RaffiKojian
Hello, RaffiKojian! 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 Help, or post a message in the travellers' pub. If you are familiar with Wikipedia, take a look over some of the differences here. Pashley (talk) 04:57, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
Adding dynamic maps to Armenian cities
editHey Raffi, thanks for your last commits!
I just wanted to let you know, that we have a general rule of adding mapframe elements precisely to the beginning of 'Get around' section. It's done for consistency purposes, so all pages have the same structure. (Not so sure if this policy is written somewhere, but if you have a look at other cities you'll notice people follow it). Thanks. --Kiaora (talk) 07:01, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Collages
edit
Hi, and thanks for putting an image in the Ashtarak article! Unfortunately, it was a collage, and we do not use collages on this site. You can see the policy and reasoning at Wikivoyage:Image policy#Montages and galleries. Any individual photo on Commons that you like can be inserted as a thumbnail, though.
All the best,
Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:57, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
- Listen, you're irritated at me for enforcing a policy you find stupid and annoying and I'm irritated at you, because instead of responding constructively to my point about existing Wikivoyage policy, you are blaming it on me. I'm a volunteer like you. If you don't like the policy, argue with the policy on the policy talk page! Don't blame me for the policy. If I don't enforce it, you think someone else won't? Well, they will. Every publication and site has a house style. That's what this is about. I'm sorry I irritated you, but I don't think it's reasonable for you to act ornery toward me for simply enforcing a policy arrived at through discussion and consensus. Make the arguments on the discussion page. This is not personal, and if you try to make it personal, that level is really not relevant to the facts, which are that Wikivoyage has a policy you don't like, and there's a way to try to change it. Click on Wikivoyage talk:Image policy and make your case. You may link the discussions on this page and my user talk page. I look forward to seeing your argument there, not on my user talk page where no policies can be changed, for why Wikivoyage should change its policy on collages. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:06, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
Raffi, I took a look at the collage you put in the article. I think it looks horrible, and am glad that Ikan Kekek took it out. I get that you like the collage. Who is right here? You have your view, and I have mine. That's why the Wikivoyage community, like other collaborative projects, adopts policies so that these decisions can be made by the community, and edit wars avoided. I realise that it gets in the way of your editing, but so would me reverting any of your edits that I don't like. Ground Zero (talk) 10:22, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
- Ground Zero - That's nice that you think the helpful Wikipedia collage is "horrible". I added the photo to the top of this section so we can all see how ugly, horrible and commercial this Wikipedia image appears. You're right, you have your view and I have mine, and by all means your view should take precedence over mine. Thanks for your constructive input. --RaffiKojian (talk) 12:53, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
- Dude, it's not my view over yours. It's the view of the Wikivoyage community over yours. That policy was written long before I joined Wikivoyage. You are free to propose a change to the policy. Policies are not written in stone - most of them were written by people who are no longer involved in Wikivoyage, so there is a reasonable chance that if you propose a change, the Wikivoyage community of 2018 will agree to it. My point is that Wikivoyage is a community project, not an individual one, so it works best if everyone agrees to accept the community's decisions. I've proposed a bunch of policy changes. Some have been accepted, and others have been rejected. I think that the reasons for rejecting my proposals have often been really dumb, but I accept that it's the community's decision, and go along with it once the decision has been made. That makes more sense than fighting the community on individual articles. Ground Zero (talk) 14:31, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
- Ground Zero - um, yeah dude, 2 people decided something 10 years ago and I've seen the conversation revisiting the issue a few years back where again something like 2 people participated and nothing was decided. Nobody cares. But you guys come in an "enforce" the rule like it's some gospel, and you even go so far as to call the Wikipedia collage "horrible". Oooookay. You're really doing a big service to the "community". Keep telling yourself that. I'm looking at the collage photo I've posted here, and how much great information that one file imparts, versus the 3x as many photos that your buddy inserted into the article after removing the collage, which impart much LESS useful info, and looking at all the time wasted on this ridiculous conversation about your policy enforcement that makes the page worse, and shaking my head. You go and propose the policy be changed - it's been done before, and as I said, nobody even cares enough to discuss it. Go make some useful edits instead of this counterproductive incomprehensible policing and insulting commentary about "horrible" files from Wikipedia. --RaffiKojian (talk) 18:22, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
- I make more than enough useful edits to be able to ignore comments like those above. Once you start attacking other editors, you give up your right to be offended by someone using a word like "horrible" to express an opinion about how a picture looks. If you want to propose a change to the policy, go ahead. I'd suggest posting a notice on Wikivoyage:Requests_for_comment to attract more input. Dismissing or ignoring policy based on not liking it or when it was written just leads to edit wars, which are a waste of time. Ground Zero (talk) 20:11, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
- Ground Zero - I've made more than enough usesful edits myself, especially back in the day of Wikitravel, so no need to get into a pissing contest. Your original comment was absolutely not constructive (and was arguably an attack), and neither is this attitude of going around and dismantling good edits due to rules arbitrary and uninteresting that nobody even cares to discuss them. And finally, I have no idea what edit war you're going on about, and don't really care. --RaffiKojian (talk) 20:14, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
- Raffi, I made no comment about your contributions. You started a pissing match by telling me how to contribute. I was just explaining why I wouldn't join you in that pissing match. Since you continue to personalize this rather than discussing this on a policy basis, you're not in a position to criticize my comment as not being constructive. Again, I don't agree that your edit was a good one, and neither does Ikan Kekek. How do we resolve disputes like this? Look at the policy. If you think the policy doesn't make sense any more, propose a change and see if others agree with you. That is a constructive approach. Attacking other editors because you're not getting your way is not constructive. Ground Zero (talk) 12:25, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
- Ground Zero - I've made more than enough usesful edits myself, especially back in the day of Wikitravel, so no need to get into a pissing contest. Your original comment was absolutely not constructive (and was arguably an attack), and neither is this attitude of going around and dismantling good edits due to rules arbitrary and uninteresting that nobody even cares to discuss them. And finally, I have no idea what edit war you're going on about, and don't really care. --RaffiKojian (talk) 20:14, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
- I make more than enough useful edits to be able to ignore comments like those above. Once you start attacking other editors, you give up your right to be offended by someone using a word like "horrible" to express an opinion about how a picture looks. If you want to propose a change to the policy, go ahead. I'd suggest posting a notice on Wikivoyage:Requests_for_comment to attract more input. Dismissing or ignoring policy based on not liking it or when it was written just leads to edit wars, which are a waste of time. Ground Zero (talk) 20:11, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
- Ground Zero - um, yeah dude, 2 people decided something 10 years ago and I've seen the conversation revisiting the issue a few years back where again something like 2 people participated and nothing was decided. Nobody cares. But you guys come in an "enforce" the rule like it's some gospel, and you even go so far as to call the Wikipedia collage "horrible". Oooookay. You're really doing a big service to the "community". Keep telling yourself that. I'm looking at the collage photo I've posted here, and how much great information that one file imparts, versus the 3x as many photos that your buddy inserted into the article after removing the collage, which impart much LESS useful info, and looking at all the time wasted on this ridiculous conversation about your policy enforcement that makes the page worse, and shaking my head. You go and propose the policy be changed - it's been done before, and as I said, nobody even cares enough to discuss it. Go make some useful edits instead of this counterproductive incomprehensible policing and insulting commentary about "horrible" files from Wikipedia. --RaffiKojian (talk) 18:22, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
- Dude, it's not my view over yours. It's the view of the Wikivoyage community over yours. That policy was written long before I joined Wikivoyage. You are free to propose a change to the policy. Policies are not written in stone - most of them were written by people who are no longer involved in Wikivoyage, so there is a reasonable chance that if you propose a change, the Wikivoyage community of 2018 will agree to it. My point is that Wikivoyage is a community project, not an individual one, so it works best if everyone agrees to accept the community's decisions. I've proposed a bunch of policy changes. Some have been accepted, and others have been rejected. I think that the reasons for rejecting my proposals have often been really dumb, but I accept that it's the community's decision, and go along with it once the decision has been made. That makes more sense than fighting the community on individual articles. Ground Zero (talk) 14:31, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
- Ground Zero - That's nice that you think the helpful Wikipedia collage is "horrible". I added the photo to the top of this section so we can all see how ugly, horrible and commercial this Wikipedia image appears. You're right, you have your view and I have mine, and by all means your view should take precedence over mine. Thanks for your constructive input. --RaffiKojian (talk) 12:53, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
- Ground Zero - coming to my talk page and saying the image I added from Wikipedia (again I put it on the right to illustrate) is "horrible" is obviously not constructive, so you can stop pretending otherwise. And I already responded to your lovely advice to have the policy revisited - it was tried years ago and virtually nobody even cared enough to respond. So yeah, you can stop attacking me because your own actions. --RaffiKojian (talk) 15:01, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
What does "M-TF" mean? For help on the standard way of formatting times and dates, please see WV:TDF. Thanks. Ground Zero (talk) 08:26, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
The don't tout guidelines
editRead this edit summary, please. Everyone knows you are not a touter, but that doesn't cause you to be permitted to copy touting from a commercial site. Try again with that listing. Thanks. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:21, 21 June 2022 (UTC)