Hello, everybody! If you'd like to discuss anything with me, please post new topics at the bottom of the page and sign the posts with 4 tildes (the ~ key) in a row. Thanks!

Currently inactive discussions can be found at User talk:Ikan Kekek/archive. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:50, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Yoga spammerEdit

Just so you know, the IP editor whose edits you reverted for touting actually created an account known as Skmishra5, which I had earlier banned for being a spambot. I've blocked the IP address for 6 months for block evasion, but please feel free to reduce the length of the block if you think it's too harsh. The dog2 (talk) 21:19, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Please don't disable talk page and email access for IP blocks unless absolutely necessary—if the IP address is reassigned or shared (which is common), it makes it almost impossible for users accidentally caught up in the block to tell us about the problem. I would also say that a 6-month block is way too long as a response to 17 minutes of touting from an IP address. Wikivoyage:How to handle unwanted edits suggests three days as an initial length when blocking is necessary. Thanks for removing the touting, by the way. —Granger (talk · contribs) 21:27, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
Granger, doesn't block evasion by a registered user trigger an automatic indefinite block? The equivalent of that for an IP address would be like 3 months, or at least 1 month. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:44, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
I have adjusted the block settings to allow for email and talk page access, but I want to mention that the user was not just inserting touty language into articles. After I reverted Skmishra5's edits for touting (and provided to link to the relevant policy page in the edit summary, so the user should have been pinged on that), (s)he proceeded to create a page with no travel content and only advertising for their his/her business, which is why I proceeded to ban the user as a spambot. And the IP editor in question made the exact same edit as Skimshra5 after I had banned him/her, which is why this constitutes block evasion. I'm happy to reduce the block length to 1 month or 3 months if that's what both of you think is more proportionate an action. The dog2 (talk) 00:00, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for restoring email and talk page access. As far as I can tell, this tout's edits took place over a total of less than two hours, with less than 20 minutes coming from the anonymous IP. I don't see that an IP block of multiple months makes sense on that basis, considering that it's common for IP addresses to change or be shared. But I'll defer to you two on that. —Granger (talk · contribs) 05:46, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
I see. Yeah, a bit of lenience could be offered in that situation. However, I think I'd block for a month but leave a user talk page message. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:35, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
I'll reduce the block to one month, and restore talk page and email access to the tout's account. The reason why I came down so harsh is because (s)he was not just inserting touty listings into existing articles, but also creating pages with only touting and no travel content, but I guess we can be lenient in this case since was over a relatively short period. If the user starts using his/her talk page for touting, then I'll restore the block. The dog2 (talk) 15:59, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. Let me clarify that I'm not really thinking of this in terms of lenience vs. harshness, but rather a matter of costs vs. benefits to the project and avoiding collateral damage. Since the tout was active very briefly, there's not much reason to think they'll try to come back months from now, and there's not much reason for confidence that they'll still have the same IP address months from now either. (So the expected benefits of a long block are relatively low, and the risk of collateral damage is relatively high, compared to a disruptive user who is active at the same IP address multiple times over a period of weeks or months.) If they do start touting again from the same IP address after a month it will be very easy to block it again. —Granger (talk · contribs) 16:57, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
I agree. I also don't think a month-long block is lenient. The next time, it could be 3 months, but that's really unnecessary when we're dealing with a low-volume tout. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:44, 27 October 2020 (UTC)


Hi Ikan!

Thanks for adding more POIs to the Broadway itinerary. I added listings that were in the articles (all See listings, and some Do and Buy listings that are notable/famous, like the Macy's department store, or seemed notable based on their descriptions), but I wasn't sure which other places merit a listing. --Ypsilon (talk) 16:39, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

You bet! I feel like an itinerary up Broadway requires more listings so that people know something about the interesting buildings they're passing. I'll eventually add the listings to the district articles, too, but there's a lot more to add. w:Broadway (Manhattan)#Notable buildings will be useful to us, and w:List of buildings and structures on Broadway in Manhattan will probably be useful, too. I'll remember to look through those articles for buildings I recognize, like and/or consider important. For the Bronx and other points north, w:U.S. Route 9 in New York looks like it'll be useful. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:01, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Mozart opera overturesEdit

I've watched Le Nozze di Figaro, Don Giovanni, Così fan tutte and Die Zauberflöte, and as far as I recall, none of those operas feature snippets of later musical numbers in their overture. Do you know of any Mozart operas that do? The dog2 (talk) 21:04, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Listen again. I think all 4 do, but Don Giovanni, Le Nozze di Figaro and Die Zauberflöte certainly do. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:30, 15 November 2020 (UTC)


Yea sorry about that, no disruption intended, I didn't read the sentence properly when I did that --Thegooduser (talk) 01:25, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Not a problem! Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:30, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

small typo in your last postingEdit

16:30, 18 November 2020 (UTC) —The preceding comment was added by Ottawahitech (talkcontribs)

Hi. I have no idea which edit you're referring to, but any time I make a small typo, just edit it, either with the "minor edit" symbol or with an edit summary of "typo" or something. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:00, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi Ikan Kekek I can't remember which typo I was looking at, but I can probably find it if it is important to you. By the way the reason I notified you is because fixing typos in someone's else comments is considered taboo on enwiki. Cheers, Ottawahitech (talk) 16:03, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Oh, this is in a talk page post by me? You can give me a link to the edit next time. Just click the "History" tab in the relevant talk page and look for the specific difference. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:58, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Usually small typos are just left alone. If the meaning becomes unclear because of the typo, one can ask in the thread (or – if warranted for some reason – on the user talk page, linking the edit or section). Link fixes and the like are sometimes done in others' comments, but that is delicate enough that I don't want to give advice on it. –LPfi (talk) 21:13, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
I leave typos in other people's comments on talk pages alone. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:16, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

An award for you!Edit

  The Wikivoyage Barncompass
I am giving you this for all your hard work on Wikivoyage. Cupper52 (talk) 09:00, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. I appreciate your understanding. I've deleted several of the links you've added because they were circular (ended up going back to the same page) or red (no such article). Keep on editing, and don't hesitate to ask me any question you like. Within reason (no meaning of life or whether there's a Supreme Being, you know). :-) Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:09, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Da capo ariasEdit

I'm a little torn on this, so I'd like to ask if you think it's worth mentioning what this term means. You'll need to know it if you watch a Baroque, Rococo or even early Classical period opera, though as we know, the only operas of those periods that are in the modern standard repertoire are the Handel and Gluck operas, and the operas that people are most likely to watch today are those from the Romantic period onwards; even Mozart operas don't really feature da capo arias. So yeah, I can also see the argument that this is going too far into the weeds for an average traveller looking to see an opera, since it's highly unlikely that a traveller will get the chance to watch an opera by say, Vivaldi or Josef Myslivecek. The dog2 (talk) 07:53, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Do you mean whether to include the term in European classical music#Terminology? I'd say no, though if we ever spin off a topic on opera, then we should include it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:10, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, that's what I was thinking. But since you brought it up, do you think we have enough material to spin off an article about opera? It's true that I like hunting down more obscure Baroque to Classical period operas since there are many hidden gems that are not by Mozart, Gluck or Handel, but I'm certainly no expert. And since you're a flautist, I recommend you check out André Grétry. The aria La Fauvette from his opera Zémire et Azor has very exquisite flute solo parts. The dog2 (talk) 08:19, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
I like Gretry and have played some recorder music by him. I've never seen any operas by him, though. I think a travel topic on opera and opera houses is possible. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:38, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
Here's an example. Unfortunately, this is an abridged version and not the full version. The aria that I mentioned starts at 44:29. Even though the opera is quite obscure, the aria is a rather famous one and I think you probably would have heard it before. The dog2 (talk) 01:17, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the link! I don't recognize the aria. Too bad the flutist isn't very good. :-) Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:03, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Here's a concert version with a better flautist then: [1]. The dog2 (talk) 02:34, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, that performance was way better! Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:41, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Speaking of which, if we ever decide to spin off a topic, should we have one single article for both opera and ballet, or separate articles for each one? After all, ballets are usually performed in opera houses, and there are numerous operas, in particular the French ones, that feature ballet segments. And as you know, even Mozart's Le Nozze di Figaro and Handel's Alcina both feature dance segments (though I'm not sure if those dance segments would be considered ballet). The dog2 (talk) 22:43, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

It really depends on how much travel-related content there is. Going to an opera is a very distinct experience from going to a ballet even when you're seeing an opera that includes ballets. For now, I think we should try to improve the article on European classical music, though my heart isn't in it during this extended enforced period of non-performance in the U.S. I also want to delete the totally inadequate list of Broadway songwriters and songs from the Musical theatre article. With all due respect, it sucks, and we aren't going to make it good because long lists are for Wikipedia. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:26, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
No offence taken. I agree that long lists are problematic, but I think we need to think of a way to cover the important figures in the development of musical theatre. At the very least, I think Cole Porter, Rodgers & Hammerstain, Stephen Sondheim and Andrew Lloyd Webber need to be mentioned, and there are probably others I am missing out to. I've watched two operas and a ballet at the Met, and my hunch is that an opera is more formal, but maybe I'm wrong. Also, you'll find lots of young people who can appreciate ballet, but not a lot who can appreciate opera. I might have the only person under 50 in the audience those times I went to watch an opera. I most certainly understand your frustration; my family is now seeing their lives slowly get back to normal in Singapore, while I'm stuck in America alone having to deal with this nonsense thanks to work commitments, but let's both hope that things will get better next year, and we can start going to shows once more. The dog2 (talk) 01:20, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
And playing concerts again! I think there are too many classic Broadway show composers and lyricists we'd need to cover. Let's not bite off more than we can chew. Wikipedia covers such details. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:24, 6 December 2020 (UTC)


Thanks for the addition. I was somewhat uneasy leaving it at that, but did not easily find a way to word it well. The WP article I was using said nothing of the sort in the intro, and the part on the topic was too convoluted. So I hoped somebody would come along :-) LPfi (talk) 23:23, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Sure thing. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:31, 29 November 2020 (UTC)


I added something about the definition of libretto in the European classical music article, so could you please check to see that there's no mistake. Also, if I'm not wrong, the equivalent of a libretto in musical theatre is known the book, and I added a sentence describing that in the relevant article. Please feel free to delete if I made any mistakes. The dog2 (talk) 21:11, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

I saw the edits on libretti and they looked fine to me. In terms of the book for a musical, I don't think that's quite equivalent because to my understanding, it doesn't include the lyrics of the songs. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:25, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, I mentioned that in musical theatre article. So correct me if I'm wrong, but that would mean that in a sung-through musical like Les Miserables, there would only be lyrics but no book. The dog2 (talk) 21:31, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
I don't think that's right. The book would have all the staging and lighting directions. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:39, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
OK. You're probably more familiar with this thing than I am since you're a professional musician, so if you don't mind, perhaps you could make corrections in the musical theatre article. And maybe add more important terminology that I may have missed out. The dog2 (talk) 21:48, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
I want to double-check on this. I think I'm right but I'm not positive. Musical theater isn't my area of greatest expertise. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:56, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
I did a bit of Internet research. I'll ask my girlfriend for her opinion, but the sources I looked at didn't seem to include lighting, costuming and blocking directions in the book, but w:Musical theatre did include staging directions, so maybe that's just an oversight. I just made this edit, because I kind of doubt people would be talking about musicals without spoken dialogue as "bookless". But work in progress. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:46, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

"Germany existed in the 19th century before it was unified"Edit

I would actually vehemently dispute this statement. Especially when one attempts to define a "German" identity that excludes Austria. And even then, what about all those border regions where Germans were either one ethnic group among many or even a minority? "Where to draw the line" was an important issue at the very least until 1870/1871 among German nationalists and it did not fully disappear from discourse until 1990 (well, among the non far right anyway) which is coincidentally right around the time the original version of Art. 23 GG was removed which allowed for it to be "applied to other parts of Germany" - an irredentist clause if ever there was one... Hobbitschuster (talk) 12:00, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

People talked about Germany and Germans in the 18th century, too. I've read Quantz, remember. Maybe the exact differences between Germans and Austrians were fuzzy, but the concept of Germany and a German certainly existed, just as the concept of Italy and Italians existed. And I daresay, there's way more difference among Italians than among Germans. Are there any dialects of German spoken within Germany (or for that matter, Austria) that you don't understand? Do you speak Italian? I speak what's pretty much Toscana at a good conversational level in practice. I don't understand Napoletano and neither do the Senesi and other Northern Italians that I knew. That's not surprising when you see that linguists are now calling Napoletano a separate language. Spanish and Italian are more more mutually intelligible than Napoletano and standard Italian. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:12, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
There was certainly a concept of a "German people" even though they were divided into multiple small states. To my knowledge, Mozart identified as a German even though Salzburg is today part of Austria. And if you've watched some 18th-century operas like Mozart's Don Giovanni or Haydn's Orlando Paladino, they do reference Germany as a concept (as Alemagna; yes I know the term in modern Italian is Germania, but you get the point). And likewise, Italy existed as a concept even though it was not a unified country, since Mozart's Don Giovanni does mention Italia. What's perhaps most surprising is that the 18th-century Italians knew that China and Japan existed too, given that Haydn's Orlando Paladino mentions Pechino (Beijing) and Giappone (Japan)
But anyway, with regards to the "German" identity, my understanding is that the Austrians considered themselves to be Germans until well after World War II, given that Hitler was actually from Austria, and was very popular in Austria, and among the German-speaking minorities in Poland and Czechoslovakia. And to my understanding, the reason why the Swiss stayed neutral was as a compromise, because most of the Swiss-Germans wanted Switzerland to ally with Hitler, while the Swiss-French wanted Switzerland to ally with France. The dog2 (talk) 17:18, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
continental west Germanic languages once upon a time formed a dialect continuum including large parts of Benelux, Switzerland and into neighboring countries. A number of Swiss German dialects have survived which have a similar degree of partial intelligibility as Dutch. Luxembourg is trilingual with "German", French and Luxembourgish. It might have been considered "German" in 1820. The term was often used in the plural "die deutschen Lande" because the concept was so fuzzy.
As for Italy, the peninsula is a geographic feature regardless of politics and the term was in use in Roman times... And Europeans love using Roman terms Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:46, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
Well, at least back in the 1840s some Germans celebrated Germany's thousand years of existence, as per Max Stirner: "Listen, even as I am writing this, the bells begin to sound, that they may jingle in for tomorrow the festival of the thousand years' existence of our dear Germany. Sound, sound its knell! You do sound solemn enough, as if your tongue was moved by the presentiment that it is giving convoy to a corpse. The German people and German peoples have behind them a history of a thousand years: what a long life! O, go to rest, never to rise again - that all may become free whom you so long have held in fetters. - The people is dead. - Up with me !" --Ypsilon (talk) 18:12, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the interesting thread. I'll address only a side point: Why would anyone be surprised that Italians in the 18th century knew about Japan and China? One Italian city state after another had a monopoly on Western European trade with the East before the voyage of Vasco da Gama, and all of you know who Marco Polo was. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:24, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
That's because China and Japan are so far from Italy, and both China and Japan had adopted isolationist policies at that time. In an era before there were steamships and railways, I would not have expected the average Italian to know about them. I guess what is more surprising for me though is that they would know of Beijing, a specific city in China. The dog2 (talk) 23:37, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
You can see why I'm not surprised. Opera librettists weren't really average Italians (those would be peasants at that time, probably, or maybe industrial laborers, but I think that set in a bit later in Italy), and preexisting knowledge doesn't necessarily disappear because a country becomes isolationist. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:47, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Six-month protection of Hong KongEdit

Hi Ikan Kekek, I'd like to talk about the protection of the Hong Kong article. This article sometimes gets helpful edits from IPs and new users, so protection has a non-zero cost. You protected it in response to two edits from the Rocky vandal – but protection won't help very much against that vandal, because they edit a wide range of articles and will happily move on to another one. I suggest we reduce the protection period to less than six months, to avoid too much of a barrier to productive edits like these[2][3]. —Granger (talk · contribs) 07:15, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Go ahead. I don't really know how to go forward. That fucking vandal is ruining things for everybody. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:30, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. I've been tinkering with abuse filters to try to address the problem. It might help if some admins spend some of our time patrolling the abuse log (especially disallowed edits), which could allow us to block this vandal's IP addresses before their edits go live. It might also be possible to configure abuse filters differently to be more effective...I'll poke around and see what I can find.
Beyond that, just keep reverting, I guess. Sometimes I think of it like swatting mosquitoes. As the site grows there will be more vandals, I expect, but fortunately we have a dedicated team of admins who I think prevent most of it from being seen by readers. Don't let the bastards get you down! —Granger (talk · contribs) 18:56, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
I'm not sure how to get useful information from the disallowed edits log. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:57, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
If you see a new edit that's been disallowed, you can click "details" to see what the user was trying to do. If it's clearly a long-term abuser (like this one, for instance), I think it's appropriate to block them. If it's a constructive edit that was accidentally caught by the abuse filter, you can ask someone (like me, or another admin who edits abuse filters) to change the abuse filter to reduce false positives. —Granger (talk · contribs) 21:05, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

I was also going to suggest a range block, but I was happy to discover that User:DannyS712 implemented one yesterday. I think this will be somewhat effective in reducing the number of edits we get from this vandal. —Granger (talk · contribs) 22:29, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Good, and thanks for explaining. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:47, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Block of "Bostonride"Edit

I am not sure an indefblock with blocking the use of their talk page is warranted. Yes we have had problems with boxing related vandalism, but the user is right in pointing out that "chess boxing" is indeed a real sport with spectators. I think we should give the user another chance, if only to give them enough rope to hang themselves as the saying goes... Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:29, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

I agree. This looks to me like it could be a good-faith user who didn't realize the edit they were restoring came from a long-term vandal. Better to give the benefit of the doubt, I'd say. —Granger (talk · contribs) 22:23, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Actually, looking further at the contribution history, seems unlikely. Somehow I thought the revert was on the "Boston" talk page, but actually it was on an unrelated talk page, so that would have to be a big coincidence. Still, I'd probably leave talk page and email access, just in case. —Granger (talk · contribs) 22:30, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Granger, do what you think best. I get your (plural) points. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:46, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
I posted to the user's user talk page and restored their access to their talk page, but I think they're clearly at least a problem user. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:02, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Ikan Kekek!Edit

I saw this on Wikipedia and just had to try it here! 19:01, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks a lot! You too, and stay safe and healthy! Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:06, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

re:Federica MartinoEdit

Hi, as you can see in the Talk:Fasano, Wikimedia Italy is holding a project with the University of Bari. Federica is one of the students, Codas and I are the tutors of the project.--Ferdi2005 (talk) 17:10, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

I see. Great, and thanks for explaining. Let me know if I can be of any help. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:16, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Of course! You can help us review the articles: Isole Tremiti and Fasano are the ones we have already written, but more are coming!--Ferdi2005 (talk) 17:20, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Wonderful. Sure, I'll look over the articles. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:27, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Wordpress and Indian ticketsEdit

While reverting touting of pnrupdate.com, you called it Wordpress. Is there some connection I should be aware of? whois only says Godaddy (i.e. the domain is registered without publicly announcing the real operators).

I am also confused by the PNR scheme. Our article says you should buy tickets at irctc.co.in and check booking status at pnr-status.info, in another section we link indianrail.gov.in for checking instead. In a third section we say "Checking PNR status through online is the most popular way to check your PNR status. Following are some renowned websites where you can check your PNR status." and link railwayenquiry.net and indianrail.gov.in (said to be the official one).

It seems this checking PNR is a big thing in India, with many firms trying to tout their site. I suppose I should ask on the talk page whether we should prune away all links but the official ones, and probably tidy up the section. Do you know something about the issue?

LPfi (talk) 13:26, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

The site says "Powered by Wordpress" on the lower right corner. Per what not to link to, we don't link to blog sites and such here. If you can check your PNR status effectively through the official site, no other site should be linked. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:20, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Ah! I didn't look close enough. I don't know whether the official sites work properly. I'll ask at the article talk page. –LPfi (talk) 22:16, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Cool. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:18, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

An award for you!Edit

  The Wikivoyage Barncompass
I'm giving this to you because of all your hard work in contributing to Wikivoyage. CatDog1234539 (talk) 18:09, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, but you're not trying to butter me up, right? Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:21, 13 January 2021 (UTC)


Hello Ikan Kekek, I agree with your opinion that the image of the San Marco Basilica was not a nice one. But the replacement by your edit does not give a good travelers view of it, because only the main dome of the Basilica is shown. It would fit well in an article like w:St Mark's Basilica. The image I included with this remark shows info important for the traveler:

  • what it looks like
  • the area is crowded
  • an upstairs area of the Basilica can be visited

I think this type of view is more practical for this article. What do you think? --FredTC (talk) 12:20, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

I have no objection to using that thumbnail. Thanks! Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:02, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Grand Pacific Drive a stub now?Edit

Hi, I have just expanded Grand Pacific Drive, would it be a stub now? TravelAroundOz (talk) 23:15, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

It sure would. This is an itinerary article. You have to create a "Drive" section for the actual route. Pan-American Highway is an Outline, Burma Road is Usable, Dalton Highway is a Guide. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:24, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
And Historic Churches of Buffalo's East Side is a Star itinerary article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:25, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Also how do I centre the image? TravelAroundOz (talk) 23:38, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Which image? In general, you should keep images other than the pagebanner on the left right side by default (have a look at Wikivoyage:Image policy), but the way to do it is [[File:(Filename).jpg|thumb|center|(Caption)]]. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:49, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
The page banner TravelAroundOz (talk) 23:54, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
It looks alright to me. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:06, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
In general, images should be on the right side, and banners should have the dimensions 7:1. I will fix the page banner. Ground Zero (talk) 03:00, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, I mistyped. The default is on the right side, not the left side (it's on the other left, so to speak...). Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:47, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
@Ground Zero: Can you do that for Golden Highway as well? TravelAroundOz (talk) 10:22, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

An award for you!Edit

  The Wikivoyage Barncompass
Thank you for getting me started on WikiVoyage TravelAroundOz (talk) 23:57, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Sure thing. Now about those stubs... :-) Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:22, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
Honestly, it's me on Day 2 here and I'm lovin it ;) TravelAroundOz (talk) 06:25, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
Good. Keep it up. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:28, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks mate! TravelAroundOz (talk) 07:27, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

An award for you!Edit

  The Wikivoyage Barncompass
Appreciate your effort.. Kamaini.wane (talk) 05:32, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
I appreciate yours. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:21, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

An award for you!Edit

  The Wikivoyage Barncompass
Wow UniverseExplorer0 (talk) 06:45, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

An award for you!Edit

  The Wikivoyage Barncompass
very good work UniverseExplorer0 (talk) 06:47, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. You can just post regular messages, though. Let me know if you ever want help with anything.
Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:11, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
You're racking up these awards, popular man! --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:14, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Hah! :-) Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:23, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

very rusty (saya lupa semua, hampir...)Edit

The links that I made to english wikipedia in the ashmore and cartier article - is that kosher?

good to see you are still around after all this time... JarrahTree (talk) 05:01, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Good to see you as well! How are you? We should be linking War zone safety#Land mines and unexploded ordnance, instead, which also links from unexploded ordnance. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:07, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
very interesting some stuff - will send off wiki - as for most - good thanks, thanks for your edits... JarrahTree (talk) 05:24, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
also it is very very dubious that any part of the interior of australia is impossible to get there, I know of 4WD drivers whom such a definition is good reason for them to go there... JarrahTree (talk) 05:39, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Very well true. In bordertown, (yes it exists), there is basically nothing for 300kms north of it. TravelAroundOz (talk) 12:07, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
I can imagine. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:46, 7 February 2021 (UTC)


  The Wikivoyage Barncompass
Thank you for getting me started on WikiVoyage Azmi1995 (talk) 16:21, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm currently still on sporadic editors before creating valuable & notable pages on here. Sadly, Brunei is quite neglected rather than their three Malay counterparts i.e. Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore. I'm updating this and making sure that it will be more informative on several pages

Sama-sama. Let me know if you ever need any help, although I couldn't help you with content for Brunei. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:49, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Edit on SderotEdit

I did in fact read through Welcome, Wikipedians for guidance before making my edit, but managed to miss the fact that it's a specific intention for Wikivoyage pages to be unreferenced—perhaps the double-negative phrasing that it's a non-goal to not document everything and not reference information could be made clearer? This is rare for a Wikimedia project, and is maybe not going to stand out on a first read-through in that amount of material; for example, on English Wiktionary references are very infrequent but not actually prohibited as it appears they are here.

I also specifically looked for article layout advice related to references, but for example there was nothing in Wikivoyage:Article skeleton templates.

As to your edit summary question about why it would be important to know that Sderot evidently has a reputation as a dangerous place to be at midnight, I'd have thought the importance of this for a traveler is evident. Framing it in the historical context seemed to me like the sort of thing a travel guide would do, but there are many different kinds of travel guides, and of course I defer to your judgment if it's not the sort of thing that belongs on a Wikivoyage page about an Israeli town next to the warning about rocket attacks. --Struthious Bandersnatch (talk) 01:47, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

I'll have a look at Wikivoyage:Goals and non-goals' phrasing. I agree that Sderot being dangerous at midnight is relevant to travelers. It would be relevant to the "Stay safe" section. I suppose if that's been true continuously for over 100 years, it could be OK to reinsert that quote, and you can say "As So-And-So said in Such-And-Such Book..." Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:18, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Does Wikivoyage:Goals and non-goals look any clearer to you now that I've made these edis? Is there anything else that could be stated more clearly? Feel free to edit it, or let me know what seems potentially ambiguous. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:25, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

That does seem like better wording, but I think that if someone familiar with Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects goes to try to figure out whether to add a reference section to a page, they're unlikely to make it that far—I probably spent a good deal more time reading and looking for guidance first than on simply entering the citation information, which I was able to cut and paste. I wonder if the Mediawiki software could be configured to display a warning or something if ref code is used in mainspace, or simply to disable the referencing features?

I don't believe the professor was describing Sderot in historical terms when he used it as a figure of speech to illustrate the rough-and-ready character of the Hashomer militiamen—he was speaking English, to an American documentary crew, and wasn't using other early-twenthieth-century figures of speech. But it's up to you whether you think it should be included in the Wikivoyage page; he could have been joking or exaggerating or something like that too, which is why I tried to write out literally who said it and the context, but still “plunge forward”. --Struthious Bandersnatch (talk) 22:44, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

The relevance to today wasn't clear. You could spell it out in your own words. To your other point: I've previously suggested making certain operations we don't want impossible, but there have been no takers, and I don't know the first thing about how to program in Mediawiki, so I won't be able to do it. Wikis are ultimately only as good as the volunteer users make them. That said, I'll see whether I could propose this change again, and perhaps someone will want to tackle it now. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:49, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
We could make the abuse filters warn about (not disallow, which I think would be overkill) use of the ref tag (and anything that looks like one): "<ref". Whether a suitable worded warning would discourage people from saving the rest of their edit or editing at all in the future, I don't know. –LPfi (talk) 08:49, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Licensing information for photos from CommonsEdit

Hi Ikan Kekek. I'd like to ask you to include the licensing information with uploading photos from Commons that are going to be deleted there due to lack of FOP. It seems we need to do this to ensure compliance with our own Exemption Doctrine Policy, which says "Photographs of copyrighted artwork and architecture must be otherwise free; contributors may not upload images taken from non-free sources just because they depict copyrighted works that are allowed under this policy." It's also helpful for potential reusers of the photos, who may live in countries like the US that do have freedom of panorama, even if the country where the photograph was taken doesn't. (And it's polite to credit the creator of a photograph.)

For comparison, see also w:Template:FoP-USonly. —Granger (talk · contribs) 18:34, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Apparently we have a designated template for this, which I just found a moment ago: Template:Non-free image. —Granger (talk · contribs) 18:38, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

When the photos have licenses on them, I select the relevant license. When they don't, the instructions on the upload page said that a default license would be supplied. Are you saying that's not true? Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:33, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
When I came across File:Jalylkhayat2016.jpg a few hours ago, it looked like this, missing the license. —Granger (talk · contribs) 22:05, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
So there's something wrong with the uploading instructions. That's really unfortunate. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:30, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
Did you go via the "upload file" link in the left margin and the "upload it locally to this wiki" link that resulted? Do you mean the instructions on the upload form (MediaWiki:Uploadtext)? Or did you use some other tool?
I suppose we should have some automatic function for transferring files from Commons – I think such a function exists, and perhaps just has to be activated (or just linked?).
Selecting a default licence is OK when you are licencing your own photos, but when it is about a work of somebody else, one has to use a a licence chosen by the author (or copyright owner).
LPfi (talk) 06:56, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes, I used the "upload file" link as you described. Many files on Commons don't have a specific type of user-chosen Creative Commons license, so they should be considered to have the default Commons license. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:59, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
Many files? Could you give an example? I cannot remember having seen any, so I suppose there is something you say that I interpret wrongly. –LPfi (talk) 08:51, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
Some of them have licenses not on the drop-down list, such as public domain. Here's an example. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:15, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
Another. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:16, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
I'm not sure what else I thought was at issue, but I'll let you know if I see something. So far, what I found is not a lack of clarity, just a lack of equivalent licenses to input here. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:20, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
Ah! Yes, there are many licences and PD reasons not in the dropdown. But you cannot just exchange one licence for another, except in the rare cases where the specific licence explicitly allows that. For the PD cases, one could simply state "PD" instead of citing the specific reason, but losing information is seldom good – what do you do when somebody questions the PD status? I think the solution is either to import all the licence and PD templates from Commons (probably a mess), or to just link the Commons template from a local "other" template, one for licences and one for PD reasons. There might be a clean way to do it, but I am not trying to find one right now. –LPfi (talk) 09:59, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
What I've been doing is copying the remarks from the photographer that the photo is in the public domain but supplying some CC license that's lesser because I don't have the option to assign a public domain license, from what I've seen. I'm going to bow out of doing anything more complicated. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:57, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

An award for you!Edit

  The Wikivoyage Barncompass
with all respect for other work you have done

referring your listing for "Croatia" yacht charter companies :

I was trying to add commercial listing since this page already is doing so - if we are not allowed nobody should be - please delete all charter company listing and links Maritim-alpha (talk) 11:23, 19 February 2021 (UTC)


Hi mate. I tried to ping you at Talk:Croatia#Yacht_charter_listings, but I messed up and it probably didn't work. Anyway, ping! --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:26, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, it didn't work. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:15, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Reply to the questionEdit

"Is it a good or bad thing that the prices and locations might be changed? In other words, do these apps have up-to-date information or not? The sentence doesn't make that clear. 04:31, 20 February 2021 (UTC) "

Emm, to say that. Prices, like the tickets' prices of these locations, and open times of the locations are unstable. So before the visitors go to a place, they'd better check some infos on local websites, that will save their time. In China, the apps are normally used to check for tickets information and all infos are up-to-date, do you need any materials to prove that? I'm a newbie to wikipedia and I'm not a native speaker, so if you would like to help me to improve the page, I'm very appreciated for you to do so. Thanks again for pointing out the mistake for me. PencilCore (talk) 04:49, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

OK, I understand. So the additional information that needs to be added is that these apps are often more up to date than other sources. Thanks. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:27, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

IP edits at a user pageEdit

Often IP edits at user pages are vandalism, sometimes they are mistaken, but they also happen because the user in question just wasn't logged in (and did perhaps not realise it). So I would mostly leave them alone, unless they might be harmful. You might of course have had a reason for your remark in the specific case – or now that I look at it, the edit summary is off, but perhaps written before the other change, I've done such things. –LPfi (talk) 12:01, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

In no way do I think that IP user is the same user whose sandbox it is, just not logged-in, but if they are, they can say that. Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:14, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
You may well be right, I didn't check the user's edit pattern. I just know such things sometimes happen, and that it is good to keep that in mind when commenting. Never mind. –LPfi (talk) 14:13, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
That was the IP user's only edit on Wikivoyage, at least under that IP address. Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:24, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
So would probably an edit from my IP seem to be, if I were logged out while editing. –LPfi (talk) 14:34, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
I understand. But would it be really bad if the IP user explained that? I usually automatically revert IP edits to other people's user pages. Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:40, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
I suppose that is OK. The user can easily revert to their version (unless a newbie who doesn't know about page history). But IP addresses are sometimes sensitive (disclosing one's location, sometimes one's identity), so I wouldn't make a fuzz about it, and especially not if a user seems not to want to comment on such an edit. –LPfi (talk) 15:56, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
Is a single user talk page post making a fuss? Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:08, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Alt namesEdit

Still getting the hang of Wikivoyage, so not sure if I can expect you to be watchlisting the page and seeing edit histories, or if WV has a different culture in that respect to enwiki. I restored the alt name, because it's on the physical building (visible on Google Maps). If this is repeating an edit summary you already saw, all apologies. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 20:59, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for the explanation, and sorry for the inconvenience. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:03, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

RE: BarncompassEdit

Thank you for your kind words. The work on Wikivoyage is never-ending! Just have to keep at it. Gizza (roam) 01:47, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Gomes000 (the Estremadura dude)Edit

In the discussion at Wikivoyage:Votes for deletion#Estremadura, I noted that this was a matter of cross-project disruption, and Gomes000 was edit-warring Estremadura articles on both Wikipedia and Wikivoyage. (I only know about the English versions -- possibly the Portuguese sister projects might have information of their own?) He's since been indefinitely blocked from Wikipedia per the conversation here, which includes some other possibly pertinent information (about e.g. his English fluency/communication skills). Is this something that should go to user ban nominations? Vaticidalprophet (talk) 23:58, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

You could propose a user ban, sure. I think we could handle him with gradually increasing blocks if need be, but go ahead and make the nomination if you want to. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:30, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

New York CityEdit

In regard to your revert on the New York City article, the state has added an travel exception where domestic travelers fully vaccinated against COVID-19 in the last 90 days no longer have to quarantine. I added this information to the COVID box in the New York (state) article. I was going along the lines of "less is more" since the city follows the state guidance, unless there is a better way of phrasing it? JRHorse (talk) 14:00, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Or rather, less is best? JRHorse (talk) 14:03, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
My opinion is that so many readers are likely to bypass the article for New York State to read the New York City article that it's best to just copy all the relevant information from the New York State article. If you feel strongly about this, though, please start a thread in Talk:New York City, and we can try to come to a consensus about this. Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:10, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
I'll copy the relevant information as was done before. JRHorse (talk) 14:53, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Great, thanks. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:32, 4 March 2021 (UTC)