Wikivoyage talk:Archive of Wikitravel (not Wikivoyage) awards

Five words

One of the traditions with the Webby Awards is that acceptance speeches can only be five words long. What should be the five-word speech for Wikitravel? --(WT-en) Evan 12:26, 28 May 2007 (EDT)

Some ideas:

No longer a lonely planet.
Open content travel guides rock.
Free, complete, up-to-date, and reliable. ("up-to-date" may not be one word...)
The traveler comes first. (and...)
These guides are your fault.
Wiki makes guides more accurate.

You could substitute "current" for "up-to-date". But I kinda like the first one best. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 12:55, 28 May 2007 (EDT)

Definitely #1!!! – (WT-en) cacahuate ^talk 15:43, 28 May 2007 (EDT)

1 is snarky and evil. I love it. =) (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:41, 28 May 2007 (EDT)

Yep, #1 is snappy and witty. It gets my vote. (WT-en) WindHorse 00:00, 29 May 2007 (EDT)

Maj likes that one best too. I'm a little bit wary of getting caught up in being an anti-brand. We're more than just "the opposite of Lonely Planet" (or any other proprietary travel guide). I guess that Wikitravel's well-enough established that maybe I don't need to worry about it. And, hell: it's a 5-word speech. Not exactly the cornerstone of people's perception of Wikivoyage. It'd be fun to mention Open Content, though; Maybe "Freedom makes planet less lonely"? Or collaboration: "Working together, planet's less lonely." I'm probably overthinking this. --(WT-en) Evan 10:12, 29 May 2007 (EDT)

Number 1 is the only one acceptable, plus everyone's (and will continue to be) in favor of it which makes it consensus! -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 10:18, 29 May 2007 (EDT)

Alternatively, Tim Wu, check district articles!, but I still prefer the lonely planet one. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 10:24, 29 May 2007 (EDT)

I was trying to think of something similar but a little less weighted, like "A Rough Guide to a Lonely Planet", but can't get that nicely into 5 words that are as punchy as #1 – (WT-en) cacahuate ^talk 15:12, 29 May 2007 (EDT)

Webby

Swept in from the Pub:

Just in case you haven't seen todays Logbook -- Wikitravel has won a Webby! Congratulations! (WT-en) Maj 10:11, 1 May 2007 (EDT)

Excellent! I have added it to the news section on the main page. --(WT-en) NJR_ZA 11:27, 1 May 2007 (EDT)

So where do we put our trophy? - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 13:39, 1 May 2007 (EDT)

I'd love to put it on the Main Page, but maybe we could put it on Project:Webby Award 2007? --(WT-en) Evan 14:08, 1 May 2007 (EDT)

Hmmmm, personally I'd like to see it somewhere more prominent than on an obscure page like Project:Webby Award 2007, can't we put it in the disclaimer bar at the bottom or somewhere on the Main Page? That logo will make people sit up and take notice of the site if they're just passing by and that could increase the number of edits we get, which is a good thing! -- (WT-en) Tim (writeme!) 15:19, 1 May 2007 (EDT)

How about we put it on the Main Page for a few days, and we put something in MediaWiki:Sitenotice (which makes a banner across the top of every page) about it? And let's have a page dedicated to the award to link to, too.

Can someone who's got better Main-Page-editing-chops than myself put it on the front page? --(WT-en) Evan 15:31, 1 May 2007 (EDT)

I've uploaded a couple of images to choose from. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 15:54, 1 May 2007 (EDT)

I've added it to the news item for now... long-term handling to be determined. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 16:11, 1 May 2007 (EDT)

Since Wikitravel is certain to win additional awards as time goes by, I've started Project:Awards. I think we should link to this from somewhere on the Main page, and if not there certainly from the Project page. Suppose we were to change the opening blurb to "Wikivoyage is an award-winning project..."? - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 08:30, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

Vfd discussion

Latest comment: 11 years ago10 comments7 people in discussion

Moved discussion from Wikivoyage:Travellers' pub.

There are several WT project pages that have nothing to do with Wikivoyage and are not needed for historical purposes.

We will develop our own history as time passes and these pages are from a fork that really has nothing to do with us and are not needed for any type of history that applies to Wikivoyage. I think these pages and links to them should be deleted. And any other pages that apply to WT only and are not needed to justify policies we are continuing on Wikivoyage. All of these pages will have equivalent Wikivoyage pages now and in the future. If someone wants to know the information covered in those pages, then they should visit WT. What are the thoughts of others? Should we start a discussion page on this? - Tom Holland (Xltel) (talk) 07:34, 1 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Oppose. Bear in mind that the history of Wikitravel up to the last data dump IS our history, along with the history of Wikivoyage between the fork and the reconnect, and all that has happened since. We who were Wikitravel have no need to pretend that we were not Wikitravel. Our disagreement was not with the community of contributors or with our past, it was with IB, who in spite of owning the name and the server, are not the people or the content. I do not support suppression or denial of that history. • • • Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 12:07, 1 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I understand your point and I agree totally that Wikitravel is "MY" history and our history and I am not ever going to pretend it was not my/our history. This is "our" history and I am not suggesting anyone pretend we did not come from Wikitravel or that there is any disagreement with the Wikitravel community in the past. I have been a big part of that Wikitravel past very active as an Administrator/contributor and will be a part of the future of WV. I have tried my best to help WV with edits and cleanup where I could and will continue. But as time goes on some of these older pages may get a bit more muddy and confusing to new Wikivoyagers. We have changed "Wikitravel" to "Wikivoyage" just about everywhere on the site including talk pages when were talking specifically about Wiki""travel"". To be honest I don't really like that very much and it causes additional confusion in my opinion, but I figured there were legal issues (I apologize I have not read all the comments and discussions in that area). I never thought it was a purge of "our" history. When I was on Wikitravel in my past life and put comments on a talk pages and mentioned Wikitravel it was about Wikitravel, but now all my references and everyone's references to Wikitravel have been changed to Wikivoyage. If you go to User talk:Xltel/Mar 2006 you can see where I was welcomed to "Wikivoyage" in December 2005, but we know that is not the case. I am now on Wikivoyage and as we go forward I expect we will get farther apart from the content, policies, goals and overall objectives of Wikitravel. New people will have new ideas and as time goes on we will move farther apart from where WT and WV are now. Please don't think I have any difference in agreement whatsoever in your comments, just looking for some better organization on the old Wikitravel content going forward, maybe deleting is not the solution and possibly the way it is now is the best way to keep it. My comment on not needing it for historical purposes really applies to they are not needed to explain development of policy. Obviously, there is no rush or need to delete anything and we can discuss organization of our history going forward. Happy New Year! - Tom Holland (Xltel) (talk) 17:40, 1 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi Tom, next time when you nominate something for deletion, please do so at Wikivoyage:Votes for deletion. @Peter, I agree with you but then at-least we should have some information on this site about our (WV) background so that people who will join this community sooner may learn about our history. Happy new year everybody! --Saqib (talk) 18:46, 1 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I agree with Peter. These historical pages should be kept, albeit perhaps in an archive section or tagged as historical.

I also agree with Tom, and perhaps go farther than he would. To me it seems obvious that, except where there are compelling legal reasons not to, the WT->WV substitutions on talk pages should all be undone. Pashley (talk) 20:51, 1 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I concur, though I fear it may be too late for the latter. LtPowers (talk) 22:16, 1 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

The WT→WV substititions are particularly annoying on pages such as User:(WT-en) IBobi, where it says that Internet Brands owns Wikivoyage. It would be nice to have those undone, but maybe there are legal reasons not to. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:49, 4 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

We should try and undo substitutions that don't make sense by hand. Most substitutions were OK, though, since most mentions are just referring to our project, and it is the same project, albeit with less-douchey hosts and a different name. --Peter ^Talk 23:53, 4 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Keep per Peter S. --Peter ^Talk 23:53, 4 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Outcome: kept. --Peter ^Talk 22:49, 14 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Add topic