, the breadcrumb trail does not show up correctly :) --(WT-en) globe-trotter 14:36, 9 August 2011 (EDT)

Siam CenterEdit

OMG, how did I manage to do that...:) --- (WT-en) felix 17:27, 15 August 2011 (EDT)

No prob :D --(WT-en) globe-trotter 17:51, 15 August 2011 (EDT)

Thanks your messageEdit

I posted my opinion on "Ikebukuro discussion". (WT-en) kambayashi 06:30, 16 August 2011 (EDT)

NetherlandsEdit

Hi! I've been working on The Netherlands and its main destinations a bit and I was wondering what you think are the main priorities for that guide? I thought it would be nice if we could bring it at least to usable level? Looking at the guidelines, I would say we're getting close, but I'm not quite sure. Cheers, (WT-en) Justme 09:09, 22 August 2011 (EDT)

At a quick glance I would say that the 9 linked cities and 9 linked ODs should all be usable, and then the country guide definitely would be. The rest is all there.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 10:41, 22 August 2011 (EDT)


The Country guide status page states the following to make it usable: "Has links to the country's major cities and other destinations (usable status or better), a valid regional structure, and a Get in section describing all of the typical ways to get there. Information about the country's currency, language, cuisine, and culture is included. At least the most prominent attraction is identified with directions."
We made it ourselves a lot harder to include regions in the "Other destinations" list, as that means we'll have to get all those regions up to usable status instead of just the destinations! ;-). To get a region usable, it states it "Has links to the region's major cities and other destinations (the most important of which must be at usable status or better), and a Get in section describing all of the typical ways to get there. The most prominent attractions are identified with directions." I don't know what we'd do with the Frisian Lakes, but I guess it should also be a region someday. So to get the Netherlands usable, we must get the following destinations to usable:
District Status Missing
Amsterdam Usable
Delft Usable


Groningen Usable


The Hague Usable


Leiden Usable


Maastricht Usable


Nijmegen Usable


Rotterdam Guide
Utrecht Usable


Efteling Usable


Hoge Veluwe National Park Usable


Lisse Usable


Kinderdijk Outline


Emmeloord Outline

Maybe rename this one Noordoostpolder?


South Limburg Usable


Texel Outline


Waterland and Zaan Region Outline

Will be boosted to usable if the following destinations are usable:


Broek in Waterland Outline


Edam Outline


Marken Outline


Monnickendam Outline


Purmerend Outline

Not sure if this one should be considered as "important", as its not really a tourist destination

Volendam Outline
Zaandam Outline
Zaanse Schans Outline
Frisian Lakes Outline

This region still has to be created (see [3]). Will be boosted to usable if the following destinations are usable:

Bolsward Outline


IJlst Outline


Hindeloopen Outline
Joure Outline
Lemmer Outline
Sneek Outline
Sloten Outline
Stavoren Outline
Workum Outline


So still quite some work left I guess. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 10:52, 22 August 2011 (EDT)

Crikey..... you have whole regions as Other destinations? Not sure that is desirable. It does happen a bit in countries where a region is also an island, but you might want to look at that again for the Netherlands--(WT-en) Burmesedays 10:59, 22 August 2011 (EDT)
Wow, quite an extensive reply, thanks :-) However, now I'm confused. If I look at other countries that have usable status, say Belgium for example, many have a bunch of "other destinations" that aren't even close to usable. That led me to the conclusion that the main ones should be usable, not all. I wouldn't want to define the Frysian Lakes as a region in that sense, especially not if that would keep the main article further from usable status. I suggested it as a tourist destination for its water sports facilities, and it does have a few interesting towns. However, it doesn't make sense to me that full articles for places like Sloten (650 inhabitants) or Workum (4000), which might not even be mentioned in other guides due to their limited importance for travelers, should be a condition for a usable article for the Netherlands?
As for the regions, in principle I'm in favor here, as in our small country regions like South Limburg or the Zaanstreek really are commonly considered as "one destination" and tourist information materials are structured in that way. With Hoge Veluwe as an exception, national parks are not even known to the general public. (WT-en) Justme 11:11, 22 August 2011 (EDT)
If you find mistakes like Belgium, please change the status of the article, leaving an edit note explaining why.
On regions, I thought we had a guidelines that a top level region should not also be listed as an Other destination in a country article? I might be dreaming though as I can't find it....--(WT-en) Burmesedays 11:17, 22 August 2011 (EDT)
Regions as ODs makes sense for the Netherlands I think, and there are many countries where this happens as well (like Krabi Province is an OD in Thailand and the Loire Valley in France). The difference between an island and a region is in a way artifical, as an island is also a region. None of the regions listed under OD in the Netherlands are top-level regions.
About the Frisian Lakes, that was just my interpretation of it, I am not sure how else to define it. The Frisian Lakes region in a sense is similar to South Limburg, except that the latter region is much better developed on Wikivoyage. We could also maybe cramp the Frisian Lakes into one destination article, though it sounds like it could have a lot of content and span a very large area.
Oh, and about Belgium, that one is just wrong. It should be downgraded to outline. It does not even have 9 ODs listed, and many of those listed are outline destinations. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 11:23, 22 August 2011 (EDT)
All good on the regions then. Just one important point to understand - no country has to show 9 ODs. The wording at Project:Country article template is pretty clear on that: Sometimes a country has destinations that aren't really cities; for example, large national parks like the Grand Canyon, or archaeological sites like Angkor Wat. These should usually be listed on the region page for the region they're in, but for especially prominent ones you can also list them separately here, with descriptions, if they exist. Otherwise, leave out this section. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 11:30, 22 August 2011 (EDT)
I understand they are not necessarily required. But Belgium has 11 million inhabitants, it should easily be able to boast 9 ODs. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 11:37, 22 August 2011 (EDT)


Right. I suggest we leave the Frysian lakes out of the equation then, for now. I'll add its sports activities under the Do-section, does that make sense? Then we can always look into the need/desirability of that region later. I don't think it compares to South Limburg very well, as that is an official and much referred to region, highly more developed in terms of tourism. As far as I know, the Frysian Lakes in daily life are rather used in senses like: "i'm going sailing on the Frysian Lakes this week". But I'm not 100% sure either.
As for the Belgian mistake: that explains then, but it does mean we have a bunch of other countries with usable status that don't meet those criteria. A quick survey of the first 5 [4] shows me that Andorra, Bulgaria, Bosnia, China can't meet the criteria you would set for the Netherland above.. (WT-en) Justme 11:44, 22 August 2011 (EDT)
Yes, all those countries should all be downgraded to outline. The Netherlands is quite far in development, except for regions listed as ODs. We could turn the Frisian Lakes into an article, but then we'd still have to develop the most important destinations in the Waterland and Zaan Region (which would at least include those villages I mentioned, although Purmerend probably could be left out). --(WT-en) globe-trotter 11:53, 22 August 2011 (EDT)
Anyone who notices an incorrect article status should just please just change it. Little attention is paid to these until we get to the top of the status list.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 12:04, 22 August 2011 (EDT)
I will downgrade some of those countries that don't fit the criteria. About the Frisian Lakes, there are three options:
  • Describe them in the Do section of Friesland, this means that all "important" destinations in Friesland would need to be usable, which would be a hard task to complete.
  • Make them a region, which means we'd need to make the "important" destinations in that region usable (I selected a few large towns and the towns of the Elfstedentocht in the table above, but it'd be up for debate I guess). Probably even harder to complete.
  • We could turn the Frisian Lakes into an article. Easier to do though its a bit odd as at least some towns deserve their own articles I think (notably Sneek).

--(WT-en) globe-trotter 12:09, 22 August 2011 (EDT)

I'm not sure what the best option is. The cheese market in Alkmaar might be much more popular, especially with foreigners, but personally I'd prefer a sailing trip in Friesland over it. Again though, I think we should not be creating situations in which the guidelines lead to unlogical or unreasonable criteria. Personally, I'd prefer a consensus that something like the Frysian Lakes don't have to meet the full usuable criteria for the Netherlands guide to be usable. It just doesn't make any sense to demand full guides for villages I, as a Dutch person, have never even heard of, for the country article to be just usable. If we can't make an exception, then I think we should either make a simple article out of it or replace it with another "other destination". In any cast, perhaps I should have put my question on the talk page of the article. Feel free to move it there, if you want. A copy of the table would be useful there in any cast. I'll try to find some more statistics and info later. (WT-en) Justme 13:07, 22 August 2011 (EDT)

Moved discussion to Talk:Netherlands.

My enthusiasm for this whole site has been send to the bottom today. I have no intention of putting more time and effort into any article, just to see it nominated for deletion within 15 minutes, and only for reasons of "guidelines". I get the need for structure and I applaud all the work that has been put into organizing all the content here, but I feel that the small regular crowd tends to care more for rules and guidelines than cooperation and good travel info. That nomination of the Delta works, to me, is not only wrong in terms of content, but also discouraging and rude. It may be true that that's nothing personal and "just the way it works here", but that's only more wrong and calls for a critical look on common practice. Personally, I think the Netherlands as an article is very usable to any traveller, so I would be more than comfortable if you'd just leave out that 9th one for the time being, and would upgrade the article (with some minor tweaks perhaps). It would set a usable status minimum for any other destination to be added, but that's more than reasonable. I'll leave it to you, though, sorry. Thanks for working with me! (WT-en) Justme 16:29, 30 August 2011 (EDT)

Considering how much praise you've received for your hard work in recent weeks, I would encourage you not to let one minor incident get you down. A deletion nomination is not a death sentence; trust in consensus to reach the right decision, and remember that nothing on a wiki is irreversible. (WT-en) LtPowers 17:04, 30 August 2011 (EDT)

Answer from HrcolyerEdit

All these years present, and still no welcome message. I have fixed that now :) Good luck in using Wikivoyage and thanks for your edits! --(WT-en) globe-trotter 18:25, 28 August 2011 (EDT)

Thanks! Tend to be more of a user really, but do occasionally try and beef up the articles on places I know... (WT-en) Hrcolyer 18:42, 28 August 2011 (EDT)

Thailand See and DoEdit

Well done with that! I know from my attempts at Indonesia, that it is not easy. --(WT-en) burmesedays 23:58, 30 August 2011 (EDT)

Thanks! I am still thinking about writing a section on natural scenery, but I'm a bit out of ideas now :) --(WT-en) globe-trotter 00:02, 31 August 2011 (EDT)

smokeEdit

Hello Globetrotter,

I am contacting you more or less at random because I want to talk something over with you. The reasons for this are that you seem to take an interest in several pages I have edited and others that I took a look at for comparisson and that I think you are Dutch (as am I). I have added 'Cafe Cremers' to the Den Haag page. Seeing as it is a coffee shop where everybody can drink and smoke it is unique, but it seemed fun to designate it as a coffee shop, for our tourists. We are famous for it, mind, but there are no mentions of them on any of the pages I have compared with. So, I made a subsection under 'drink' and dubbed it 'smoke'. I think it is a great idea feel we might wish to add such a section to the pages of every major Dutch city. That way the tourists will not get stuck in that place where everbody gets treated rudely, but go to the shop where everybody dances like Iggy Pop (if you know what I mean). Do you think this is a great idea as I do, or do you think I should remove the subsection? Thanks for the input. --(WT-en) Faust 21:58, 2 September 2011 (EDT)

Hey Faust! It is perfectly fine to add coffeeshops to Dutch cities, they are major places to visit in Dutch nightlife. At the The Hague page, the Smoke section currently seems a top-level section. As you have stated, I think it'd be better to have the Smoke section (or "Coffeeshops" section as its called in Amsterdam) listed under the Drink section. That way all nightlife facilities are grouped under Drink, while coffeeshops are easily grouped in their own section. So yes, a great idea overall, keep adding your favorite listings! :) --(WT-en) globe-trotter 22:49, 2 September 2011 (EDT)
Thanks Globetrotter, that was sort of what I was going for, but I am not all that experienced, so it turned out as a top-level section. I'll edit (if you have not yet done so). --(WT-en) Faust 05:51, 3 September 2011 (EDT)
Could you look it over to see if it lives up to standards? I imagine people will add other later (I quit the habit 10 years ago, but I enjoy this shop for the athmosphere and one can drink there as well). --(WT-en) Faust 06:00, 3 September 2011 (EDT)
Yes, it's well done! The only thing is that it's better to use the [add listing] button on the right of the section, as then you can just fill in the gaps. Also keep in mind that Scheveningen has a separate article. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 10:55, 3 September 2011 (EDT)
I am unsure why I added the blue white studio to te hague. I did know it was in scheveningen... Funny how the mind works. Other than that, I just added most when I created the sub-sections, so I never aw the button. But thanks for the tips and the thumbs up! Maybe I'll see you around at the Rijswijk page. :) --(WT-en) Faust 11:02, 3 September 2011 (EDT)
By the way, Should we not name the top-section something like consume or something? Drink is such a strange name for stuff that can be smoked and all.. --(WT-en) Faust 11:06, 3 September 2011 (EDT)
Yes, "Drink" is a bit odd, as it includes cafes, nightlife, clubs, coffeeshops, and many other varieties of nightlife. But well, while the name is a bit odd, it's quite a logical grouping I guess. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 11:29, 3 September 2011 (EDT)
Ok, to your health then! --(WT-en) Faust 16:05, 3 September 2011 (EDT)

CelleEdit

Hi Globe-trotter. Are we okay to upgrade Celle to guide status? This would appear to be normally a criterion for DOTM articles? Regards. --(WT-en) SaxonWarrior 07:56, 5 September 2011 (EDT)

It's not only a guide, it's a strong one. I commented on this recently at /Talk:Celle#Status_of_this_article. --(WT-en) burmesedays 08:16, 5 September 2011 (EDT)
Yes, it's definitely guide status :) --(WT-en) globe-trotter 12:53, 5 September 2011 (EDT)

Bangkok/ThonburiEdit

What happened there? My browser was showing the big map as duplicated, and the "<!--PRINT PRINT-->" code looked like something we wouldn't want there. Did I delete the only copy of the big map? (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 03:32, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

Those PRINT tags are crucial for Wikivoyage Press guides. Without that line, the map would not show up in the printed guide. The reason the map showed up as duplicated before, was because the user adding the tour broke the print tag. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 03:49, 13 September 2011 (EDT)
Wikivoyage press guides? People in the press use these guides as printouts? (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 04:23, 13 September 2011 (EDT)
Well, not people in the press. But Wikivoyage articles are sold as commercial guides, yes. See [5]. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 06:28, 13 September 2011 (EDT)
I can't imagine why there would be much market for that, when you can just print out pages yourself from any printer connected to any computer. But whatever works. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 10:09, 13 September 2011 (EDT)
See Project:Wikivoyage Press. People buy them because it's a lot easier than printing them out yourself, and it looks a lot better. And see Project:Template index#Print formatting for other things you shouldn't remove. =) (WT-en) LtPowers 10:15, 13 September 2011 (EDT)
Indeed. I have one here (although I must say it was a gift). It looks a lot better and I also find such a nice little booklet more convenient than a pile of home-made copies. But then again, that probably depends on your printer and binding facilities hehe.. (WT-en) Justme 10:21, 13 September 2011 (EDT)

LombokEdit

I am wondering why you bumped Lombok down to outline? I think this is one of the better 2nd level region articles anywhere at WT, and definitely usable. The 3rd level region articles below it are decent enough. I do not think the presence of red-linked speculative city articles should effect any of that. --(WT-en) burmesedays 08:10, 26 September 2011 (EDT)

Yes it's definitely usable. I saw it guide, and saw it did not file the criteria for it, as many towns do not have established articles. So I just downgraded it to outline, while instead I should have downgraded it to usable. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 11:58, 26 September 2011 (EDT)
The question is whether Praya, Selond, and Sekotong count as "the region's major cities" for Central and East Lombok and South Lombok respectively. Regions can have usable status without having every sub-destination be usable. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 17:47, 26 September 2011 (EDT)
Praya is a regional town, it is the capital 'city' of the Regency of Central Lombok and has a population of around 55,000, one of it's most notable aspects is that it has an ATM. It is also the nearest town to the new airport. Sekotong is hardly a city at any stretch of the imagination, more a loose collection of villages. Selong is not on the map of Lombok for a reason, it is little more than a village, it is however the capital of east Lombok, its most notable feature is that it is nearby the east coast of the island. Have a look using Google earth and it will all become clear. Technically they are significant as they are the Regency capitals but the reality is that we would be really scratching to make an article for any of them, maybe Praya and that is on my list of things to have a look at. Maybe if some accom and restaurants start happening in support of the new airport we might have something to build on, until then probably not.-- (WT-en) felix 03:09, 19 October 2011 (EDT)

LombokEdit

Hi, any idea how that table was causing the problem? Also, just curious, how did you work out it was the table? Cheers. -- (WT-en) felix 07:35, 27 September 2011 (EDT)

I am not sure why, that's why I removed the complete table (else I would have fixed it). I found it was the table by going through the article and checking many different things that could be causing the issue. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 08:54, 27 September 2011 (EDT)
Hi, I finaly got around to it and fixed the table, I recall you might have deleted similar tables elsewhere but I cannot recall where. I cannot seem to dig out any clues from you contrib histories...any recollection? --(WT-en) felix 02:35, 19 October 2011 (EDT)
I have not removed a lot of tables. The only other one I can think of is Kuala Lumpur. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 03:22, 19 October 2011 (EDT)

Thonglor midtownEdit

Thonglor midtown is no more, all the businesses are gone, and the name has been removed from the building. No idea what will happen next. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) Nk (talkcontribs)

Thanks for the info! I've already updated the map accordingly. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 05:11, 28 September 2011 (EDT)

Huge citiesEdit

Hi, G-t. Can I ask why you've moved the functionality of Template:Huge into Template:PrintDistricts? (WT-en) LtPowers 09:27, 13 October 2011 (EDT)

I've been incorporating it into that template, because the articles exactly overlap. This way the {{huge}} tag is not necessary anymore. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 09:51, 13 October 2011 (EDT)
New York City doesn't use Template:PrintDistricts. (WT-en) LtPowers 17:11, 13 October 2011 (EDT)
Shouldn't it? --(WT-en) Peter Talk 19:56, 13 October 2011 (EDT)
I replaced it some time ago with a custom message because (three of) its constituent boroughs are themselves huge cities. (WT-en) LtPowers 08:48, 14 October 2011 (EDT)
Yes, I hadn't seen New York City was an exception! I've added [[Category:Huge city articles]] to the New York City article to make sure it shows up in the list. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 08:59, 14 October 2011 (EDT)

Ko LipeEdit

Hi, Globe-trotter. First, I just want to acknowledge all the great work you do. You spend a lot of time cleaning up articles and working to improve formatting, and I tip my hat to you.

About Ko Lipe, I don't understand why you don't want Castaway Divers to list freediving among their services. My feeling is, as long as it's all in one listing and isn't touty, it's fine for them to mention every service they have (at least within reason). Also, he's right about Elephant Books & Coffee, even if he pointed out the "inconsistency" in an annoying way, as if it's intentional on anyone's part and he has to be passive-aggressive instead of just deleting the multiple entries he saw.

If you don't hear from me for a while, it's because I went to sleep and then worked all day tomorrow.

All the best,

(WT-en) Ikan Kekek 05:08, 16 October 2011 (EDT)

I am not against the listing, it's just that it was placed as being "freediving" itself [6], while I think it should be placed as a separate listing after an overview of freediving is given. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 05:13, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
I got and agreed with that part. By the way, it looks like Castaway Divers is both a "Do" and a "Sleep" in the latest version of the Ko Lipe guide, and that should not be the case. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 21:12, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
sorry if I came across as passive-aggressive, didn't mean too, had already read rules about other owners not editing competitors listings, just felt a bit peeved as didn't understand, the rules regarding two listings. really had no intention of touting, just wanted to add info about a service we provide, once I understood the two listings logic I add the service to the dive operations section as it is offered through the dive centre.
Now though I feel penalized, as you have removed my dive companies listing, that's is a legitimately separate business, from the resort, it is a separately list Ltd, it has it's own website, and has it's own management and although on the same beach it has its own building beach being over 2km long.
would love to add more info about the island general, and sorry if I make mistakes in where I place the info in advance,if you would like me to write the intro to Freediving would love too. think I understand now how you guys would like it mentioned, it is an interesting sport and would add to pages interest (WT-en) Pierre drake 00:28, 18 October 2011 (EDT)
Of course, I had no way of knowing Castaway Divers and Castaway Resort were two different businesses; instead, they look for all the world like divisions of the same business. Assuming that they really are two separate entities, as you state: Speaking for myself, and not for Globe-trotter, my only problem with your latest edits, in that case, is that your reference to your business in the section explaining what Freediving is smacks of being promotional, because even though I take it that you are in fact the only freediving shop in Ko Lipe, you really shouldn't be referring people to your listing there - that gives you three different references within one guide, and really pulls the guidelines on listings to the breaking point. And for that reason, I'm deleting that reference in that place. But with all that said, I appreciate your willingness to cooperate and help make the guide better - that's the most important thing. All the best, (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 03:41, 18 October 2011 (EDT)
no problem try to keep all reference out of the equation, how do you suggest, people find the location of any particular activity would say (check dive operators out for course) be OK.. thus tourist would then know where to find further info without some reference kind of like shooting in the dark? Re: Maps etc., would you like me to make one up, a lot of work involved but think I might have time over x-mass to try and do one? would love to add some photo's but read alot about load times etc. how do you guy's feel about some more picture's, if yes how many which sections etc? (WT-en) Pierre drake 09:26, 18 October 2011 (EDT)
They can just search the page for more mentions of freediving. It's not hard for them to find if they're interested. I'd like to hear Globe-trotter's opinion, but my feeling is, good maps and good, non-promotional photos always add value to a guide. And I would also say that it would be fine and indeed helpful to show the locations of different dive shops, hotels and whatnot in the maps. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 09:41, 18 October 2011 (EDT)
I agree with Ikan that the description of the activity should be separate from that of the business. People can still find your business as it is listed right under it, and you can put in the description that you offer freediving. It's a bit of a slippery slope, but for now I accept that they are two separate listings, as long as they are in different buildings. Please provide addresses for both listings (oddly enough, I can't find them on the websites). I appreciate the other edits you've made to the article, and would be great if you could further improve it with a map. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 03:18, 19 October 2011 (EDT)
OK Re:Listing understand, Re location of all the Shops businesses here on the island, it is hard for you guys to imagine, without every coming here but basically we are such as small island a long way from any where, the island has no roads, or address, people here, use things like trees to describe where they are or how to find things, so basically if you are on a beach that is 2Km long we just say we are toward the south end of XY beach, or you jump in a boat and tell the boat drive you want to go to XY resort or dive shop or Bar the locals no where everything so they get dropped in the right location. the only thing close to a road is a path that is 1.5mtr wide that runs from one beach over the middle of the island to the other but that's really it the rest are just sandy paths weaving here and there across the island that often get move or changed because of some development or another. so re our address we just tell people we are toward the south end of sunrise beach, not very accurate but all people have to do is walk in that direction until they find what they are looking for. Try to knock a Map up over x-mass, and will load some nice non-promotional photos. all the best (WT-en) Pierre drake 06:21, 21 October 2011 (EDT)
Thanks for that explanation; I understand. And thanks very much in advance for the map and photos!
All the best,
(WT-en) Ikan Kekek 17:45, 21 October 2011 (EDT)

Where you can stick itEdit

Hi, G-t. It would be really helpful if, when you add something to Project:Where you can stick it, you also mirrored that new addition in the "By section" section of the page. Thanks! (WT-en) LtPowers 17:31, 17 October 2011 (EDT)

Ah, hadn't noticed that section, will do so next time!--(WT-en) globe-trotter 09:48, 18 October 2011 (EDT)

removing isPartOfEdit

Hi,

I just thought I'd point out that (even though it isn't used very much) in order for RDF to work correctly, isPartOf is required on district articles, even though it isn't required for the breadcrumbs. See Template:IsPartOf. I'm sure there is probably a policy to the contrary somewhere else saying it isn't required, but the RDF is definitely wrong if it isn't there. --(WT-en) inas 23:56, 17 October 2011 (EDT)

Ah, I did not know about this. The template doesn't have the IsPartOf tag. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 03:21, 19 October 2011 (EDT)
Yes, great things were anticipated for RDF, but at this point I can't ever see anything coming from it. The way the software uses RDF for breadcrumbs, but not for subpages is a bug, and I think I logged a tech request some years ago. Some background is here [7] if you are interested. --(WT-en) inas 18:48, 19 October 2011 (EDT)

Koh Lipe: castawayEdit

Hi,

sorry if I came across as passive-aggressive, didn't mean too, had already read rules about other owners not editing competitors listings, just felt a bit peeved as didn't understand, the rules regarding two listings. really had no intention of touting, just wanted to add info about a service we provide, once I understood the two listings logic I add the service to the dive operations section as it is offered through the dive centre.

Now though I feel penalized, as you have removed my dive companies listing, that's is a legitimately separate business, from the resort, it is a separately list Ltd, it has it's own website, and has it's own management and although on the same beach it has its own building beach being over 2km long.

would love to add more info about the island general, and sorry if I make mistakes in where I place the info in advance,if you would like me to write the intro to Freediving would love too. think I understand now how you guys would like it mentioned, it is an interesting sport and would add to pages interest. (WT-en) Pierre drake 00:31, 18 October 2011 (EDT)

User:(WT-en) TourismMadangEdit

Hi Globe-trotter. User:(WT-en) TourismMadang looks like a legitimate user page to me - on Project:Don't tout the policy specifically requests tourism professionals to identify themselves on their user pages, and that seems to be what the user is doing. I've restored it for now as I'm concerned that deleting the page without comment might chase this user away, but let's discuss if you feel differently. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:42, 9 November 2011 (EST)

Because of the weblinks, e-mail address, and the spammy/touty tone, I thought it should be deleted. However, now I read it back and I understand what you mean. I guess I was a bit quick with deleting, so just keep it up. --(WT-en) Globe-trotter 20:53, 9 November 2011 (EST)

HKEdit

Hi, thanks for your message! :) (WT-en) Jakeseems 19:15, 13 November 2011 (EST)

No problem :-) It was a breeze to read through Hong Kong in a day, quite similar to the things I have seen there. --(WT-en) Globe-trotter 19:17, 13 November 2011 (EST)

JoetsuEdit

Hello! Please check this page.[8]

there is link to other site .

Should I fix this page? (WT-en) kambayashi 22:50, 14 November 2011 (EST)

Yes, please remove the link, as it does not comply with our external links policy. :-) --(WT-en) Globe-trotter 23:22, 14 November 2011 (EST)

My editsEdit

I have had two reverted edits and I don't know why so i'am just wondering if you think I should continue plunging forward or not? For right now i would like to continue editing. --(WT-en) Kcv5 03:30, 21 November 2011 (EST)

SL mapEdit

Do you perchance remember what your source was for your Sierra Leone SVG? --(WT-en) Peter Talk 17:35, 25 December 2011 (EST)

Woops, seems like something went wrong with uploading it! I've added the source information from the PNG file to it. --(WT-en) Globe-trotter 02:51, 26 December 2011 (EST)


Hi! I don't like to sound picky but it would be nice if you would also add the facts that you add to the Discover section to the articles themselves if they aren't already there. I added the flag fact to Brasilia after verifying it from the Portuguese Wikipedia, because I was quite sure that the largest regularly hoisted flag was the one on Mexico City's Plaza de la Constitución. And for the Thai sandwich - it is not in the article and I cannot find any specific Thai name for it (which would be good to have) by googling. You seem to be quite familiar with Thailand, so perhaps you know what is is called. (WT-en) Ypsilon 10:57, 20 January 2012 (EST)

Sometimes I think the facts don't necessarily add much to the article (e.g. the Schiphol fact). However, I see it is required to add it, so I'll do so from now on. About the ice cream on a sandwich, it's exactly what it sounds like and doesn't really have a name. This link [9] shows some more about it. --(WT-en) Globe-trotter 00:13, 21 January 2012 (EST)
Looks really delicious! (WT-en) Ypsilon 08:42, 21 January 2012 (EST)
Ideally, Discover facts should already be in the linked articles. Adding them if they're added just to meet the requirement can result in awkward wording. (WT-en) LtPowers 13:08, 21 January 2012 (EST)

Krakow mapEdit

Hi, I just added a map on Krakow Talk page. I read that you give feedback on maps, what you think? I wonder if names of districts are necessary and if I should include positions of some attractions located away from the centre (like Zoo or Tyniec monastery which is close to freeway ringroad). (WT-en) Jjtk 11:52, 5 February 2012 (EST)

Bangkok Transport MapsEdit

Hello,

I thought I would have a go at combining the two maps you made of Bangkok's water transport: those of the Chao Phraya river ferries and the Khlong Saen Saep ferries (they're the ones pictured here for your reference). I made a first draft to see what other users think, it still needs some work. The SVG is Image:Bangkok waterways.svg and the PNG is Image:Bangkok waterways.png.

First, what do you think? I think this would save space in the article and aid understanding of the canal's locations as it's easy to miss.

If you like this idea, I may also try to overlay the BTS, airport train and metro to create one map of Bangkok's transport. Please let me know what your opinion.

Second, the PNG file that I made doensn't seem to create a preview but does appear to be viewable at full size. Is this a known problem? Is it just my computer? I'd value your help.

Cheers, (WT-en) Travelpleb 20:58, 24 March 2012 (EDT)

Israel mapEdit

Hi. I wanted to ask of you a very small change in the Israel map you created, if you feel like it (I'm Israeli, BTW). The line between the Israeli Coastal Plain and the Shephelah isn't accurate: the Shephelah needs to include that small "dent" just next to where the "n" in Coastal Plain is currently. That's where the city of Modiin is, and it's definitely better grouped in the Shephelah (where the article currently correctly puts it). Thanks. --(WT-en) ElectAbuzzzz 06:52, 9 April 2012 (EDT)

MoveEdit

Hi G-t, it seems that i'm not smart enough to do the same as you do. I want to move my old page to the new one. It says that they cant delete and move. Do you know the issue? Thank you, Jc8136 (talk) 18:22, 19 September 2012 (CEST)

In the second step, you'll have to confirm deletion of your page by selecting "Yes, delete the page" and then press "Delete and move". --Globe-trotter (talk) 18:24, 19 September 2012 (CEST)
G-t, thank you very much for your effort. During the cleaning process, i came across your Yaowarat and Phahurat Tour and really liked it. I think it would be a good OtBP in a big city that everyone could visit (beside all the temples etc.). Would you mind if i nominate it for OtBP or would you like it to do yourself?Jc8136 (talk) 20:39, 19 September 2012 (CEST)

ShortcutsEdit

Hi Globe-trotter, why did you move nrwt and nlt back into the article namespace? Other soft redirects such as copyvio are in the Wikivoyage namespace. sumone10154(talk) 00:39, 21 September 2012 (CEST)

Because they're shortcuts, they don't work outside of the main namespace. However, they should have been redirected to the relevant policy articles, as I have done now. --Globe-trotter (talk) 00:44, 21 September 2012 (CEST)
While it's true that you need three extra characters (wv:) which is a bit of a drag, a shortcut like wv:$ should work in whatever namespace you summon it from, shouldn't it? --W. Frankemailtalk 18:13, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

General cleanup awesomeness barnstarEdit

This general-cleanup-awesomeness-barnstar is to show you how much we appreciate your hard work in helping get Wikivoyage EN ready before the launch! --Tsandell (talk) 23:09, 23 September 2012 (CEST)

Thanks a lot, love the title! It's been quite an effort to get the wiki cleaned up, good to see the tasks are almost done :-) --Globe-trotter (talk) 23:17, 23 September 2012 (CEST)

TalkbackEdit

Hello, Globe-trotter. You have a new message at my talk page. --Saqib (talk) 15:56, 24 September 2012 (CEST)

Thanks Globe-TrotterEdit

Actually I've been around for a while. :) -- (WV-en) Mark (talk) 21:16, 24 September 2012 (CEST)

Haha, yes, I know, but couldn't leave your Talk page empty like that! ^^ --Globe-trotter (talk) 21:18, 24 September 2012 (CEST)

Regarding UNESCO articlesEdit

Hey, fantastic work on the cleanup. I like what you've done with UNESCO Creative Cities; it's really organised it in a much more logical way. Not sure if you're aware, but I'm working on something similar with the World Heritage sites. It's a monstrous job, with nearly 1000 sites. You can see progress in my userspace (WV-en) here. If you've got some time on your hands, feel free to continue the job and/or work on another continent. It will take some time and it'd be good to make our article much more organised and useful than the one on IBtravel. Thanks, JamesA >talk 10:47, 26 September 2012 (CEST)

Hey guys, just jumped in to say I started (WV-en) work on Europe. Jjtk (talk) 12:28, 26 September 2012 (CEST)
That's great work. Thanks so much. JamesA >talk 12:41, 26 September 2012 (CEST)
Yes, all credits go to you JamesA, it's based off your design. I'll also start working on the other continents on your user space. --Globe-trotter (talk) 13:19, 26 September 2012 (CEST)
Oh, cool. You've done a great job adapting it. Yes, feel free to work on some other continents like Oceania or any of the Americas. Thanks, JamesA >talk 13:35, 26 September 2012 (CEST)
Per my words on ‎Jjtk's talk page, feel free to move across Oceania when it's done. We can always spruce them up later. Thanks, JamesA >talk 12:59, 29 September 2012 (CEST)

BoxesEdit

Hey, G-t, what exactly are you doing with Disclaimerbox, Warningbox, and Cautionbox? You've made a bunch of edits but didn't use very descriptive edit summaries and now they don't show up on the template pages so I can't see what they look like. LtPowers (talk) 01:26, 27 September 2012 (CEST)

I was working on the boxes to get some more consistency in them, but the wiki was suddenly locked so I couldn't continue. Look at User:Globe-trotter/Boxes where I got. --Globe-trotter (talk) 02:32, 27 September 2012 (CEST)

Buffalo as DOTMEdit

I saw that you had placed Buffalo back in the queue for Destination of the Month for January 2013. I have grave concerns about this.

I am in total agreement that empty spaces in the queue are undesirable, but to quote the esteemed (WV-en) Ryan Holliday: "the tradition with DOTM and OTBP is to feature the destination during a time that is good to visit." [10]. However, as I explained on Wikivoyage talk:Destination of the month candidates, in order for Buffalo to be featured at "a time that is good to visit", it would have to be put off till April 2013 at the earliest.

I tried to place that quote and link in my edit summary to my revision to the DotM nominations page, but it didn't fit. Apologies for that.

In my own personal opinion, though I am eager for my work on the Buffalo article to be in the limelight, I'd much rather do right by our readers and feature my city as a destination at a time when attractions will be open consistently (or at all), and when they'll be unlikely to be buried under two feet of snow. Also, I would be happy to search around for other destinations that would be a better fit for a January DotM.

Please let me know your thoughts.

-- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 03:56, 27 September 2012 (CEST)

I'm not sure what happened, but if I changed Buffalo, it hasn't been my intention. Of course destinations should be featured in their best season, just move the schedule around as you see fit. --Globe-trotter (talk) 04:01, 27 September 2012 (CEST)
JFTR, it appears to have occurred here: [11].
In any event, no worries - and I stand by my offer to search for another 1/13 DotM. :)
-- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 04:05, 27 September 2012 (CEST)

RevertingEdit

Hello Globe-trotter. If you don't mind, may I know why you reverting some edits of W. Frank? --Saqib (talk) 13:01, 1 October 2012 (CEST)

I'm mostly reverting "Go next", as it'll be impossible to change all these instances by hand. They should be done by a bot of some sorts. --Globe-trotter (talk) 13:03, 1 October 2012 (CEST)
I see. That means you will revert some mine too? --Saqib (talk) 13:07, 1 October 2012 (CEST)
Yes, there's no need to manually convert the headers at this point. But there's also nothing wrong with going ahead and doing it to a few articles on your watchlist if you have the urge. It won't affect the bot/extension. JamesA >talk 14:25, 1 October 2012 (CEST)
I think it could confuse our readers till the change. It might take a while before the change has taken place, and then we'd have some articles with "Get out" and others with "Go next". --Globe-trotter (talk) 14:26, 1 October 2012 (CEST)
Do you really think our readers are so easily confused? I think that making the change manually is a waste of effort, but reverting them is not only a double waste of effort, but a waste of somone else's well intentioned and policy compliant effort. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 18:56, 1 October 2012 (CEST)
Revert only when necessary or it will drive away the editor. I would say zero-revert rule is the best. --Saqib (talk) 20:34, 1 October 2012 (CEST)
Zero-revert rule is absolutely not the best. Those making changes should find consensus for a change, not the other way around.--Globe-trotter (talk) 03:05, 2 October 2012 (CEST)
Why did you change the community agreed "Go next" to "Go out" with this revert, please? --W. Franke-mailtalk 05:21, 2 October 2012 (CEST)
Why did you change "sizeable" to "sizable", "Auckland" to "auckland", "Airport ISite kiosk" to "Airport isite kiosk", "Frequent Traveller" to "Frequent Travller", "Airbus" to "airbus", "==Go next==" to "==Get out==", and bugger up many of the image positions and sizes with this revert, please? --W. Franke-mailtalk 06:03, 2 October 2012 (CEST)
Notwithstanding the Plunge forward policy, which allows for change without consensus, though in those cases reversion is not inherently controversial, in the cases under current discussion there was consensus for the changes which were reverted. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 07:48, 2 October 2012 (CEST)

(Re-indenting) I may have missed one revert, however, I had to make dozens of reverts cleaning up articles you've been messing around with the formatting. I really have better things to do than to keep reverting tedious edits. A few things that I think ought to be discussed before mass-implementing them to some articles:

  1. Don't move the TOC to the right on every page
  2. Don't change U.S. to US on every page without consensus first
  3. If you want to make changes to a template, make these in the template, not all individual pages where the template is used
  4. Don't make "Stay healthy" a sub-section of "Stay safe" in all articles, especially not on policy pages describing article templates
  5. Don't change the order of Cities and OD lists other than alphabetical—really pointless
  6. There is consensus for changing "Get out" to "Go next", but there really hasn't been any consensus on how to implement this yet. Instead of changing "Go out" to "Go next" on some random pages, it'd be wise to participate in the discussion on how to go about changing it in all articles.

While plunging forward is encouraged, these mass changes lead to inconsistent article styles on WV. Changes to formatting should be discussed first, because applying them in some articles and not in others makes a mess of our guides. The way you react on pretty much everywhere on this site is nonsensical, and damaging the good spirit of this community. Instead of ranting, making a scene and typing all caps, it'd be wise to start discussing your changes in a normal way. --Globe-trotter (talk) 12:23, 2 October 2012 (CEST)

(Unfortunately?), my work rate is very much lower than yours, Globe-trotter.
I don't do "mass changes"
Consequently, I like to think that each of my edits on the very limited number (<24) of destination articles I edit are carefully considered as to whether they will help the number one person in our hierarchy: the traveller.
I certainly haven't moved the TOC to the right on every one of our more than 20,000 pages -just on those very few articles - typically German ones - where the display on standard width screens and resolutions was cocked-up - and if the ability to display a screen capture in-line was working, I could very clearly demonstrate the benefits in sheer readability of not having dark blue body text overflowing on to medium blue maps!
In some cases, the edits I make are a result of rather recent policy changes (sometimes after very lengthy and wide-ranging discussion) that you may not be familiar with. In these cases, I usually reference this either in my edit summary or on the article discussion page.
Many of our policies use conditional wording such as "recommended", "unless there is a good reason", "may" and procrustian templates may not reflect this - Disney Land is an example.
In the case of New Zealand, 93% of visitors fly into either Auckland Airport in the North Island or Christchurch Airport in the South Island and I suspect that few of them plan their itineraries in alphabetical order. The majority of visitors to NZ travel from N to S - that is why you can get free rental cars in Christchurch, Dunedin and Invercargill to return North - sometimes with a free tank of gas thrown in.
I don't really have a problem with you unilaterally changing things to almost alphabetical order (although Wellington is the capital, it is both South of Auckland and comes after it alphabetically). I do think it a problem that you seem to be
  1. stalking me on the less than two dozen destination articles I edit and then spasm reverting me on sight without cogitation
  2. not using the article discussion pages before doing all these reverts.
Please would you point me to the policy that mandates alphabet ordering for #Other destinations. Previous editors to our New Zealand article thought a North to South ordering was helpful to the traveller.
Now I do have a practical suggestion for you. We have more than 20,000 destination articles where you can alphabetise and "Get out" to your heart's content; would you just discuss reverting established editors beforehand on these following few articles?
Europe
Diving in New Zealand‎
UNESCO World Heritage List
New Zealand‎;
Auckland
Berlin
Dresden‎;
Masasi
Tiraspol‎
Islamabad
North Island‎
Nelson (New Zealand)
Middle East
West Asia‎
Glasgow
Sark
Rotterdam‎
I really don't think any of this "stalk and then revert" behaviour is helpful to our prime goals or an effective use of your undoubted talents and stamina, so why don't you just trust other editors to "police my nonsense" on two dozen or so articles where I like to think I have both local knowledge and sufficient knowledge of our policies and goals not to entirely mess things up?
There are 17 above, so is a public "revert free zone" (for reverting auto confirmed editors only) of 24 reasonable?
I will only add and subtract from this public list infrequently? --W. Franke-mailtalk 17:37, 2 October 2012 (CEST)

MoenjodaroEdit

Hi Globe-trotter. I need an map of location for the subject article. I have a base images which can be used to draw a new map, but its copyrighted and not available online. If you can send me an e-mail please so I will reply you back with the base map image. Thank you. --Saqib (talk) 17:32, 2 October 2012 (CEST)

Image licensingEdit

Hi Globe-trotter. I'm beginning to go through some of the World Heritage sites and add some content and photos. There are some great photos on Flickr, but many are licensed under CC BY-NC or something similar (eg, [12]). As a clarification, are these compatible with our licenses or not? I've looked through many policies on Shared, but cannot find an answer. I'd assume not, as licenses are fairly strict in that regard, but I don't see how we'd be using them in a commercial way here. JamesA >talk 11:46, 3 October 2012 (CEST)

Hello James. What do you think WP is a commercial site? They do not allow CC BY-NC licensed images either. --Saqib (talk) 12:10, 3 October 2012 (CEST)
I wasn't sure at all. Thanks for the clarification. JamesA >talk 12:22, 3 October 2012 (CEST)
James, as I remember the reason is that everything we produce must be freely available for anyone to use commercially or non-commercially, so a mixture of licenses wwould make it too complicated for a third party commercial user who would have to check each image. This way its easy - if its here you can use it. Cheers, • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 13:18, 3 October 2012 (CEST)
Indeed; the whole point of a free travel guide is to allow anyone to use its content for any purpose. Having NC-licensed stuff means that commercial entities (like Wikitravel Press) cannot use our content. LtPowers (talk) 20:00, 3 October 2012 (CEST)

EtiquetteEdit

There are some points of etiquette in using talk pages that have built up over the years. Here are two points that you may have forgotten :-

  • Unlike everything else in Wikivoyage, it's considered bad form to change someone else's posts on a talk page — even to correct spelling or grammar.
  • It's usually perfectly OK, though, to change something you wrote on a talk page, for any reason. If you made spelling or grammatical errors, feel free to change them.

Putting both of those together means that I'm not happy with you redacting what I write here. If you don't wish to reply, that is your prerogative, but please don't change what I write on user's talk page as if you were an IBadmin. --W. Franke-mailtalk 23:00, 6 October 2012 (CEST)

Keeping redirectsEdit

There are close to 1,000 articles that link to Wikivoyage:Star Articles -- most of which are from a small handful of included templates, true, but by no means all. The redirect is basically free and we have any number of redirects from one namespace to another, so I don't see any reason to delete it, especially when it would be far more work to correct all of the links pointing to it. If you disagree, please vfd it instead of speedy-deleting it. -- D. Guillaume (talk) 05:16, 7 October 2012 (CEST)

Yes, I probably deleted too fast, as I am working my way through some policy pages. However, I thought it to be odd that Wikivoyage:Star articles is not similar to Wikivoyage:Guide articles, Wikivoyage:Usable articles, etc. I think we'll need to fix that somehow. --Globe-trotter (talk) 05:20, 7 October 2012 (CEST)

CotmEdit

Hi Globe-trotter, thank you for listening Karachi article as collaboration of the month. I guess this gonna be the first article as cotm since the WV makes the fresh start. --Saqib (talk) 21:36, 11 October 2012 (CEST)

Yes, Karachi is the first "real" WV cotm :-) It has some momentum because of your contributions, I hope others will also contribute. I'll also do some listings tagging (as I don't know much about the city itself).
We'll need to remove listings from the South Karachi articles. Do you have any idea where to start?--Globe-trotter (talk) 21:39, 11 October 2012 (CEST)
If you talking about section "eat" and "drink" then yes, I was thinking the same today. I'll start cleaning-up process of the "eat" section asap. --Saqib (talk) 21:46, 11 October 2012 (CEST)
Yes, that's exactly what I meant :-) --Globe-trotter (talk) 22:05, 11 October 2012 (CEST)
How many entries in each sub section under "eat" and "drink" are appropriate? Also, I have got a map of Karachi with boundaries of towns mentioned. I don't know how to create a map so if you're willing to create one, please send me an e-mail and I'll send you the image file in reply. --Saqib (talk) 10:43, 13 October 2012 (CEST)

CategoriesEdit

Hi Globe-trotter, I tried to disable template such as {{speedy}} from showing in the category:Speedy deletion candidates but can't figure it out. --Saqib (talk) 12:26, 20 October 2012 (CEST)

<includeonly>category:Speedy deletion candidates</includeonly> should do the trick K7L (talk) 15:52, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

New templatesEdit

Hey, Globe-trotter... I noticed you create Template:Talknotice; did I miss a discussion where the community approved its creation? LtPowers (talk) 18:17, 28 October 2012 (CET)

SpambotsEdit

Hi, Don't forget we ban spambot users indefinitely, but only ban spambot IPs for three months on the first offence. IPs may well be schools/colleges, etc, which may well come good, and will always be unpatrolled. --Inas (talk) 05:45, 29 October 2012 (CET)

TypoEdit

The Project: namespace actually works, unlike "Wikioyage" [13]... This, that and the other (talk) 23:40, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Oops! Annoying keyboard! Fixed.--Globe-trotter (talk) 23:43, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Lively writtingEdit

Hi. I'm sorry if I sound rude, my English is defficient. I didn't modify lively writing but I fixed misconcepts:

  • Even though the island was Christianized by Spanish conquerors (you can visit many of the Jesuit wooden churches all over the island) its inhabitants are also very superstitious.
Very superstitious compared with ......? People around the world believe in God, UFO, ghosts and so on. People in Chiloe believe in God, UFO, ghosts and so on.
You can't visit many Jesuit wooden churches: it only remain two, the others old wooden churches were made by local carpenters with suppot of Franciscans.
  • A singing, fair-haired beauty similar to the German Lorelei is called la pincoya. It is said that if she dances towards the coast the sea will bring a lot of fish.
Accords legend, she dances. Read the second sentence. There is only one Pincoya, so its name should be capitalized.
  • A ghost ship carrying the souls of wrecked sailors, similar to the Flying Dutchman, is called caleuche.
There is only one Caleuche too.
  • And if someone tells you he or she was seduced in the forest, it might have been the fiura or the trauco, which is often blamed for venereal disease or an awkward pregnancy.
Nobody will tell you something alike. Nor Fiura nor Trauco (capitals) were supposed cause venereal diseases. Only Trauco could cause a pregnancy, because Fiura is a horrible woman.
  • A very pitiful figure is the invunche; as a baby his orifices, including his eyes, were closed and one leg was sewn to his back, so that he walks on three legs.
Let's see: if a baby has two legs and you sew one leg to his back, remain one leg, not three.

Please, restore my edition or make another one that fix this problems. Regards. Lin linao (talk) 06:15, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Re: (WT-en) Globe-trotterEdit

It looks like Unger didn't check the box to delete the old user when he merged the two accounts. The account is blocked and not doing any harm at this point, but I can re-merge you and make sure the box gets checked, if you'd like. LtPowers (talk) 02:42, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Why delete an article without any discussion?Edit

Moved to Talk:E11_hiking_trail#Why delete an article without any discussion?

Where do redirected articles go?Edit

You redirected "E11 hiking trail" (as imported from WikiTravel to WikiVoyage) to Wikipedia because that is where it originally came from, but I cannot find it there. "E11 European long distance path" is a slightly different text which was already there. An independent "E11 hiking trail" does not exist in Wikipedia, so where can I find what you redirected? DrMennoWolters (talk) 10:19, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

I didn't redirect to Wikipedia, I redirected E11 hiking trail to Long distance walking in Europe. However, that is now irrelevant. The information from E11 hiking trail can be found in the history. --Globe-trotter (talk) 10:30, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

License reviewEdit

Hey, could you look at this deleted file [14] and confirm it has the same license information as this? Then, would you please add {{License review|site=Wikitravel|user=~~~|date=~~~~~}} to the Commons file description page under licensing.

Thanks! --Peter Talk 21:55, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Does LtPowers' review here [15] not suffice? --Globe-trotter (talk) 22:28, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
That's strange. I guess the filemover bot didn't transfer over his review. I'll ask him to do that separately. --Peter Talk 23:36, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Hengelo or Twente?Edit

Dear Globe-trotter, I notice that the current stub about Hengelo is mostly your creation. I would say that Hengelo is not interesting enough to the foreign tourist to carry an article of its own. Why not redirect from Hengelo, Enschede and other towns and villages to a single but good article about Twente? DrMennoWolters (talk) 16:09, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

These cities are still pretty big I think. Hengelo might not be too interesting for visitors, but should still be able to carry its own article. Enschede can for sure. Some smaller places could merge into one article, like I have done for Wijdemeren, but these are too large I think. --Globe-trotter (talk) 20:19, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Rome/VaticanEdit

Am taking a look at this page: a district I have ignored up to now. The text includes Monte Mario in the district but your map does not and your map seems faithful to the Rome district map. Should I remove Monte Mario refs to Rome/North? Season's Greetings Roundtheworld (talk)

I just followed the Rome map when I drew it up, I don't know about the discussion that led to the current districts set-up. --Maybe you can chip in here: Talk:Rome/Districts :-) Globe-trotter (talk) 17:22, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Broken imageEdit

Hey, I'm going through the articles on Dutch cities to tag or replace missing images. Do you know what happened to this image? It's not on en-WV-old or wts-WV-old, but can still be found on WT. Cheers, —Ruud 01:02, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments about E11Edit

Thank you for bumping the E11 itinerary to "guide" status. Let us continue working on it until it is an excellent example for other itineraries. DrMennoWolters (talk) 18:46, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Bangkok starEdit

Hey, I just realized that Bangkok isn't a star! I definitely think it should be, as it is a great model for anyone trying to create a huge city star guide themselves. Care to nominate it? --Peter Talk 18:20, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I haven't nominated it, because I'm not sure if it's there yet. I did nominate Bangkok/Rattanakosin, but it was slushed. --Globe-trotter (talk) 19:19, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
I would definitely support the nomination, anyway. And I'm not clear on why Rattanakosin was slushed, actually. --Peter Talk 19:24, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Both Bangkok and Bangkok/Rattanakosin both look good and seem to be very worthy Star article candidates. I applied some very minor edits to both articles and left some notes at Bangkok/Rattanakosin discussion page. Possible the Bangkok article has a little too much capitalising for effect in the prose. It's usefulness is understood, but it looks really messy and disjoints the article visually. Some may argue it assists in facilitation quick reader access to key words they may be scanning for. Do we have a guideline on that sort of thing. Not suggesting we start building one or anything, just wondering if there is anything already evolved that discussed that. I cannot recall stumbling upon anything myself. Personally I find it visually irksome. As with Bangkok/Rattanakosin I cannot see a good reason to have the article littered with ( ! ) but I left them untouched at Bangkok during my visit there. I would be happy to support a nomination of Star status on both of them, Even if they might require a few touch ups they are both good sound and informing articles. -- Felix (talk) 14:25, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Nice workEdit

The new layout for the Itineraries and Travel topics pages is a great improvement, and it appears to be your work. Bravo! Pashley (talk) 00:05, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes it's my work, thanks! :-) --Globe-trotter (talk) 00:46, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

U dot S dotEdit

Says who?

And why did you do a block revert of all changes ... no explanations for those. Tony (talk) 05:23, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

See Wikivoyage:Abbreviations. Don't change many of these practices without consulting the community first—they have been discussed for years. It's better to start a discussion on the relevant Talk pages and get consensus before implementing mass policy changes.--Globe-trotter (talk) 05:29, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
You haven't explained your block revert, which is usually considered rude and unhelpful. Tony (talk) 06:01, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
It was a single revert of your changes on that page. You should find consensus for all of them first on the Talk page. "United States of America" has been used here since forever, so if you'd like to change that, you should discuss that first. The same goes for changing "U.S." to "US", for switching all kinds of mdashes throughout the site, and removing the hierarchy bit at the top of the page (which I think is helpful to the reader). --Globe-trotter (talk) 06:11, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
You seem to have ownership problems. These are your private personal opinions, are they? "All kinds of mdashes" is a parody of some of the edits I've made, to clean up the appearance of the text along universally established guidelines for English. And if you're going to bounce back continually with a "that's what we've always done", we won't be good friends. Now the site has migrated to an international organisation, of which the most powerful and mature happens to be an English-language site with well-established and painstakingly worked out guidelines. They are not all applicable here; some key aspects are not applicable. But many are. So now is the time to reconsider your ownership mentality and take on board the need for a few changes after many years of stasis. Tony (talk) 06:18, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
I am not criticizing some good writing you have done, but we don't have to follow Wikipedia's guidelines because we are now a part of the Wikimedia Foundation. This is a different project with different goals and a different use of language. It's fine if you want to make changes, but propose them first instead of mass implementing them without a backing of the community. That's how Wikipedia works too.--Globe-trotter (talk) 06:24, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Did I intimate that WV has to follow WP's guidelines? I thought I made it clear that "some key aspects are not applicable". But frankly, a lot of the guidelines and policies here need urgent attention if the WMF's trademark is going to be at stake. Tony (talk) 06:26, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Clearly you are free to propose any changes you wish to the WV guidelines or policies. Bringing them in line with WP may in some cases be desirable. However, we can't just ignore the existing WV policies and guidelines and apply the WP ones. That way lies chaos. --Inas (talk) 09:02, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in, I came here because I spotted a mention of Star attribution to one of the Thai articles that I an aware Globe-trotter has paid a lot of attention to in the past. Some of the statements Tony has made have some clear veracity and are of course worthy of consideration and appropriate discussion, as others have indicated above.
Although I never saw reason to mention it in the context of the previous incarnation of this travel related project I 'outed' myself when we moved over to WV and linked up my WP and other Wiki accounts. I am familiar with the culture of both WV (and it's deranged sister of another cyber dimension), and also with that of WP. They are both similar but different.
The pervasive WV culture is one of non-confrontational consensus and resolution, we are overall adverse toward censure, flagging things, overt criticism, or temporary/permanent blocks, other than for serial spamming, advertising, or abusive conduct. Overall there is a subtle aversion toward highly formalised disputation resolution or consensus farming. I am certainly not suggesting you are doing that, rather it is just a broad generalised comment.
Block reverts are normally reserved for remedial action to rescue an article from vandalism, or perhaps overcome some clumsy editing by a new or inexperienced contributor. Sometimes they can be useful to prevent a cascade of editing and ensure that the contributor subject to the Block revert has an opportunity to pause and perhaps appreciate there is a problem. This can assist in ensuring they do not waste a lot of possibly well intentioned energy on something that may need subsequent removal or substantial remedial MoS editing effort from a patrolling editor.
It is both a challenge and an opportunity for this WV community to address the guidelines and policies here that need urgent, or less vigourous but still necessary attention.
This (travel project) community was hobbled by the ownership of the host server provider for an extended time. Innovation and change was often sidelined by the more urgent needs of time consuming and distracting demands of spam, vandalism, advertising and self promotional activities due to a very superficial, clunky and unfocused technical backbone provided by the host. There are some technical aspects of WMF that are only recently available to us. There are also matters of policy, project development and usability that we would like to develop. However please do understand that many of us are busy with other pursuits at times, also the task of content migration, content hygiene, post migration content checking, and Commons image linking has been the first priority and it is still an unfinished Post-migration task.
I have conflicted with Globe-trotter myself on some regional style commonality of articles in the past and there is no doubt that if there are any "ownership" issues they arise from a heartfelt and focussed attitude toward the integrity and regional continuity of the articles concerned, and not some sort of petty notion of self importance, possession or control of those articles.
Please be a little kinder and understand that this is overall a very friendly community, and we don't like fighting amongst ourselves. It is unsettling and quite unproductive. Please make suggestions, contribute toward policy development and policy change, that is most welcomed, and encouraged. But please do it by using the appropriate article discussion pages and work with others toward the improvement of the project.
WV will not, and cannot be WP, it is something quite different, otherwise the two projects would have been merged rather than joined in partnership. We must however work with what we have, otherwise as suggested by Inas we will substitute innovation and improvement with only chaos.
Change is often best achieved by organic and holistic process. Unannounced changes and surprises in policy or regional article theme are hopefully not going to a feature of WV. If you wish there are many areas of the project that are begging for article content review, application of standard article MoS and scrubbing of nonsense prose or inappropriate content.
BTY I would also like to see the messy dash issues and the accompanying line-breaks and continuity issues tidied up across the site, mdashes may offer an elegant solution to some typographical issues. But Talk it through, especially if it means approaching an article with a potentially alarming or unsettling revision. I speak from some authority on that as I am no doubt notorious here for doing exactly that sort of thing myself over an extended time on this project's clumsy and now orphaned ugly sibling. Indeed Globe-trotter has been subjected to the unsettling agonies from that very same sort of thing in the past, but dealt from my own hand. I hope this helps a little toward explaining.-- Felix (talk) 12:31, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

"I hope this helps a little toward explaining"—not much, since I'd assumed most of what you said. But thank you for your kind post, Felix. Tony (talk) 13:29, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Felix: I wish things actually were as you described. Many editors here do indeed behave in the way you describe. You yourself and Peter Southwood are glowing examples of the collegiate style of editor that usually subtly edits and persuades by rationality of argument and data on discussion pages rather than crudely and brutally (and quickly - that is a major advantage of) reverts and rollbacks. Unfortunately, Tony seems to have very quickly spotted that it only takes one or two rotten apples to spoil the whole atmosphere. Let's try to embrace change while preserving all that was good about Wikivoyage née Wikitravel. -- Alice 22:24, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Says the one editting my comments into foul language [16] and constantly using personal attacks. I have never used administrator tools when making any of these changes, they are my edits as a user and have nothing to do with the fact that I'm an administrator. I have only restated previous versions of pages that were heavily altered without any community consensus. It's an estasblished practice here to propose big policy changes before implementing them. If you're unwilling to do that, then plunging is fine, but don't be surprised someone steps in and asks you to put some arguments on the table before accepting the changes.Globe-trotter (talk) 22:48, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
We've shaken hands and made up now, GT, so I'd just like you to understand that
1) there was an edit conflict (with you, as it happens) before I'd managed to stick in the rather juvenile attempt at humour with "exterminate, exterminate" referring to your continual nuclear reverts and I was not intending it to come over as "foul language".
2) daleks are not profane body parts in my variety of English. There was a popular British TV series on a Singapore channel called "Dr Who" and they featured in it as rather inexorable but unlovable characters that it was difficult to reason with. I'm sure Wikipedia will have an article if you don't believe me. What does it connote in Dutch, then? -- Alice 00:32, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Island nationsEdit

I'd like to pour some petrol on the embers while they're still glowing by echoing Tony's sentiments that block reverts are usually considered rude and unhelpful.
Especially where the reverting editor has admin tools available to make very quick rollbacks designed to combat vandalism. This situation is exacerbated when the reverting editor is highly prolific and just helicopters in and out of articles without deigning to explain or garner consensus on the the articles' discussion pages. I find it highly ironic (but absolutely correct) that GT, of all people, is suggesting discussing changes on the article's discussion page when this is actually more typical of GT's "collegiate" style:

You might want to understand the context and purpose of that page throughout the years. It has never actually been a travel topic in the way we describe them; that's why in the past I fiddled with what to do with the status rating. It was always featured on the Main Page as a top-level region to make sure that island nations not part of any continent would not get lost in the system (since 2003). That's why Island nations is also used in the breadcrumb trail of islands like Saint Helena. To change that page, would mean a fundamental change in the geographical hierarchy of those islands, and should be discussed first. I explained this to you [17], but you just trolled around and kept insulting me without reading my arguments. --Globe-trotter (talk) 22:32, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

(Edit conflict)

Thank you for replying in such a moderate and cool way, GT.
I must admit you really rile me (and probably lots of other editors) by reverting rather than editing. I'd love to bury the hatchet with you since I certainly respect your knowledge, hard work and ubiquity here. Before you revert stuff other than vandalism would you take the time (at least with frequent editors here - although it could be argued that it's just as important not to bite the newbies) to discuss your wanted revert on the article's discussion page (as you yourself rightly suggest above)? It may genuinely be that you don't understand that "sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander", too, but right now your reverts come over as extremely harassing and demeaning.
I'm genuinely sorry that I did not understand your cryptic "This is a top-level navigation page, that makes sure islands can be found that are not listed under any continent." comment made after your nuclear revert because at that time you had not deleted the travel topic tag nor added the disambiguation template and the article was still entitled Island nations (and not simply "Islands"). Believe me I had looked at the history of the article before I edited it and there was really no clue there that the article was intended to serve the purpose you describe. If it really did serve that purpose then the least you needed to do was to spell out on the discussion page that the title needed changing, the lead needed nuking, it was not a travel topic but a necessary disambiguation page that should NOT have Island Nations listed. Had you done this, I would have proposed moving/restoring the historical content to a new page of Islands, which I assume would serve your real purpose! -- Alice 23:13, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
I understand it's a bit confusing as the Island nations article is now off the Main Page, so it's a bit difficult to still regard them as being a top-level page. Maybe we should find a solution for that. About the reverting, I may have responded a bit fast, I agree with that. I only did so because it was a navigational page, and because there have been people in the past adding long lists of islands to it. There was (at least at that time) a consensus to just keep it to those islands falling outside of the continental hierarchy. I hope we can indeed bury the hatchet as this was mostly a misunderstanding. Globe-trotter (talk) 23:38, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Let's shake hands then and try not to annoy each other un-necessarily; you by editing my contributions rather than reverting, and me by not being time-of-the-month and getting needlessly hot and bothered and lashing out. (Before I read this, I've just made some comments over on the article's discussion page, the tone of which I now regret. I need to attend to some personal stuff right now, but later I'll try and find the time to bowdlerise my comments there.)
I've made a suggestion there (expanding on what I wrote above) and I hope you and others will consider and comment on my suggestion. What I haven't yet said is that i would envision not just a simple categorised list of Island Nations but rather a travel topic of why Island Nations tend to develop along parallel paths often distinct from their colonial/titular/continental neighbours. There are interesting parallels for the traveller, for example, in the British Islands and Japan. I've had the pleasure of visiting both extensively (free of charge because of my work) and I am always amused by the "politeness" rituals of each. It might also be interesting to draw out the similarities and contrasts between the "daddy" islands of NZ and the other much smaller islands of Oceania. -- Alice 00:21, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Breadcrumb navigationEdit

Hello, I guess its fine to use the IsPartOf template in the subpages of the districtified articles. --Saqib (talk) 19:57, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Wrocław in PolishEdit

Thanks for resolving the issue on the Wrocław page. I never even noticed the redundancy! Jimmu (talk) 04:58, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Bus TravelEdit

Hi Globe-trotter, I see you moved Bus Travel to Bus travel, but the page is empty. Do you want me to add a file to start the page? Lotje (talk) 10:50, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

It seems like someone has deleted that page. I can just delete the page and clean it up, unless you really want to write about Bus travel :-) Globe-trotter (talk) 11:50, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
No, I do no not want to write about bus travelling, so I guess you can go ahead deleting the page without upsetting anyone. BTW, do you speak Dutch ? :-) Lotje (talk) 12:28, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Ik spreek Nederlands ja :-) Globe-trotter (talk) 12:33, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Wat leuk, ik nl. ook :-) Lotje (talk) 12:37, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Netherlands vs HollandEdit

Hi, you reverted my edit in the Netherlands article regarding the incorrectness of calling the whole country Holland. While you are correct that the tourist site is called Holland.com, this is to cater to ignorant foreigners. I've communicated with them before, and they have indicated that while it is incorrect, they are using it to conform to common usage. However, that does not make it any less incorrect. I am putting it back in. No reason to further stroke the egos of overly arrogant westerners..... Fgf10 (talk) 07:43, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

This is a travel site, not an encyclopedia. If it's common usage to travellers, it should be common usage here. We are not here to judge what's "correct" or not, we follow common usage. Globe-trotter (talk) 13:13, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
I edited it. Are others happy with my version? Pashley (talk)
GT is not wrong in what he states above but, in the same way it would be unnecessarily and gratuitously offensive to keep referring to the whole British nation's landmass as "England", it does seem an unnecessary provocation to provide other than a short explanation in the lead and a disambiguation page. It was certainly good to remove "metonymically", but the best place to discuss this may be at http://en.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Netherlands&oldid=2115282#Netherlands_vs._Holland -- Alice 21:51, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

XiamenEdit

I notice that you are almost the only one other than me who has edited Xiamen lately. I've been doing a fair bit there and in Gulangyu, hoping to get them to Guide, then DOTM. Both still need some cleanup, though, and I am getting burned out.

When things here slow down a bit (around Hallowe'en?), please take a look. Pashley (talk) 20:55, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Both articles are now about as far as I can take them. Care to comment? Some discussion at Talk:Xiamen#Guide.3F. Pashley (talk) 13:47, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

2 for the price of 1Edit

Why did we need both {{starcountry}} and {{countryguide}} templates at the bottom of Singapore? Surely that country article can not have both statuses simultaneously, can it ? -- Alice 08:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Only the {{starcountry}}, or in this case {{destarnomination}} reflects the status, the {{countryguide}} template is just a machine-readable tag, so that bots can know it is a country article. Globe-trotter (talk) 08:33, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Oh dear! I fear I've removed a lot of what I thought were conflicting (old) versions of the status template over the last few months then. Sorry! -- Alice 08:43, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
It doesn't really matter, it doesn't do that much :-) Globe-trotter (talk) 08:46, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
It's certainly confusing. The presence of an article-status template (such as, confusingly, guidecountry) should be sufficient to identify the article as a country. It may be time to delete the old *guide templates. LtPowers (talk) 20:01, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
That's comforting. I still feel a bit of a Lulu, though. -- Alice 21:30, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

AutopatrollerEdit

Hi! I saw that you changed the user group in the logs for selected users. How do you do this? I want User:Tine -a German WV admin- add on the autopatroller list. Thank you, jan (talk) 21:20, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Go to "user contributions" and then to "user rights management" at the top. Also took me a while to find :-) Globe-trotter (talk) 21:25, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you! Too many new gadgets;-) jan (talk) 21:43, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
==== Scandinavia and the Nordics ==

Hi

I saw you changed "Scandinavia and the Nordics" to "Scandinavia" in the Europe article. While this is not an encyclopedia, Finland and Iceland are not a part of Scandinavia, and it was my understanding that this was the reason for that expression. I know that a lot of English speakers use "Scandinavia" for the whole Nordic region, but as long as that is part of it I don't see any harm in leaving "and the Nordics". Could we change it back? Mads.bahrt (talk) 22:55, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

This was heavily discussed in the past, but tourism organizations use "Scandinavia" with Iceland and Finland included. Wikivoyage tends to use short and snappy names that travellers recognize. Scandinavia is very recognizable and everyone knows what you mean, while Nordics (even if officially more correct) doesn't ring a bell with many people. Some other regions are also technically incorrect, but used anyway (such as the Balkans). Globe-trotter (talk) 23:05, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Ashmore CartierEdit

Are nothing more than just more than reefs in a very dubious status as a place where people smugglers are found trying to bring more refugees into australia illegaly, and in effect are really of a status like Heard (dont bother even thinking about it) in the southern part of the Indian - is there a protocol with such an entry to wikivoyage? it seems a tad strange to have templated structure of a potential wikivoyage article - it is quite misleading - surely? I ask this as I will be dealing some time down the track with some more isolated locations in tasmania where accepted means of access are very very limited if not awkward to say the least and the example of the ashmore cartier seems a good one to consider and ask questions about.. cheers sats (talk) 00:22, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm not totally sure how we deal with such islands. But if there are people living on it, or it can be travelled to but is far from other places, then we usually do make an article about it I think. Globe-trotter (talk) 06:11, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your response - nobody lives on it (like Heard) but might have had temporary human presence in the past (like Heard), I like your clarification 'i think' - I suspect there should be a category of very difficult to live on or very difficult to get to locations that - technically a well off well equiped long distance ocean travelling person might have the capacity to visit for a brief visit - however there are places that have legal restrictions (Macquarie) where the Australian government I think (now I am doing it) have rules as to access to limit damage to island ecology... Also like some military/intelligence sensitive islands that exist in the Indian - advice should be in relation to the severe restrictions of access that are enforced with force... sats (talk) 08:13, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
btw I used to have access to lots of info re cape horn region - the sensitivies about that region between chileans and argentinians is astonishing - good to see you are careful with the patagonian info - almost as electric as some other hotspots in the world... sats (talk) 08:23, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

OutlinesEdit

I commented on some of your edits; see Wikivoyage_talk:Article_status#Terminology. Pashley (talk) 21:22, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Re: ApeldoornEdit

Graag gedaan! I love your Hilversum article, I referred to it quite a lot while working on Apeldoorn. Any tips for improving the article further will be appreciated! :) Natataek (talk) 13:58, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

oh, and if you have the time, one of your nice maps would look good on the page! ;) Natataek (talk) 14:18, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

DeletionsEdit

Hi. In case you wonder I was checking the files on Special:UncategorizedFiles. So if you have some spare time now and then you are most welcome to pick a few :-) --MGA73 (talk) 18:39, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

A loooot of files there.... Unbelievable we haven't tackled this before. Globe-trotter (talk) 18:42, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for deleting :-) Perhaps Category:Files on Wikimedia Commons is easier to work on? That should eliminate many of the files. --MGA73 (talk) 15:35, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

IndonesiaEdit

Ho Globe-trotter, firstly my apologies. I have wanted to respond to your input on the discussions on the Indonesia Talk page but I am really tight on time at the moment. I have a stack of multi-faceted projects in front of me that are making my head spin and yet I don't want to drop the ball on the comments you have raised on that talk page and just appear to leave them without a response.

I am a bit confused over the detail emerging on UK/US/Commonwealth English there. You prudently linked to Wikivoyage:Spelling and mentioned "essentially says that U.S. English should be used for all articles, except for those with a history of British usage (Commonwealth countries + Ireland)". Yet when I look there I see "Wikivoyage prefers no major national variety of English over any other." and I also see; "If the destination has no history of using English and no clear preference for the variety to use, we prefer US English spelling", and of course I understand the context of the full paragraph. My viewpoint is that Indonesia does provide sufficient cause to use 'Commonwealth' En.

So what I would like to discuss is specific to the Indonesian article, yet of course it also embodies the broader issues that have already been worked over many times on the Spelling talk page.

I don't want to start a discussion here on you talk own page, I don't think that would be sufficiently inclusive of others. However the Indonesian Talk page has some other issues at hand at the moment.
I started writing something on this last night but ran out of time and had to run away.

I was considering starting a new section on the Indonesian Talk page (heading it Regional spelling use for the Indonesian article) but things are a bit lively there at the moment. I am reluctant to bring it up on the Spelling Talk page as I fear the specifics of the Indonesian article will promptly get swallowed up in any broader discussion that evolves. Also it has been thrashed to death there many times, or at least to the point a tacit sort of collective agreement appears to exist to leave it alone. You may recall I expressed some support for your table (on Spelling Talk) but I remain a fence sitter on the issue of rigidity in applying something like this as it opens up a can of worms in the context of patrolling and guiding contributions. I can see some consensus on that in that if we did something like that then it creates a 'policy' or 'guideline' that then needs to be applied/or may be applied, and in turn that somewhat conflicts with principals of Plunge forward, indeed it potentially provides quite a wet blanket in that regard. So that is why I am quite reluctant to bring it up on Spelling Talk. Any suggestions on the suitable venue for discussing this? It's not urgent, we could just wait until the Indonesia Talk page calms down a bit, or just fire it up there in a different section. Let me know what you think. -- Felix (talk) 22:08, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Åland Islands not autonomous?Edit

In your edit http://en.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=Scandinavia&diff=2129306&oldid=2127007 you removed the Åland Islands from the list of territorries that now only contains Greenland and the Faeroe Islands. I'm not expert but as far as I can tell Åland has a level of autonomy with respect to Finland very similar to the Faeroese and Greenlandic autonomy within Denmark. They also have a level of cultural distinction from Finland similar to Greenland and the Faeroe Islands within Denmark. Like Greenland it has had a seperate referendum on EU membership (but they made opposite choices). Why did you consider it any more integral than Greenland and the Faeroe Islands? Mads.bahrt (talk) 23:24, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

They are autonomous by treaty, but an integral part of Finland. Faroe Islands and Greenland are dependencies, outlying territories of Denmark. The Åland Islands are better compared with Svalbard, except, well, Svalbard happens to speak the same language as the mainland. Wikipedia quotes it as follows:

Many political entities have a special position recognized by international treaty or agreement resulting in a certain level of autonomy or differences in immigration rules. These are sometimes considered dependencies, but are officially considered by their controlling states to be integral parts of the state. Examples are Åland (Finland), Svalbard (Norway), Azores (Portugal), Madeira (Portugal), Hong Kong (China), and Macau (China).

However, maybe more important here on Wikivoyage, the Åland Islands clearly fall under Finland in the hierarchy, so they don't need to be listed on that page. I wouldn't be necessarily opposed to changing that, but then we'd probably also have to list Svalbard on that page. Globe-trotter (talk) 00:52, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
I don't see you point, but it might be me missing a finer nuance due to linguistic barriers. Like described in the text above there is international treaties specifying that the Faeroe Islands and Greenland is not part of the EU, which, like in the text above, results in different immigration rules (ie. a Schengen Visa is not valid for these areas, but a Danish Visa are...). Also, like in the text above, Greenland and the Faeroe Island are still considered an integral part of Denmark, although they have a large degree of autonomy in internal matters and it is accepted that they are allowed to secede from Denmark if and when they choose to do so. In the meantime, since I wrote to you, somebody else reverted you deletion and started discussion on Talk:Scandinavia so I suggest we continue talking there if needed. Mads.bahrt (talk) 19:59, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

* Revised Indonesian History *Edit

Your comments would be greatly appreciated about my attempt at revising and making concise the Indonesian history section, here: [18]. ReveurGAM (talk) 04:42, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

A map for ManilaEdit

Hi there!, i have been admiring the maps that you have done and i am completely fascinated about it. The reason that i messaged you is that i have been thinking if you can create a map for Manila like the one in Bangkok and Berlin because i've also planned to create a map of Manila, but the problem is, i can't create a map like the one you did on Bangkok, Berlin and Amsterdam. Why Manila? because i am currently living here and i believe that my city would really a deserve a nice map from you. So i am really hoping that you could create a map for my city. Here's a district map of Manila:

 
District Map of Manila
 
Map of Bangkok


Hoping to hear from you soon!, and if you need more maps of Manila, just let me know. --Miguel raul 01:38 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Schiphol airportEdit

As a part of the airport expedition Amsterdam Airport Schiphol got its own article. I guess this is your "home airport" so maybe you would have some first hand information to add to that article? Ypsilon (talk) 14:31, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll add some I know :-) Globe-trotter (talk) 17:34, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Qibao mergeEdit

At Talk:Shanghai/Qibao I have suggested removing a merge tag which you applied. Any comment? Pashley (talk) 12:42, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I have left a comment at Talk:Shanghai/Qibao. Globe-trotter (talk) 20:53, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Field decorationEdit

  The Barnstar of Diligence
is awarded in recognition of extraordinary scrutiny and persistence. We've had our disagreements but I admire that you both spotted and reverted a major change of policy that seemed to have occurred unnoticed many months ago. W. Franke-mailtalk 14:36, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
Unbelievable no one noticed that in six months! :-) Globe-trotter (talk) 14:37, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
Yup, that's why you've been decorated in the field, GT! --W. Franke-mailtalk 14:47, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikivoyage:Community portalEdit

Nice work on the page. Keep it up! --Saqib (talk) 10:31, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! :) Globe-trotter (talk) 11:11, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Musandam PeninsulaEdit

Hi Globe-trotter, here comes another beggar for a map. I nominated Musandam for OtBP and content etc. is fine but it is hard to find inputs for a map as OSM is very weak in that area. I discussed a while ago with Peter that topic but his only solution is a hand-drawn map that orientates on bing/google maps. I totally failed with hand-drawning. Are you capable to do a starter? I'm willing to do maps but so far i need a base like OSM to get started as i'm completely lost with green fields drawings. It doesn't need to be perfect but Musandam is very rough and orientation is a key point. Thank you in advance and best regards, jan (talk) 13:52, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

It's not allowed to trace over Google or Bing Maps as that could be considered a copyright violation. If you mean drawing maps completely by hand, I'm afraid I'm the wrong person as I definitely can't do that ;) Globe-trotter (talk) 14:00, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
I fear that Peter meant what you are afraid of. Like me, too;) The http://www.openstreetmap.org/ map of Musandam be enough for you to start a simple map? jan (talk) 14:08, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Hey now, to be clear, I encouraged no such thing! Quoth meself plus emphasis: draw free-hand whatever streets you think are essential to include, without directly copying them from another source. If Jan doesn't have enough knowledge of the place to do that, then we're probably stuck waiting for coverage to improve on OSM, or for higher resolution satellite imagery to be released of the area under a suitable license. Waiting can yield results though—I was dismayed years ago that we couldn't produce high quality maps of Russian destinations, but OSM now has very good coverage there. --Peter Talk 04:50, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
Keep in mind that OSM is basically a Wiki; if it lacks coverage in an area you'd like to see more coverage, the obvious solution is to work on covering that area. =) LtPowers (talk) 13:36, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
LtP: I'm registered at OSM but i don't get the way they work. I gave up because there is not a really welcoming spirit imho compared to WV. jan (talk) 13:38, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
I've never interacted with the community. But they have permission to use satellite imagery to create their free maps, so you can just go over there, draw the streets on top of the satellite photo, and get your OSM map that way, without ever needing to talk to anyone. I'm not sure what kind of "welcoming spirit" you're looking for. LtPowers (talk) 14:43, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Sockpuppet policyEdit

Hi GT, I see you have removed the reference to sockpuppets from the policies page with the edit summary "sockpuppet policy redirected". Where to? Cheers, • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 19:22, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

See Wikivoyage:Sock puppets :-) Globe-trotter (talk) 19:35, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
I didn't notice that policy discussion! So much is happening its difficult to keep track. Are you planning to put anything on the policy directory to help people find the new checkuser policy? • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 20:53, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

NutshellsEdit

Just a quick note to thank you for all your great work on nutshells!

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:19, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

The Netherlands article - ownership?Edit

Dear Globe-trotter,

Seeing that you are an administrator and a veteran member of the community, I am most surprised by your vast alterations to the Netherlands article, which to me look as if you treated the article as your own. I disagree with so many of them that I do not even have the time now (and hopefullly witll this coming weekend) to list them in the talk page.

While it is one of the founding principles of Wikivoyage to plunge forward with any changes one sees fit, as it is in most wikis, I grew accustomed over my short stay here that such wide-ranging changes are usually discussed in the talk page of a given article. I would love for you to do that regarding both the changes you did and any other major ones you plan. As this is a country-level article, I would even consider an RfC to gather as many opinions as possible.

Please do consider that other members of the community may not agree with you and do discuss on the talk page. I find it disconcerting when somebody with an administrator status displays what I would describe at Wikipedia as ownership issues with an article.

Met vriendelijke groeten,

PrinceGloria (talk) 05:42, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

The wiki way can be great for gathering and updating collections of travel facts and tips but does sometimes make for rather lumpy prose. Sometimes it can be a good thing for an editor with vision and a knowledge of our MoS to have a bit of a spring clean. It can be very difficult and laborious to discuss in abstract detail and in advance major changes. GT has made a lot of his edits in small sections with explanatory edit summaries, so it should not be too difficult to reverse or change anything genuinely controversial.
One thing I do deprecate with his edits is his attitude to images. He has removed a lot of images without explaining why. Although this may be good for folks with slow or expensive connections it's rather negated by his use of forced large display sizes in the few that remain. He needs to remember that WV is not just printed medium and to respect the image size preferences that may have been set by registered users. --W. Franke-mailtalk 09:05, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
To PrinceGloria: instead of writing this wall of text, name things you disagree with so we can talk about it. Plunge forward is among our most important guidelines. To pretend I "own" the article is a pretty outrageous claim. It's owned by the community, and you're free to adapt it, change it or improve it as you see fit. My changes were not even that big. I mostly used existing information, and formatted it more like the United States of America article.
About the images, just like the text, they grew very unwieldy. I cut back 37 low quality tiny images to 13 good quality larger ones. The image policy preaches "minimal use of images", and for good reason. Images of corporate logos, road signs, hotel chains, and public transport passes are not going to excite a traveller going to visit a country. Add or remove images as you see fit.
And the image size, quite frankly, there is no community consensus on what it should be. I often use 350px, a star article like Chicago uses 300px. It's up to the writers. Personally I believe 350px is on the small size, considering we're writing a travel guide, and we use images to make an impression to the reader. That's why other travel guides also use large images. However, if you want to change all image sizes to 300px, be my guest.Globe-trotter (talk) 11:21, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
You make a good point about wanting to use inspirational images; however, sometimes a picture (or even more, a map or diagram) can be worth several hundred words of explanation.
I fear you have entirely missed the point about thumbnails and fixed image sizes expressed in pixels. My point does not involve quibbling about whether 270px or 300px or 360px is better. No, you should either specify no size at all in thumbnails or use the upright=a-factor-of-the-user-set-preference syntax. Here's a succinct explanation why:
http://en.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=Wikivoyage_talk:Image_policy&oldid=2315806#Image_sized_as_factor_of_default --W. Franke-mailtalk 11:53, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
That's your opinion. I have a different opinion on this matter, and so do many others in the discussion you refer to. Globe-trotter (talk) 12:08, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

A belated reply to your post on my talk pageEdit

I managed to write a reply to your message on my talk page, I do hope some of the stuff became clearer, and it did to myself as well. Please see the reply below just to make sure you know where I come from - and I hope some of it is already clear to both of us. Most importantly, nothing personal intended. Feel free to delete the below if you believe it is not relevant anymore. PrinceGloria (talk) 03:41, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Dear Globe-trotter, I am sorry that you feel the way you do. I do not have a particular interest in yourself, and I hope you do not mind that I do not, but you happen to edit quite a bit of pages that we share common interest in, such as regarding the Netherlands. The Twitter thing was also one that I somehow got involved in after Nick started the thing up, it is just a coincidence that you edited a sequence of articles I keep on my watchlist recently.
There are also not that many editors involved in Wikivoyage. Touching any particular article or issue is going to affect somebody personally, as it would probably be to a large extent their work that is being discussed. I know it does touch me personally when people somehow question, modify or revert my work.
As concerns Schiphol and the "discover" bit, I was genuinely convinced you are referring to the Fokker museum. I did not consider the Rijskmuseum outpost a legitimate museum at all (which I now believe we may want to discuss), and do believe me it did not cross my mind you may be even referring to that, I genuinely believed you meant the Fokker Museum. I now see how that appeared nonsensical to you, and I hope you will now appreciate my point of view as well.
By the way, neither the Rijksmuseum outpost nor the Fokker museum are unique. Do let me get some rest before I will dig out some more examples. Neither is the first (and the Fokker museum predated the Rijksmuseum outpost thing), nor are they unique.
We seem to generally hold divergent views on many issues and will often clash because of that, but I guess this will only be beneficial to Wikivoyage in general. While I am all happy to edit some articles or take care of some issues I somehow "have for my own", because there aren't more editors involved, I do miss the critical oversight and the chance to have my clear convictions challenged, and I know it is better for Wikivoyage whenever they are. I hope you do as well.
I will be more careful in addressing your edits in the future, as I understand I made it appear as if there was something personal about it, which I assure you there is not. And I guess I might have handled everything better, so this is a learning experience for me.
Kind regards, PrinceGloria (talk) 03:41, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
Just for the quick record, Wikipedia even has a list of airport museums in the US alone. They are not the same as the Rijksmuseum thing, and with appropriate phrasing it can be made to be "first" and "world only" if all the caveats are kept, but all in all, I believe it really boils down to Schiphol's PR being very generous to themselves and us not really having to go with their flow. I love Schiphol to bits, they are my favourite airport in every way (even their FB is the most friendly one and my favourite, they even answer my queries to KLM that KLM's regularly great social media folks sometimes fail to address), but we need to inform our readers well in the first place.
I know I am ignorant, but to me the Rijksmuseum thing was really not a big deal. I now understand it was only me and it is, so I fully support having it in "Discover" and, subsequently, on Twitter (which Nick does pretty much automatically, no need to remind him extra).
Kindest, PrinceGloria (talk) 03:50, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
I didn't know the Twitter automatically takes the Discover section into account, so that was a mistake on my side. Anyway, circumstances unfolded a bit unfortunate, and I was also confused about some things, so I think all is fine. About Schiphol, I don't mind if you tweak it and improve the wording as you're right that there is some PR fluff to it. I was just confused as to why you'd change it into something completely different, but now looking back at how it was done, I see there was a good intention to improve the Discover page. So it's all good. Globe-trotter (talk) 12:18, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Bistrița-Năsăud CountyEdit

I see that you renamed Bistrița-Năsăud County. Note that when you rename a region, as well as changing the isPartOf parameters of sub-regions and towns (which in this case you have done) the category of the region also needs to be renamed. Also any redirects to the original name need to be fix as now there are a number of links that do not completely work. I often follow up such moves with fixes but in this case I think this page should be with others merged into regions that currently do not exist. If you look at Transylvania the regions named in the article do not exist then towns are organised by counties, of which most are only structural pages linking to towns and villages. Do you know the area? Are the proposed regions acceptable ones for reorganising to towns to? --Traveler100 (talk) 10:42, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Listing QuestionEdit

User:Wrh2Bot will definitely make an occasional error, as noted in the bot nomination, and I very much appreciate any cleanups. However, this edit is for a listing that includes an email, URL and prices, so shouldn't it use the listing format? My understanding is that whenever a listing contains structured data it should use the appropriate template. -- Ryan • (talk) • 23:48, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

It's not really one listing, but a description of hiking possibilities. I think it works better in prose... Globe-trotter (talk) 23:51, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
OK, hopefully manual cleanup of such listings will be OK then - the bot assumes that * '''[http://example.com Name]''' or * '''Name''' followed within 75 characters by a URL or email address represents a listing (provided there is only one email/URL in the listing). -- Ryan • (talk) • 00:02, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
It's no problem. I'll work some more on that section. Globe-trotter (talk) 00:09, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

TravemündeEdit

Hi g-t, i hope you are fine. In the past weeks i put in a lot of effort into the Travemünde article. I think it is in a good shape but you are very experienced in bringing articles up to Star. This is my first nomination, so i would very much appreciate if you could check and comment. Thank you very much and best regards, jan (talk) 12:36, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Logo submissionsEdit

Hey, as a fan of your submission, I would recommend reducing the number of iterations that are up for vote—ideally down to whichever seems the most popular. If there is more than one to vote for, then the votes of people who support your general idea might get diluted. --Peter Talk 01:11, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Phone numbersEdit

Hallo Globetrotter, even in het Nederlands. Ik heb meerdere laptops. Als ik naar een WV pagina ga en een telefoonnummer zie, dan wordt op een van mijn laptops het telefoonnummer gevolgd door een icoontje van een telefoonhoorn. Als ik daarop tik dan wordt dat betreffende nummer gebeld. Op deze laptop is Microsoft Lync geinstalleerd. Ik vermoed dat dat de reden is (maar weet dat niet zeker). Deze optie is natuurlijk heel handig maar, dan moet het telefoonnummer wel de juiste formatering hebben. Dat is helaas niet overal het geval. Als ik me aan de Engelstalige richtlijnen houd, zoals bijvoorbeeld in France onder Connect aangegeven staat (ik ben met wat Franse artikeltjes bezig), dan werkt het. Als ik me aan de Nederlandse richtlijnen houd, dan werkt het niet. Dat komt omdat daar de landcode en het netnummer in italic weergegeven moeten worden. Bijvoorbeeld +31 70 werkt niet door die dubbele quotes. Voorbeeld: (en) +31 70 1234567 (nl) +31 70 1234567. Bij (en) zie ik het icoontje en bij (nl) niet. Ik weet niet of jij het icoontje ziet. Dat alles ter informatie. WiDi (talk) 10:10, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Die dubbele quotes kan je weghalen bij de Nederlandse artikelen, dat is nog de syntax van vroeger (en kennelijk heeft niemand de moeite genomen deze te updaten). Nu moeten telefoonnummers op alle artikelen weergegeven worden zonder dubbele quotes. Dat lost gelijk jouw probleem op :-) Globe-trotter (talk) 10:23, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
Ik ben benieuwd naar dat icoontje. Zie jij dat ook? Is dat bekend of loop ik hopeloos achter? WiDi (talk) 10:29, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
Ik heb het niet :-) Volgens mij wordt die geinstalleerd door Skype, maar Lync zou ook kunnen. Globe-trotter (talk) 11:03, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
In mij geval is het Lync. Kan heel handig zijn. Formatering is dan belangrijk. Ook op de Duitse en Franse WV pagina's zijn de formateringen fout en werkt het niet. Maar goed... Ik zal er voortaan rekening mee houden. Bedankt voor je antwoord. WiDi (talk) 11:37, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. I thought you might be interested to know that that other site is selling you out. Your specific image I mention in the discussion was posted here. Texugo (talk) 22:57, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Winnipeg region listEdit

I noticed that you have removed the regionlist template from the Winnipeg article. Peter and I have been working on a replacement neighbourhood map that, once complete, would require the regionlist template. Do you mind if I revert your edit? -- Alvanson (talk) 16:27, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

I should also add that there are presently no plans to district the Winnipeg article. See the talk page for the discussion so far. -- Alvanson (talk) 16:32, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
The regionlist template should only be used if the city is districtified. Else sections about neighborhoods should look more like Lausanne#Districts. But I should have looked in the Talk page first, apologies for that.Globe-trotter (talk) 16:36, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
Given the discussion on the talk page, can your last edit be reverted? Alternatively, is there an alternative way to present the city's neighbourhoods that integrates with the proposed map? -- Alvanson (talk) 16:46, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
You can revert for now if you wish, but I think somewhere down the line someone else will change it as I have. Because the regionlist template is only used for Wikivoyage districts, not for background information about neighborhoods. The proposed map looks like a typical Districts map, it should only be used if the city is districtified. Globe-trotter (talk) 17:02, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcomeEdit

I am a pretty experienced wikipedian (I was awarded an "I edit wikipedia" tee-shirt not long ago) but have discovered the "difference between us and them" section and am taking it to heart. I have jumped in and made a few exploratory edits, marked a page or two on my watchlist and will see what happens. So here is question # 1. I am the holder of a large family archive (the carpchives) of images, but most of them are historic. It is not clear to me yet how much wikivoyage wants/needs photographs from 50 or 100 years ago. It appears to me that it is focused pretty much on the here-and now. As well, of course, on the there-and-now. Any thoughts? Suggestions? Insights? Theories? on this? Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 17:52, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes Wikivoyage is about travel, so a photographs of 50 or 100 years ago don't have a lot of value for this project. But I think Commons or Wikipedia would be very happy with them! Globe-trotter (talk) 18:05, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
This is what I suspected. As it turns out, I do have some more recent shots and just uploaded #1. Thanks for the answer, Carptrash (talk) 18:48, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Editing linksEdit

Thank you for your note - just trying to help out a little bit! Matroc (talk) 00:58, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

TOC of Mitzpe RamonEdit

I saw you reverted my change to the TOC there, so please reply at Talk:Mitzpe Ramon#TOC in banner?. Regards, Tamuz (talk) 15:29, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Plane logo?Edit

Hi Globe-trotter, I hope you're well!

I was very happy to see your "plane logo" become one of the three finalists in the voting for our new Wikivoyage logo, but now I see that some other proposal (which is far less favourable in my eyes) is garnering much attention due to users working on modifying it and responding to comments by others.

I was wondering if you lost the enthusiasm and are throwing the towel with your logo proposal, or whether you would be posting modified verisons and addressing comments and remarks at the Finalist review over at the meta.

Cheerio,

PrinceGloria (talk) 05:01, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm a huge fan of the airplane as well. Please see my comment here, though, as I believe that is what requires G-t's attention. --Peter Talk 21:51, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

GPX namespaceEdit

Hello! You might be interested in this discussion about creating a new namespace for GPX (instance of using article mainspace), or moving the GPX files to Wikimedia Commons, or Wikidata. Cheers! Nicolas1981 (talk) 05:35, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Regions of the NetherlandsEdit

Hi, just wanted to point you to Talk:Netherlands. PrinceGloria is arguing for the division in 4 regions to be replaced by the provinces. I personally find that a bad idea, but I would like some others familiar with the Netherlands to weigh in before putting too much work in the Southern, Eastern and Northern Netherlands. Thanks! :-) JuliasTravels (talk) 15:24, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

moving regionsEdit

hi, just a little request that when you move a region that you then edit the cities in that region. If this is not done the breadcrumbs of those cities do not work. --Traveler100 (talk) 06:05, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Globe-trotter/Archives".