Wikivoyage:Travellers' pub

Welcome to the Pub Shortcut: WV:Pub The Travellers' Pub is the place to ask questions when you're confused, lost, afraid, tired, annoyed, thoughtful, or helpful. To start a new topic, click the "Add topic" tab, so that it gets added at the bottom of the page, and sign your post by appending four tildes (~~~~) Before asking a question or making a comment: Have a look at our Help, FAQ and Policies pages. If you have a question or suggestion about a particular article, use the article's talk page to keep the discussion associated with that article. If you'd like to draw attention to a comment to get feedback from other Wikivoyagers, try Requests for comment. If you are wanting travel advice on a specific matter see the Tourist Office. If you have an issue you need to bring to the attention of an administrator, try Vandalism in progress. If you are having a problem that you think has to do with the MediaWiki software, please post that on Phabricator instead. If you want to celebrate a significant contribution to Wikivoyage by yourself or others, hold a party at Celebrate a contribution. Discuss issues related to more than one language version of Wikivoyage in the Wikivoyage Lounge on Meta. Pull up a chair and join in the conversation! //en.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=Wikivoyage:Travellers%27_pub&amp;action=edit&amp;section=new</span>"}]]}'>Click here to ask a new question Experienced users: Please sweep the pub Keeping the pub clean is a group effort. If we have too many conversations on this page, it gets too noisy and hard to read. If you see an old conversation (i.e. a month dormant) that could be moved to a talk page, please do so, and add "{{swept}}" there, to note that it has been swept in from the pub. Try to place it on the discussion page roughly in chronological order. A question regarding a destination article should be swept to the article discussion page. A discussion regarding a policy or the subject of an expedition can be swept to the policy or expedition discussion page. A simple question asked by a user can be swept to that user's talk page, but consider if the documentation needs a quick update to make it clearer for the next user with the same question. A pointer to a discussion going on elsewhere, such as a notice of a star nomination or a request to comment on another talk page, can be removed when it is old. Any discussion that occurred in the pub can be swept to where the main discussion took place. Any discussions that do not fall into any of these categories, and are not of any special importance for posterity, should be archived to Project:Travellers' pub/Archives and removed from here. If you are not sure where to put a discussion, let it be—better to spend your efforts on those that you do know where to place.

'</span> pub"}]],"parts":[{"template":{"target":{"wt":"WikivoyageDoc","href":"./Template:WikivoyageDoc"},"params":{"1":{"wt":"collaboration"}},"i":0}}]}'/>

Mapframe view changes

Hello, There a small change coming to interactive maps I would like to share with you. Currently maps using <mapframe> are shown without a frame. After an upcoming update maps will appear inside a small frame with the option of a text caption. Similar to how embedded images work.

Frameless maps are good for insertion as part of a template, whereas framed maps are good for insertion directly into the page, either by hand or by using the visual editor.

• To insert a map without a frame, add the "frameless" attribute: <mapframe frameless ....>

• To add a caption, use the text="..." attribute.

Note: Adding the text attribute automatically enables a frame.

If you wish to keep existing templates from showing a frame, please add the frameless attribute. You can do this now without waiting for the deployment.

This change should be enabled on Wednesday, August 31st. For more information please see T143734, start a discussion at mw:Maps, or leave a note below. Thank you. CKoerner (WMF) (talk) 22:31, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

My apologies, this change has already deployed this week. Sorry, my mistake. It seems the mapframe tag looks ok, but please let me know if anything should be changed. Also, I will look at updating the Module:Map to support this feature. Thanks! --Yurik (talk) 22:42, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

I happen to drop by and notice that both Module:Map and {{Mapframe}} still need to be updated to reflect this.. TheDJ (talk) 12:24, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Help needed: Malformed coordinates, URLs, emails

Here are a few spooky things that might need to be fixed: http://wvpoi.batalex.ru/download/listings/wikivoyage-listings-en-latest.validation-report.html

You can uncheck categories at the top, to not show email for instance. This page is updated every 2 weeks.

Thanks a lot! Syced (talk) 08:01, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Syced, is it possible to have it for all languages? --Andyrom75 (talk) 07:44, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

It is also available for Russian, French, German: http://wvpoi.batalex.ru . If you want to add more languages, please post an issue at https://github.com/baturin/wikivoyage-listings/issues thanks! :-) Syced (talk) 10:33, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

If it's not a big effort you can add all the languages, otherwise it doesn't matter. The request is just to give to all the admins or users in general the chance to use a new tool (regardless of the nature of the tool) :-) --Andyrom75 (talk) 16:58, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

I don't see a way to remove or mark those that I have fixed - thus others are going to end up checking them again? -- Matroc (talk) 03:23, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Indeed that's a known problem with this tool: There is no way to "mark as fixed". On the positive side, the list is shown in random order so that you have less chances of checking the same items as someone else, and it is updated every 2 weeks, which is much more frequent than the previous tool I was maintaining. If the randomization is bothering you, please remove the "this.shuffleIssues();" line from the HTML. Thanks a lot! Syced (talk) 07:56, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Map image request

Can someone who is familiar with creating region maps create a new one for North Wales with Denbighshire, Flintshire and Wrexham (county) merged. Maybe also new colours that are not so close to each other. --Traveler100 (talk) 20:14, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

@Traveler100 I may not be as familiar with creating region maps, but I gave it a shot either way. How's this?
-- Wauteurz (talk) 15:16, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

@Wauteurz, great thanks. --Traveler100 (talk) 18:44, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Replacing "Autobahn" with the less well known "E" symbol

Have a look at edits like this one, where the Autobahns in the routebox were replaced by the European routes (symbolized by E). Now, I am not a car person (as might be well known already), but nobody in Germany ever talks about the E whatsitsface. People only ever refer to the Autobahn A something. Often shortened to A something. And the A numbers are ubiquitous in signage whereas the E numbers show up erratically at best. I propose to change those back and if possible formulate / clarify policy on routeboxes in that regard. Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:14, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

For Germany the Autobahn numbers are much more useful for driving, in my experience only in Belgium are they commonly seen on road signs. --Traveler100 (talk) 04:17, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

There's room for both the Autobahn numbers and European route numbers in the routebox. ϒpsilon (talk) 06:15, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

I agree; both would be fine (and is commonly seen on signs in the Netherlands as well), but removing the A-numbers is not a good idea. When asking directions, getting traffic updates or just discussing routes with locals, A-numbers are usually far more useful than E-numbers. I've left User:Iceandsnow, who has been making these changes, a message to draw his attention to this discussion so he can weigh in. JuliasTravels (talk) 09:28, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Is there a policy / information / whatever page on routeboxes? Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:03, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

I believe it's this one: Wikivoyage:Routebox navigation. ϒpsilon (talk) 18:10, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

I would like to insert something along the lines of "if possible and practical, use route names and symbols that are used at the destination". Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:25, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Please do. Sweden, Norway and Denmark are as far as I know the only countries where roads can have only the E-number and nothing else. Nevertheless, elsewhere the E-numbers are in general always showed on road signs and maps alongside national route numbers. In Germany I remember them on many (if not necessarily all) Autobahn signs alongside the A-numbers. So, I'd say, let's keep both. ϒpsilon (talk) 19:26, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Go next vs see

I'm still a newbie to this project but I'm keen to give back to it this year so am doing more editing and I'm thinking about ways we could improve the project technically (maybe as part of google summer of code). Disclaimer: I'm building an offline wikivoyage app for my next backpacking trip but more about that later.

One thing that is confusing me is I continually see things in the go next section that I don't feel belong there and are better suited in the see section. One great example is the York article. Castle Howard is a day trip not a destination in itself. As a long time paper guidebook user this distinctions is important to me. Go next sections are used to work out places to go and visit and stay, not simply go to see for a day. As a rule of thumb if a go next destination doesn't have a wikivoyage page I would not expect it to be here. What do others feel about this? Has this been discussed before? Is there some way we could give better guidelines to users when editing on what to put here? Jdlrobson (talk) 20:33, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

[w:Castle_Howard] is 15 miles from York, but probably not a destination article in itself. Therefore probably best leave as a 'see' listing.

It isn't that unusual to create 'see' listings outside of the immediate destination if they do not constitute an article by themselves or belong to another destination. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:45, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

In general, "go next" is a list of articles for adjacent or nearby destinations - most often the next town and next major city on each highway or rail line. Actual listings for attractions and activities belong in "see" and "do" respectively. Wikivoyage:What is an article? indicates a destination meets the "can you sleep there?" test, where to be a possible candidate as a usable destination (and not merely a listing) a place should have some way to get in, something to see or do, somewhere to eat and somewhere to sleep. Merrickville is an easy day trip from Ottawa, but it gets an article as it has enough to stand alone. An individual castle? Probably not, it gets a listing.

The one possible exception to forcing listings into see/do/eat/drink/sleep would be a small city or town separated by miles of pasture land from one (or a handful) of tiny villages with a listing or two each. We list contiguous suburbs as part of the city. A group of rural villages? A rare few small-town destinations have the town itself with see/do/sleep... followed by "Nearby" (with the subsections being the names of individual villages, with a brief description and a listing or two in each) followed by "Go next" with the next destinations to actually have an article. For instance, Miami (Oklahoma)#Nearby devotes a subsection to a lead-contaminated ghost town, Picher OK, that's not going to get its own article.

That's rare. In general, "go next" lists destinations with actual articles and roads to those destinations. K7L (talk) 00:34, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

I made this edit based on the above. I've seen many other articles which have the same problem so please shout now if there's any issue with this edit :) Jdlrobson (talk) 05:22, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

I think it's fine. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:35, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Whether something is a daytrip depends whether you are driving, going by bus, walking, etc. Also how much there is to do. For exmaple in the Rotterdam article, Amsterdam is in a daytrip list under the Go Next section. I think that most travellers would want to stay in Amsterdam, so it should be just a Go Next. Go Next destinations should not necessarily have their own article with sleep options. They could just be great destinations in an area that have its own article. For example in Izmir Selçuk is a Go Next that mention Ephesus. I think it might be better to just make Ephesus a Go Next even if you cannot sleep there Elgaard (talk) 22:06, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Is there a tool to compare the similarity of WV text with the text of other sites?

I am asking because the search engine rank according to startpage of Nicaragua is quite bad while that for Managua is a lot better, despite what I would perceive more edits to the former than the latter. I would like to see where there is still copied content in those articles to possibly edit it out as best practicable. Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:35, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

"Copyscape", linked from Wikivoyage:Search Expedition#Tools, is somewhat useful although not superb. -- Ryan • (talk) • 20:52, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Country codes

Hi

I am not sure whether all who will read this are aware, but all phone numbers are supposed to include country codes preceded by the "+" symbol. (e.g. +49 (area code without zero) (local number) for Germany). While I am trying to fix those where I am able to, it is a task that looks like a bot could better do it.

Are there any possibilities to either create a bot or make it inherent in the listing editor that it adds the country code of the country (as per the breadcrumbs) if no country code is found? With some way to turn it off for false positives?

I am sorry if the question is stupid, I am not exactly a coding expert... Hobbitschuster (talk) 01:58, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

I did create a AutoWikiBrowser script under User:Traveler100bot to do this but was not 100% reliable so had to run in semi-auto mode checking each update. Have not run for a while, maybe time to do another scan through pages (may be a couple of week before can get round to it as on the road at the moment). --Traveler100 (talk) 04:16, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Hobbitschuster, Traveler100, days ago I've proposed the introduction of this new property in wikidata. It's necessary to clean the data stored in Wikidata and in all the projects that use them. Once implemented, can be easily created a local category to check the correctness of all the numbers stored in the listings. I suggest to support to speed up its implementation (creation & population via bot). --Andyrom75 (talk) 17:53, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Interesting book?

Has anyone here read Overbooked: The Exploding Business of Travel and Tourism? The one review I saw was quite positive. Does it have anything to say that should affect our approach? Pashley (talk) 13:09, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Saftey on or near bodies of water..

Do we have a topic on Coastal safety, or Saftey near bodies of water ?

It's been an issue in the UK , in respect of the tragic incident at Camber Sands. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:56, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

We have at least Beaches, Water sports and Swimming, which all touch the subject in their Stay safe sections, but they are only outlines. --LPfi (talk) 19:45, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Pagebanner visualization bug

Tracked in Phabricator ^(?)
Task T147946

In diff pages like this one, the pagebanner is not shown. --Andyrom75 (talk) 17:57, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Who is charge ti fix issues on this extension? --Andyrom75 (talk) 12:06, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

The preview page suffer the same bug. It's particularly annoying when an user change the banner imagine, because it's not possible to see it before saving. A Phab bug should be opened. --Andyrom75 (talk) 14:56, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Preview bug has been solved, but since no one has still corrected the diff one, I've opened a ticket. --Andyrom75 (talk) 17:55, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

SEO editing

Hello

While I am no SEO expert and don't know whether this is an effective use of our time, I think the following is at least worth a shot:

Search for our page (preferably high profile pages like countries or continents) and the page on that other site and then put their URLs into this tool. Then try to bring the percentage figure down by editing the sections that it says are copied. We can see after a few weeks (using anonymous search via startpage) whether our efforts were worth it. Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:21, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

This is one good idea. There are others at Wikivoyage:Search_Expedition and more on its talk page, Mentioning WV often on social networking sites also helps; every time a friend mentions someplace he or she is about to visit or is moving to, post a link & suggest they contribute as well. Adding simple things, like more good photos from Commons or more wikilinks, also helps. Pashley (talk) 23:27, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Automated editing I would additionally support automated or semi-automated editing that changed out many words and phrases for roughly equivalent ones (e.g. "delicious" for "tasty"). —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:27, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Please don't change individual words using synonyms - search engines are smart enough to recognize that effort as an attempted SEO cheat and will often penalize the offending site in rankings. When rewriting please rewrite full sections. -- Ryan • (talk) • 01:34, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

@Wrh2: Thanks--I didn't realize this. Makes sense. If someone made a list in userspace of the most-viewed articles that we have which also have the most similar content to Wikitravel, we could start working on massaging those texts (and updating them as well--it's important that high-traffic pages are up-to-date). —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:41, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Good Commons pictures

Wikimedia Commons has a rather large list of Featured pictures. Someone might go through them looking at which ones might be used here. Also useful, but less work, would be to just patrol the Main Page with its Picture of the Day to see if those are useful.

I look occasionally but do not have either the time or the visual judgment to take on the whole task. Any volunteers? Is someone perhaps already doing this? Pashley (talk) 23:50, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that Ikan is already updating articles with featured pictures, but more people assisting in that effort would obviously be welcome. -- Ryan • (talk) • 23:58, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Exactly. There are also a lot of good Quality Images which aren't featured but are really useful for our purposes. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:15, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Pages for Olympics

So my students have settled on improving pages related to Pyeongchang 2018. Now, looking at pages like Rio 2016 or Sochi 2014, it does seem like they are rather poor. M\Something that struck me is the lack of consistency in the get in/around and eat/drink/buy sections. Rio has no Get in/around/eat/drink/sleep sections at all, and is a sad testatement to the fact that wiki projects rely heavily on someone caring - and clearly, nobody cared to even add pointers "see the Rio de Janeiro page. Sochi 2014 is better, but Get in simply states - read Sochi page. Get around does provide some useful information, through much less then the Sochi page. Still, I think it makes sense to discuss Olympics-only transportation at those pages, and keep regular one at the city pages. But eat and drink are again empty, and stay has a single hotel - once again, a far cry from the useful info at Sochi. Unsurpsingly, London_2012 is better, and can be used as a boilerplate for future events, with a number of generic stuff that should be copied into each future Olympics article. Once again, however, the buy/eat/drink/sleep sections are mostly empty; through I do note that two out of four paragraphs of sleep discuss Olympic specifics. In conclusion, I think that we should formalize some sort of event page guide, in particular - stress that they should only provide event specific info, and otherwise refer readers to pages about relevant cities. Buy, eat and drink and sleep sections shout be empty and probably deleted, and should never list individual locations, only discuss how the event information affects the city pages (see London 2012 last 2 paras for what I mean by that). With that in mind, I'd also propose inserting a standardized text into Pyeongchang 2018, Tokyo 2020 and Beijing 2022 based on London 2012, i.e. "General information about traveling to/in/shopping locations/drinking/eating establishments/accommodation to/in Foo-placeappears in the Foo-place article." Sounds good? PS. One final thing - there seems to be an overlap between content in Prepare>Accommodations and Sleep sections. Not sure how to fix it, but we should not have two sections about essentially the same topic. --Hanyangprofessor2 (talk) 07:28, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, given that practically nobody of our current contributors seems to be knowledgeable about/interested in the Olympic games, the last few Olympics articles are next to useless (Vancouver 2010 is the last good Winter Olympics article). Great to see that we have some people onboard who'd like to help out with Pyeongchang 2018. By the way, contributions to our articles of other South Korean destinations would also be very welcome. ϒpsilon (talk) 08:14, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm interested in the Olympics but not as much from a travel perspective and I've also been busy lately. WV just needs the number of contributors to grow. Otherwise there will always holes like this in the future. Gizza ^(roam) 09:11, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Gutenberg books

Gutenberg.org has over 50,000 free, legally downloadable, books. It is all older material for which copyright has expired, so (at least in the US) legally in the public domain and freely usable.

We already use them some, e.g. On the trail of Marco Polo and On the trail of Kipling's Kim are based on Gutenberg books and quote them extensively. Other articles have links, e.g. Retiring_abroad#Housing links to some 19th century cookbooks for those who might want traditional dishes from home.

There are some Gutenberg bookshelves that look likely to have more things we can use. e.g. Travel Bookshelf and Countries Bookshelf.

I'd say Gutenberg is another resource we should be using much as we do Commons, part of the huge range of sites that are part of the global commons. In fact we should be actively looking for ways to use them more. Pashley (talk) 15:39, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Other destinations section vs see section

I was looking at Gangwon and similar pages (Pennsylvania, etc.) - and I have trouble figuring out the difference between the "other destinations" section and "see" section. Both list non-city level attractions like parks, etc. What guides placing them in one or the other? I think they may be better of being merged. Is there a Manual of Style like guide to consult on that? --Hanyangprofessor2 (talk) 07:41, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

I'll let somebody more experienced explain the difference, but as a starter, here is the guide you are probably looking for: Wikivoyage:Article_templates/Sections Drat70 (talk) 08:06, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Usually "other destinations" are destinations, which have or should have articles of their own (non-city areas, parks etc.), which should be mentioned in such a section for them to get into the hierarchy, while the See is about attractions or classes of attractions that could (and should) be in See sections of other articles. I think the articles linked above could be tidied a bit; the parks probably all belong in Other destinations, perhaps See was used to avoid redlinking. --LPfi (talk) 16:34, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Temporary closures

I've been wondering what to do with listings for places that have closed temporarily, renovations, or any other reasons? The establishments are still there, the contact info remains unchanged, of course. L. Challenger (talk) 11:47, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

When I encounter this, I usually comment the listing out, then when it's back in action, it's easy to restore. Drat70 (talk) 13:22, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

My preference is generally to note the closure in the listing description, that way readers can see "expected re-opening January 2015" and if they are reading it today they will know that the place is probably open again and the listing is just out of date. Commenting out the listing would also work, although that approach means that if the original editor forgets to uncomment it then it's likely to remain hidden for longer than necessary. -- Ryan • (talk) • 14:36, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

A note is better than commenting out. Absence of info tells the traveller nothing. A note saying that a place is closed may avoid disappointment, especially for those who would turn up based on info found elsewhere and without booking or enquiring ahead (been there, done that). Nurg (talk) 10:25, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

On it:voy we are use to insert these kind of "temporary information" through a dedicated template that tracks trough categories all the information that after a certain date should be revised. --Andyrom75 (talk) 23:49, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Grants to improve your project

Greetings! The Project Grants program is currently accepting proposals for funding. There is just over a week left to submit before the October 11 deadline. If you have ideas for software, offline outreach, research, online community organizing, or other projects that enhance the work of Wikimedia volunteers, start your proposal today! Please encourage others who have great ideas to apply as well. Support is available if you want help turning your idea into a grant request.

• Submit a grant request
• Get help: In IdeaLab or an upcoming Hangout session
• Learn from examples of completed Individual Engagement Grants or Project and Event Grants

I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 19:53, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Madrid needs district articles

So far, Madrid has not been districtified. Just started an outline of Madrid/Centro. If you can contribute to the districts of Madrid, please share your thoughts at Talk:Madrid. /Yvwv (talk) 12:46, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Is this kind of section allowed ?

I am just curious that this kind of section Berlin#Prostitution is allowed ? I know that Prostitution is legal in Germany but Is it good information to tourist? I want to ask your opinion. --Berlinuno (talk) 07:49, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

I think so, especially as it's mostly warnings. See Wikivoyage:Sex tourism policy. Do you find that the section in question runs afoul of the guidelines laid out there? If so, let's talk about that. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:06, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Issues around this type of content are usually around the premise that Wikivoyage does not advise illegal activities, although in this instance there doesn't seem to be any problem. It can be confusing to apply in places such as Thailand where prostitution is both widespread and (nominally) illegal --Andrewssi2 (talk) 11:39, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Listing editor testing requested

There is a longstanding bug in the listing editor where listings can be mangled if any field of the listing contains a pipe character ("|"). In practice this means that many listings containing embedded templates, wikilinks, or images are not editable by the listing editor.

I think I've finally fixed that bug, but the change is not completely straightforward, so I would appreciate help in testing it. For those willing to help, can you install the beta listing editor and report any failures in this thread? To install the beta listing editor:

1. Go to your user preferences and click on the "Gadgets" tab.
2. De-select the existing "ListingEditor" in the "General" section (required - both old & new listing editors cannot be active at the same time).
3. Select "ListingEditor2 (beta)" from the "Experimental" section.
4. Click "Save" at the bottom of the preferences page.
5. You may need to wait a several minutes for the change to take effect as there is sometimes a lag in enabling gadgets.

The only difference between the current listing editor and the beta is the change for dealing with pipe characters in listings, so you should not see any changes from the normal listing editor, aside from the fact that a nasty bug should be eliminated. In addition to failure reports, if you use the beta listing editor for a significant number of edits without issue then reporting success would also be helpful. -- Ryan • (talk) • 15:45, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Since no issues have been reported I've pushed the changes live, so everyone using the listing editor should now be able to edit listings containing embedded templates or wikilinks without error. -- Ryan • (talk) • 17:11, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Halloween

Stubbed, I would appreciate some suggestions on how to expand it. (and possibly on what other secular festivals could be given a 'travel' article.) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:32, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Speaking of which do we have a set of headings/page banner for "festivals"? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:38, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Is "festival" the correct term? To me, it conjures up organized (and sometimes contrived) local events like Mardi Gras in New Orleans or the winter carnival in Quebec City. I also see you've listed a paranormal tourism for deletion, as author. Would it be worth combining these somewhat-related topics? K7L (talk) 14:54, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Halloween, in some places is like a secular festival, albeit one that isn't as such formally organised (but we can discuss this further if needed), and it was intended to use the article as a focus for the largely stage managed special events, and some cultural practices ( like costume wearing, candy collection), that a traveller might want to know about.

The Paranormal tourism article on the other hand was intended (the deletion debate aside) to be for strange (and fringe) phenomena that are of travel interest the whole year, as opposed to the staged special events for Halloween.

There may be some overlap, but there's a different intent of focus.

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:24, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

So why create an article you are struggling to find content for? The problem I have with this article in its current form is that it is not about travel. I am sure it could be but why start if you have no destinations in mind? We do not have Christmas but we do have Christmas Markets. Carnival/Mardi Gras, would make sense (this year under February) as you would recommend people to visit Venice, Brazil or Cologne so although there are many places around the world that have activities for Halloween, where are the special destinations you would recommend people to visit to experience the festival? --Traveler100 (talk) 19:10, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

The article needs a good understand section, which should:

• Give the history of Halloween
• Explain it to somebody who has never heard of it. This should include a para about how it differs from the events it is "not to be confused with".
• Say which countries it is celebrated in, and how the customs differ between countries. (Guising and turnip lamps in Scotland, trick or treat and pumpkin lamps in the US...)
• Anything to be aware of if you "stumble" across a Halloween event. (fruit / sweets for children?)

The Do section needs specific examples of the events in all the countries where it is widely celebrated. I am not sure about the London Dungeon listing, which looks an expensive commercial attraction. AlasdairW (talk) 20:53, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

That was added because of a special event they were running, No objection to it's removal.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:08, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Hmm, Anyone up for expanding the Understand section? I'm only familiar with my own local area's traditions which are essentially an excuse for local chains to sell costumes/candy, and as such that isn't necessarily appropriate for Wikivoyage. I've commented out the London Dungeons item, pending a further disscussion about scope.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:12, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia's article is of some length, but it would need an expert to unpick key sections of it for Wikivoyage. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:31, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Also if I recall, there are some communities that don't do Halloween, which is something the article should probably mention. Anyone with more specfic information? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:14, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

If this article can't be expanded by others, than I've got no objections to it being merged elsewhere. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:22, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Hmm - No takers? Perhaps a merge would be better? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:41, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Stuff's going to break in 2017

TLDR:

1. Someone/some page at this project should probably be subscribed to m:Tech/News.
2. The announcement in the most recent edition about mw:Parsing/Replacing Tidy is going to affect you, but probably not very much.

More details:

w:HTML Tidy is a tool that the devs have been using to silently compensate for some typos in HTML and wikitext code after a page has been saved. Tidy is being removed (but not during 2016) as part of a multi-year plan to update the parsers and improve accessibility.

To give a simple example, </br> is an invalid HTML code (it should be <br> instead). It's easy for editors to get confused about which HTML tags need a slash and which don't, or they saw it somewhere and copied it, so this error happens all the time. This currently displays as if it were correct, but that will not be the case when Tidy is removed. You can see the pages affected by this particular error by searching for insource:/\<\/br\>/ in the regular search box. There are only about 25 pages in the mainspace that have this particular error (and no templates!), but that's only one of the errors.

More information, and a list of the major changes, is available at mw:Parsing/Replacing Tidy. In (probably) December, there will be a tool that you can use to visually check previews on pages that you're concerned about (it'll probably be available in Special:Preferences, but turned off by default). In the meantime, there is a list of known errors at mw:Parsing/Replacing Tidy that you may want to review and check your wiki for. I also recommend dropping by w:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Check Wikipedia and watch for information about scripts and tools. Much of this work can be handled with scripts or bots, but some of the changes (e.g., where to close a table that is missing the |} code to signal the end of the page) require human judgment.

Most of the information about projects like this is delivered via m:Tech/News. However, nobody at this wiki is subscribed to that weekly newsletter. If you aren't reliably getting this information via another wiki or mailing list, then you may want to subscribe and start watching for announcements like this.

I think that the Wikivoyages are going to be one of the least-affected sets of wikis, because of the decision to use as few templates and as little complicated formatting as possible. However, there are some pages that will be affected. I expect formal announcements to go out later, but I thought you'd want to know about this sooner rather than later. Also, if you work at any other project, please share this information.

If you have questions or information to share with the devs about this project, please feel free to {{ping}} me. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 16:47, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Event template not liking paramaters

Before I get annoyed what's gone wrong ? Halloween#United_Kingdom

I tried adding 2 events, and they refuse to display the location data. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:22, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

If the event location is a destination page it will display as a link (as long as it is not on that page). The Country does not display. Intention is once we have a good number of event templates across the site we can create an intelligent calendar of events with the data. --Traveler100 (talk) 04:51, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Creative Commons 4.0

Hello! I'm writing from the Wikimedia Foundation to invite you to give your feedback on a proposed move from CC BY-SA 3.0 to a CC BY-SA 4.0 license across all Wikimedia projects. The consultation will run from October 5 to November 8, and we hope to receive a wide range of viewpoints and opinions. Please, if you are interested, take part in the discussion on Meta-Wiki.

Apologies that this message is only in English. This message can be read and translated in more languages here. Joe Sutherland (talk) 01:35, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

mapframe and GPX traces

I notice a couple of issues with the maps on itineraries, like the Trans-Labrador Highway:

• GPX traces aren't being displayed. This used to display a line tracing the path of a Bertha Benz Memorial Route, a Trans-Canada Highway/Yellowhead Highway and a few other itineraries.
• If a static map exists, instead of displaying it as an alternate where dynamic map support isn't available (print? no JS? whatever?) both maps are always being displayed. Trans-Labrador Highway does this when it used to display the dynamic map as primary and hide the alternate (static) map.

Are these bugs? and are they documented anywhere? K7L (talk) 14:34, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

I took up the GPX issue in Template_talk:Mapframe#optional_show_parameter two weeks ago. ϒpsilon (talk) 15:21, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

I believe this is being looked into - no permanent solution available yet; as far as I know, hopefully soon. -- Matroc (talk) 04:32, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Matroc, K7L, ϒpsilon, take a look at the proposed technology for centrally storing GeoJSON data and reusing it in multiple mapframe/maplinks. . I think it should provide a much better alternative to the current GPX/KML storage. Let me know what you think. --Yurik (talk) 05:05, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

If it makes it possible to add routes without having to understand extra coding (just as before), then I'm all for it. ϒpsilon (talk) 05:19, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

ϒpsilon, could you walk me through the process please? What have you been doing before, and for what types of articles? --Yurik (talk) 05:40, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Philippines edits

Some relatively new users have been adding a lot of content to articles about places in the Philippines, and of course that's good. But there are problems with the format and sometimes content of these edits, and I would like you to all know that because my edits tend to get overwritten by them, I've pretty much given up patrolling these articles. The problems include:

(1) The use of bullets throughout the articles, including in the middle of a sentence in "Get in", when it wraps to the next line

(2) The use of lowercase letters at the beginnings of such bullets

(3) The listing of numerous supermarkets and other stores and such purely by name, with no or little other information

(4) A refusal to use the ₱ symbol for costs

(5) The arbitrary use of capital letters in the middles of sentences

Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:06, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Irregular subheadings, too. See here and here for typical examples of some of the problems. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:09, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Another example. Did you know "Fan" and "Private" were proper nouns? On the other hand, "tv" is lowercase... Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:34, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I've been fixing some of those problems & have dropped some comments on user talk pages, apparently unheeded. Ikan & others have been too. This is getting downright tiresome, but I'm not sure what can be done about it. Pashley (talk) 03:57, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Fringe_phenomena#Known_scams_and_fakes

Any well known ones to mention here? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:00, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Most of them. All of them? I think the whatever their name fairies that were endorsed by Arthur Conan Doyle deserve mention... Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:34, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, the Cottingley Faries, are infamous. I was however in terms of the article thinking more in terms of scams used to part the traveller from funds ;) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:21, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Can I introduce other community site or site's article or SNS article about Pyeongchang or Place ?

I'm interested in Pyeongchang, Pyeongchang 2018 and I want to know about "Can I introduce other community site or site's article or SNS article about Pyeongchang ?"--JongHoon Park (talk) 07:11, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

@JongHoon Park: What is the article? Do you know what kind of license it has? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:12, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

@Koavf: As I know, there are lot's of unknown sources in article. And some articles have own their referrence that is individual nickname or name in article. I don't know about license..--166.104.240.100 07:36, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

@166.104.240.100: @JongHoon Park: We don't need citations here--those are only at Wikipedia. We expect that travellers will verify information by going there themselves or possibly calling ahead. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 13:39, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Any information you guys want to know about Pyeongchang, Pyeongchang 2018 in south korea? (the city hold the 2018 winter olympic in Korea)

Hello. I am a korean student. My team gonna edit some informations for small project about the Pyeongchang, as you know, the host of 2018 winter olympic. And I want to know if there is any information you want or need to know about Pyeongchang. Our team have a plan to edit some informations about the way to get in, sightseeing, famous korean food, hotels and so on. If you think there something should be need to add, let me know.--Jisoo-U (talk) 07:12, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Please go ahead and add any information you think will be useful, and thank you! Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:17, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

I just looked at the Pyeongchang article and was glad to see the information about buckwheat products that was added to "Eat". Some listings for good places to eat these and other products would be great. Another point I want to make is that there are currently too many images, considering the length of the text: On my browser, the last three photos are all below the end of the article. I won't remove them, but I would suggest for no-one to add any more images, but instead to make sure that enough content is added so that the images all end up within the article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:28, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, you're welcome to add any information you know of that can be useful to a traveler. For example, Get around only has information about taxis, how about the few bus lines that are mentioned? Maybe there are also more things to see? The Buy section is empty, are there some interesting products or shops in the city? If you know some good restaurants, please add them to Eat. And if you know some good bars, pubs, hofs and so on, they can be added to Drink. ϒpsilon (talk) 14:17, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

How is the Seoul KTX train connection coming along? The 'get in' section could use some more detail on this. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 20:12, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

The Accommodation section of Pyeongchang 2018 could usefully be expanded. What would be very interesting is any slightly off the beaten track places to stay nearby. For example London 2012 has some interesting suggestions in the final paragraph of its accommodation section. I went to the watch the Paralympic Games and stayed in Gillingham where I found a guesthouse near the station, and about 40 minutes from the Olympic Park by train. I stayed less than an hour from the Olympic Park and paid about the same for 1 week as I would have paid in London for 1 night.

The Get around section could be fleshed out with information on public transport in the area. Full details may have to wait until nearer the time (will there be 2 or 4 trains per hour?) but the general routes should be known now. A little bit of information about the area around each venue would also be useful - is there anything to see or do nearby for a few hours before or after an event (see Glasgow_2014#See). Are there any places to eat or drink near the venues, but outside the Olympic fence? AlasdairW (talk) 23:15, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

The Way To Make Baicheng Better

I am from Baicheng. How can I make it better? What should I add? --Mzsamzsa (talk) 07:24, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Welcome! In answer to your questions: Please add any kind of information you think a visitor to your city would find interesting or useful. The thing that really sticks out to me is that most sections are completely empty. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:16, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

With the existing listings links to their web pages, location coordiantes and street address as well as a little more description. --Traveler100 (talk) 10:23, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

What's the difference between 'See' and 'Do' on the wikivoyage page?

Actually, I don't know well about the difference between 'See' and 'Do'. sometimes there are some informations of parks or famous mountain on 'See' section. As well there are some information about ocean in 'Do' section. what is the exact difference? and if there are informations about the temple, whick section would be suitable? See or Do?--Jisoo-U (talk) 07:33, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

You're talking about a temple that's an attraction as a sight to see, right? That would belong in "See". I know that which section has which listing isn't always consistent in practice, but there's a handy page that helps answer questions about what belongs in which section: Wikivoyage:Where you can stick it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:14, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jisoo-U. Look at Wikivoyage:Big city article template#See and the 'Do' section that follows it. 'See' is for attractions that don't move much, and there is a list of examples there. 'Do' is for activities and performances, rather than static attractions. Some of the things that go in 'Do' are a bit surprising. For example, movie theatres go in 'Do', because the actors are performing, even though the visitor just sits and watches. Check that page and the one that Ikan gave, and if you are still not sure, just put things where you think is best. Someone else might move it to another section, but at least you will have written the information, which is the most important thing. Nurg (talk) 10:40, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Can I add the 'Mascot' and 'Commemorative Coin' of Pyeongchang 2018?

In Olympic page, it would be better to add some mascot or commemorative coin which represent this big event. It could be interesting for someone who has an interest to Pyeongchang2018 and has a hobby to collect memento. There are some introduction of these on Official Pyeongchang 2018's site. I want to know about other people's thought to this idea.--Oh Joonseok (talk) 07:36, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Sure, as long as the image used complies with creative commons license. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 09:02, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, thanks to our Exemption Doctrine Policy, which allows "fair use" of otherwise free photos of some non-free artwork (and architecture). Such images cannot be uploaded to Commons, but have to be uploaded locally on Wikivoyage, unless the mascot or coin is free, which I doubt. --LPfi (talk) 10:50, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Can I copy the images from this http://www.pyeongchang2018.com/horizon/eng/mascot/mascot.asp to wikivoyage? --Oh Joonseok (talk) 07:45, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

That page says "Copyright by The PyeongChang Organizing Committee for the 2018 Olympic & Paralympic Winter Games" so I would assume not. Reading through their brand protection page seems to suggest even fair use is not allowed. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 09:18, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Fair use should be allowed regardless of the copyright owner. The brand protection page seems to be about trademark rights, which are unrelated to copyright. Essentially the law and the linked page want to ensure a page of ours is not mistaken for an official Olympic Games page – and we should anyway not use the symbols in such a way.

However, WMF and our EDP (linked above) require that the photo itself be free, and any material on the official pages are unlikely to be (except possible historic images). Somebody has to take a good photo of the mascot, the coin or whatever symbol we want to use, and publish it under a free licence (and there should be a note about the underlying unfree work).

--LPfi (talk) 11:25, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

LPfi, thank you for your excellent explanation of our EDP. I was afraid I had written it so poorly no one else could understand it. =) Powers ^(talk) 20:43, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Make SEO edits a precondition for featuring

So I am currently editing Berlin a bit, always copying sections into copyscape to see how much they match a certain other page and then trying to edit accordingly (do look over my language and the general flow of the text and be as strict as you must when excising parts where I got carried away on a tangent) and I found there are some quite large matches, especially in sections like "get in" or "get around" and - most damning of all - the lede. Berlin is not currently scheduled for featuring and I have no intention of nominating it (though Berlin/South is currently rated guide and could in theory be nominated/featured), but this got me thinking; our featured articles are the most visible and high profile articles and featuring (or even a nomination) usually entails a lot of editing at any rate, so how about we try to better our search engine rating by deliberately editing featured articles or articles nominated for featuring with that in mind? In other words, should we ask for editors to do a bit of that before a feature goes live? Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:10, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

While any divergence from WT content is of course a net gain for WV, this is the kind of thing that happens organically over time regardless of anything we editors may do intentionally to speed that process along. In my estimation, the primary impulse behind any edit to this site, or question an editor should ask himself before clicking the "Save changes" button, should always be "does this constitute an improvement in the content that we offer the reader?" If there's also an incidental SEO benefit to the edit, so much the better, but it strikes me that simply making lateral changes to the content of our articles for no reason other than SEO runs the risk of inadvertently degrading our content. It seems picayune, but word choice, clever turns of phrase, etc. do matter. To a certain degree, they're how we define ourselves relative to other travel guides. Given that SEO edits are merely a way to move us in a direction we're already moving anyway, it seems unnecessary to run that risk, and I'm especially wary of going so far as making them a precondition for featuring DotMs, OtBPs and FTTs (which are supposed to be open to all Guide or better articles, full stop). -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 23:29, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Well, you be the judge of my recent edits to Berlin. I do think that some of them improved the content of the article rather than just moving laterally. And furthermore we should take a serious look at section that were not changed at all in years, as they are both the most likely to give us SEO penalties and the most likely to contain outdated information. Hobbitschuster (talk) 23:50, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Agreed We can at least make it a point to have several users pore over the page before featuring. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:36, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Hobbitschuster, I wasn't referring specifically to your edits to Berlin, and I take you at your word when you said they improve the content of the article. I think maybe you and I are talking about two different things here. When I hear about "SEO edits", what that implies to me is a simple, superficial change to the wording of an article such that it says the same thing as before but in different words, which fools search engines into regarding it as original content. If you're talking about adding information to an article that wasn't there before, or updating information that hasn't been edited in years, I'd regard that as an improvement to our content first and foremost, with any attendant SEO benefit secondary. And if you're saying that DotM candidates should be looked over to make sure that all information is up to date and nothing is left out, I'd agree with that too, but I would also say that's something that by and large we already do. Lastly, the mere fact that improvements to our content do necessarily also improve our SEO standing, and the fact that they happen all the time at WV, is precisely what makes me think it's maybe not utterly necessary to make the sort of "lateral SEO edits" I described at the beginning of this comment. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 01:03, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

The problem is that certain sections - once they are written - do not "move" much in any direction, as evidenced by a cursory glance at the text on that other site and our site. For instance this is quite true for a lot of the "by bus" content in articles about Europe, despite the rather rapid development of this market in recent years (I have tried some stabs at it, but way too many articles still list companies that may or may not still exist) and if I take a look at an article, I tend to skip certain sections (e.g. everything "by car", because cars to me are boring and I just assume there is some street and you just follow the signs). Incidentally, when I then look at the comparison tool, those sections are not unlikely to be those most in need of work. Now I am sure we all have different sections we tend to skip - some of us may not skip anything ever - but using comparison tools could help us identify the areas where work is most needed and beneficial. Frankly, I seem mostly incapable of "lateral edits". When I try to reformulate a text, I usually do it from scratch or from only a list of talking points. But we are all different. And a particularly damning thing is if the lede of an article has not changed since the migration. Some ledes may be unimprovable and the best prose since I don't know when, but the vast majority of our ledes were written by someone who thought "well there needs to be a lede" and not much improved on since. Hobbitschuster (talk) 02:01, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Those are points well worth pointing out and keeping in mind. I think, though, we should not talk about SEO in any guidelines or feature discussions: that could lead to sections being rewritten by people not too good in writing English, and as you and Andre say, the reason for changing the wording does not matter much for the SEO issue. Using the comparison tool to find possibly outdated or less developed section will help SEO and improve article quality without our saying anything about SEO. --LPfi (talk) 06:22, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

The featured article should showcase the best Wikivoyage has to offer. As such, it should offer the voyager (a) original content which is (b) up to date. I recall the question of whether Internet access should be a featured travel topic (FTT) was raised; my reaction was that it's not ready to be a featured travel topic if it still contains a substantial amount of three-year-old information which was copy-pasted from some other website. If it's not worth the trouble to replace the outdated text with new and original content, it's not worth featuring. K7L (talk) 13:10, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

I do not understand the requirement for original content. If some free content found elsewhere makes an article better in other aspects, what is the point of using less good or less complete text instead? In most cases, of course, text from elsewhere needs at least some rewriting to fit our style, but that is a separate consideration. And old content is not necessarily outdated, if it has been checked and updated where needed. I think we should not confuse quality issues with SEO and the wish to cut any connections to that other site. For SEO, I hope Google & co are smart enough for our work to show in search results without efforts on just changing content, which seems to be true. For the other site, a company abusing a community does not mean the community did not produce valuable content before the fork. I hope we could just leave that site to degenerate on its own and concentrate on making this site good. --LPfi (talk) 13:14, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Idea for an improvement: Show gpx tracks on the maps and be able to download them for usage in map application

Imagine we were able to show gpx tracks on the mapframe (e.g. a city walking tour, which covers the highlights of Istanbul). Then – with a click of a button, one could download exactly that gpx file to the phone and import it into OsmAnd, Maps.me, … best with POI pictures and some text. I personally think, that would be a huge improvement for Wikivoyage! --Renek78 (talk) 18:53, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

This feature was once introduced to WV, but then reverted with some not very clear reasoning. Check out also the old discussion on this topic. And while this feature keeps being missing from WV, you can anyway download GPX using this external tool. --Kiaora (talk) 04:49, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Renek78, that feature has been implemented in it:voy as a pilot. You can see for example it:Nelle terre dei Gonzaga. From the GPX indicator icon you can download both the GPX track and all the listing present in the page (provided that they have the coordinates).

Kiaora, the revert has been done for technical reason. If this is the only problem, I can correctly activate it here as well. Let me know. PS The original purpose of the external tool that you have mentioned, is to extract POI from more than one article. --Andyrom75 (talk) 07:06, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

It would be extremely helpful to have this feature enabled. As it's very unlikely a lot of people know about this tool at all. And yeah, I've seen it's capable of combining POIs from several articles, quite handy. --Kiaora (talk) 07:22, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Kiaora, I've just activate it the GPX indicator on all the articles that have been associated to a GPX itinerary like London/City of London. To activate it on every article that has a listing I need the support of an en:voy-admin to change MediaWiki files. I'll keep you posted. --Andyrom75 (talk) 09:21, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Done!

Kiaora, Renek78, now from all the articles is possible to download GPX file, with POIs and tracks information ready to be installed on external devices. --Andyrom75 (talk) 19:29, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your support, Andyrom75! That's already a big step in the right direction. But somehow I don't fully understand how to add a track to a Wikivoyage article. For example I wanted to upload a gpx file for the "Hike along the coastal path from Monaco to Carnoles". I would create the trace with a tool like GPSies, upload to this place and then somehow link the gpx in the article. But I already fail on the upload part. The wikihelp "Wikivoyage:How to use dynamic maps" wasn't really helpful. I guess I'm too new to all this...

Renek78, you need to save the mentioned GPX track in Template:GPX/Monaco. Once done, if the syntax do not contain mistakes, the track will be automatically added to the article. Unfortunately the maps used here in en:voy has a bug that do not show the tracks directly in the map. If you want to see it, you can try it first on it:voy where the tracks are visibile (when well written) because we still used the old maps that in general have less problems. Once satisfied with the track, you can copy it here too. --Andyrom75 (talk) 22:45, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

I am going to try it as soon as possible. Means, that my idea is already implemented - you are the man, Andyrom75! --Renek78 (talk) 11:38, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Quick update: I have just created a track now on GPSies and uploaded it to the Monaco gpx template. If I now download the Monaco gpx file the track is included, but I am not able to see the track on the article map - neither on the English version nor on the Italian one with this "Mappa dinamica" element. So not sure now whether more cleaning of the gpx is needed or the mapframe feature just has to be updated.--Renek78(talk) 12:23, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Another update: The track can be seen when clicking on the button "Full Screen dynamic map". The next step would be to make the mapframe show gpx tracks and to be able to link the "do" map marker "Carnoles hike" with the gpx track. Then it's close to perfection. --Renek78 (talk) 12:37, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Fantastic! Thanks. --Kiaora (talk) 03:56, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Renek78, 2 notes.

1. To see the GPX track in a language version, you must save the track in that specific language version. You have saved it only here in en:voy
2. You can see the GPX track in the en:voy "big map", because that map is still linked to the old one that is currently in use in it:voy (not only as a "big map" but in every article). It's not a matter of template name. What changes is the content. See the different marker icons for example. --Andyrom75 (talk) 13:57, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

GPX track shows on the geo map - Work is being done to show the GPX tracks on a mapframe - Though it is possible to do so in a temporary roundabout way - it would be better to wait for a final solution(s)... -- Matroc (talk) 01:30, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

How to deal with users making the exact same edit here and on that other site?

Maybe we should have some guideline for dealing with edits like this. If you look it up on that other website (I was somewhat suspicious due to the amount of redlinks), you see immediately that a user under the same name did the exact same edits over there. Now I have posted a thread on the talk page of the British Virgin Islands article, but this is likely to be a recurring issue and I would like some guideline as to how to deal with it in general. If I understand our current (lack of) policy correctly, we do not prohibit it as there are no things in CC by SA that prohibit it, but we discourage it due to SEO concerns and encourage the authors to instead focus their edits here, correct? Maybe we should write an essay or something to point users to to maybe convince them? Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:04, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

I don't think we should do anything, other than be glad we have a new contributor, welcome him and fix the wikilinks you mentioned on the talk page. Acer (talk) 22:21, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Notwithstanding my earlier comments, this is one case in which I think "lateral SEO edits" may be desirable. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 22:27, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Well it is quite possible that a significant number of the editors to whom this applies are unaware of our history and even some of those who have a passing knowledge of it might not know about the whole SEO thing. Maybe we should have/create something more in depth to link to rather than Wikivoyage and Wikitravel as nowadays the "editor active here and on that other site" is the commonest cause for us to talk about them in the first place and the cases of "someone asks us about that other place of their own volition" have greatly decreased. Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:42, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

We could make a customized welcome template for people coming over from WT with a link to the history. I just don't think we should require any specific behavior from them, such as not making duplicate edits in both sites (since I think being able to do that is an incentive to start editing here. If they have to rewrite they might balk at the extra work and just stay there instead). Acer (talk) 23:01, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

We've had a significant number of negative experiences on this site in the past with editors who were active on both sites stirring up trouble here, so I hope my reaction to this issue is not colored by that. I think it's fine to drop such users a friendly talk page message explaining why we frown on duplicate content from WT, but I don't think we should hesitate to edit the WV text accordingly, and I don't think we should show a whole lot of tolerance towards repeat offenders. Frankly, I'd love for policy to be changed to explicitly prohibit duplicate WT/WV content (except insofar as there remains some pre-fork material on our site), but given the amount of mountain-moving that's necessary to gain consensus on policy changes here, I think that may be a bit too much to hope for. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 22:51, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

It should be noted that while it is seemingly logical that the same text on both sites will penalize our SEO rankings, there is no concrete evidence to suggest this actually happens. It probably does, but no way to know for sure. Additionally, I assume (not knowing for sure) that a high proportion of text on WV is still the same as WT, and therefore a few paragraphs of similar content, although possibly unhelpful, is not likely to do much harm by itself.

Also should we get new contributors to 'buy in' to our historical dislike of WT? It probably isn't a good first impression.

I would go with the principle that 'anyone can edit', and if someone does add similar content then other contributors can enhance by adapting i so that it becomes sufficiently different. Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:51, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Not to hijack this thread, but regarding the statement that "there is no concrete evidence" that duplicate content affects search engine rankings, that is not true. Duplicate content issues are a well-known challenge in search engine optimization and indisputably affect how a site is ranked - there are reams of articles describing the issue online, and they explain why it may cause a site to be filtered out of search results or rank lower. For just one example, see this page from Google, which explicitly states that Google excludes results when content is too similar to another result. -- Ryan • (talk) • 02:00, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Regarding the last paragraph of Andrewssi2's comment, that's precisely what I suggested doing in the first place. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 02:02, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Ryan , I was saying that duplication probably does cause a SEO issue, but it is not possible to determine the impact of one new article of duplicated content except to say that reading Google's guidance it would likely lower our ranking score. I'm thinking how this might be explained to a new contributor. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 02:34, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

SEO again

Outreach Has anyone tried directly contacting search engines? I have done so with DuckDuckGo and unless I am just remembering myself as a free culture hero, I think they actually changed their results to favor Wikivoyage. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:32, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Many have thought about it, but no-one knows how to go about it in a way that might be effective, given that the webmasters of nearly every website in the world want to do the same. Here's a thought: Let's draft and polish an open letter to search engine companies describing why WV's situation is different from nearly all other websites, due to the fork etc, etc. Then, as well as having it on the site, we could try to identify a key person in search engine companies, reformat the letter for print, and post it off to them. Nurg (talk) 02:50, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

I doubt an open letter would have any effect on SEO rankings. It might create some media or blogosphere talk if we are lucky, but that's about it. Google's algorithms mostly do what they do "automatically" with little input from management. And if anything google would actually have a (minor) incentive for us to go down in flames, as they cannot sell us any ads. In other words: Why would they even want to help us? The poor kindness of their hards just cannot be assumed. Free content advocates are of course another thing. Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:47, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Does Google show bias in order to give a higher ranking to sites with ads on them? I didn't think that was the case. Also many search terms in Google actually show the Wikipedia article as the first result. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 21:55, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

I am not saying they have an agenda against us (and they are unlikely to have one), but there is no reason they would bend over backwards to accommodate us. What potential gain could it bring them? Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:00, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Ultimately their goal is to get the most relevant search results to their users. It is likely that they are fully indifferent to us (and to WT), and will just give us higher rankings the more relevant we become. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 02:06, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

A million edits

Special:Diff/2000000/3000000

From November 2012 to May 2016, we've racked up a million edits. Not bad at all. :) K7L (talk) 14:57, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Liechtenstein#Problems_with_the_banner

Is that accurate? Hobbitschuster (talk) 01:04, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Wikivoyage:Maintenance panel % to be fixed

Hard to believe that a percentage can be higher than 100% :-) (see standard template column) --Andyrom75 (talk) 09:49, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes I have been trying to track these rough pages down. Found a few pages with double ispartof and status templates and a few with manually added category statements, but it is not easy to find them all. --Traveler100 (talk) 11:59, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

I haven't analyzed the formulas, but maybe the solution could be on defining more suitable categories, maybe all the ones involved in one single formula created by a single template. --Andyrom75 (talk) 19:37, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

External links to printable PDF maps

I would like to add links to printable maps I created on Inkatlas (example), but it seems like this is against the current External Links policy. I think a free, detailed, up to date printable atlas is something that's very useful to travellers. There is no way to include this external content in Wikivoyage itself. Are such links, in fact, against the policy? If so, can an exception/change be made? Full disclosure: inkatlas.com is a project I'm working on in my spare time. Kontextify (talk) 14:56, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

We have the ability to include a map directly on a Wikivoyage destination page; our dynamic maps are based on OpenStreetMap with markers added to indicate the Wikivoyage article's POI's. K7L (talk) 15:06, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

It's a really nice tool! But the maps aren't particularly oriented to travel; we try to make our guides as self-contained as possible, with maps printed right in-line as part of the articles. And our maps have markers showing points of interest, and are customized to be useful to travelers. It might be worth adding Inkatlas to our list of related projects, though. Powers ^(talk) 19:13, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip about the related project page! I do appreciate the static and interactive maps already embedded in articles, but I find they're often too small or not detailed enough to replace a proper map of a place (or not printable at all). Would it not be useful to link to such a map in addition to having the embedded ones that show POI's? FYI: Inkatlas uses OpenStreetMap data as well. Additionally, public domain terrain data is used for "outdoor" maps, useful for hiking and other activities. I was thinking of including these in articles about national parks, for example. Kontextify (talk) 14:05, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Editing News #3—2016

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this multilingual newsletter

float:right;margin-right:0;</span>margin-left:1em;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;padding:1em;"}]]}'>

Did you know?

Did you know that you can easily re-arrange columns and rows in the visual editor?

Select a cell in the column or row that you want to move. Click the arrow at the start of that row or column to open the dropdown menu (shown). Choose either "Move before" or "Move after" to move the column, or "Move above" or "Move below" to move the row.

You can read and help translate the user guide, which has more information about how to use the visual editor.

Since the last newsletter, the VisualEditor Team has mainly worked on a new wikitext editor. They have also released some small features and the new map editing tool. Their workboard is available in Phabricator. You can find links to the list of work finished each week at mw:VisualEditor/Weekly triage meetings. Their current priorities are fixing bugs, releasing the 2017 wikitext editor as a beta feature, and improving language support.

Recent changes

• You can now set text as small or big.
• Invisible templates have been shown as a puzzle icon. Now, the name of the invisible template is displayed next to the puzzle icon. A similar feature will display the first part of hidden HTML comments.
• Categories are displayed at the bottom of each page. If you click on the categories, the dialog for editing categories will open.
• At many wikis, you can now add maps to pages. Go to the Insert menu and choose the "Maps" item. The Discovery department is adding more features to this area, like geoshapes. You can read more at mediawiki.org.
• The "Save" button now says "Save page" when you create a page, and "Save changes" when you change an existing page. In the future, the "Save page" button will say "Publish page". This will affect both the visual and wikitext editing systems. More information is available on Meta.
• Image galleries now use a visual mode for editing. You can see thumbnails of the images, add new files, remove unwanted images, rearrange the images by dragging and dropping, and add captions for each image. Use the "Options" tab to set the gallery's display mode, image sizes, and add a title for the gallery.

Future changes

The visual editor will be offered to all editors at the remaining 10 "Phase 6" Wikipedias during the next month. The developers want to know whether typing in your language feels natural in the visual editor. Please post your comments and the language(s) that you tested at the feedback thread on mediawiki.org. This will affect several languages, including Thai, Burmese and Aramaic.

The team is working on a modern wikitext editor. The 2017 wikitext editor will look like the visual editor and be able to use the citoid service and other modern tools. This new editing system may become available as a Beta Feature on desktop devices in October 2016. You can read about this project in a general status update on the Wikimedia mailing list.

Let's work together

• Do you teach new editors how to use the visual editor? Did you help set up the Citoid automatic reference feature for your wiki? Have you written or imported TemplateData for your most important citation templates? Would you be willing to help new editors and small communities with the visual editor? Please sign up for the new VisualEditor Community Taskforce.

• If you aren't reading this in your preferred language, then please help us with translations! Subscribe to the Translators mailing list or contact us directly, so that we can notify you when the next issue is ready. Thank you!

—Elitre (WMF)

17:49, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Talk:LGBT travel#Is this really a Guide article? -and- FTT for May/June 2017?

Fellow Wikivoyagers: please share your opinions on the issue raised here. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 03:58, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Profile of Roland Unger (German WV)

For your interest. Profile of Roland Unger (German WV) on Wikimedia blog. https://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/09/28/roland-unger/ Nurg (talk) 08:51, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Consumerist Tourists vs Vagabonds

Why is wikivoyage so pro-consumerism? I feel like almost all of the articles are dominated by where to spend money (where to shop, where to buy a beer, where to pay for a bed (only $15/night! /s), where to pay for camping).

Long-term travelers are more likely to hitch-hike, dumpster for food, and setup their tent in the woods. But where is the information for these vagabonds? Is wikivoyage's articles specifically opposed to supplying information to us long-term travelers/vagabonds?

When I was en-route to Vancouver, I learned from a fellow traveler that the local police permitted setting up a tent on public property. I spent a lot of time researching this to confirm that the BC Supreme Court permitted setting up erecting a structure for shelter overnight. Once I was sure it was legal (and I did it for about a month), I added a section about camping in Stanley Park to the Vancouver article. I included a link showing the legality, but it was removed. The next edit, the rest of my addition was removed.

I'm relatively new (as a contributor) here, so I'm not going to undo the removal. Instead, I'm here in the pub, trying to learn the intention of this wiki. Is Wikivoyage intentionally providing information geared toward yuppie travelers looking to fly to a city, spend a week shopping, and fly back home? Or are we a wiki for serious, long-term travelers/vagabonds? Do we deamonize such behaviour as busking? spanging? dumpstering? train hopping? stealth camping? Where is this line drawn?

If wikivoyage is intentionally opposed to vagabonds, can you please point me to a wiki that is not?

—The preceding comment was added by Fedcba098 (talk • contribs)

I think vagabonding might make for a valid travel topic, but frankly any claims that "long-term travelers are more likely to hitch-hike, dumpster for food, and setup their tent in the woods", or that "yuppie travelers looking to fly to a city, spend a week shopping, and fly back home" are somehow not "serious", are ridiculous on their face, so much so that I have to somewhat doubt the seriousness of this question. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 14:56, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

That all being said, I don't support the reversion of the OP's edit. If that information is relevant to travellers (even a certain subset thereof) and accurate (on the Talk page he provided a link to the BC Supreme Court ruling confirming his claim), then I don't see any argument against including the information. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 15:02, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Some of what you mention may be illegal in certain jurisdictions. Hence as per our WV:illegal activities policy we do not give advice on how to best break the law, even if some might consider the laws stupid or unjust. That said, we do have an article on the right to access and there should be an article on hitchhiking. If not, plunge forward. Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:32, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Well, the specific edit he made focused on a single jurisdiction Vancouver where what he mentioned is indeed legal - in fact, his edit consisted of saying precisely that camping in tents on public land is something that the law allows. I think the edit should stand. Zooming out a bit, where other destinations are concerned I think we should handle this on a case by case basis. Where such things are legal, this is information we should include; where it's not, we should stay silent (beyond perhaps mentioning that it is illegal). -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 15:57, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the fast responses! To clarify, it's legal not only in Vancouver, but in all of BC. As AndreCarrotflower recommended, I did some plunging into the Budget travel. It appears that supplying information geared towards budget/free travelers/vagabonds *is* part of the mission of wikivoyage, so long as it does not violate the law. I think this information is dwarfed by the consumerist nature of the articles, so I will continue to add useful information for fellow vagabonds to the Budget sections of cities as I go along. Looks like the opinion so far is that I should revert my post; I'll do that (thanks for the input!). Also, there's a section of "Sleep" section in Budget travel that links to a sleep rough, which is roughly equivalent to "camping for free." I did a lot of legal camping in parks in the NorthEast US while bikepacking, and it seems that I should compile these places (as well as Vancouver) in both the Sleep sections of the relevant cities/states/regions and fill-out this empty travel topic. -Fedcba098

@Fedcba098: Info on squatting, hitching, etc. is extremely valuable, especially if it keeps someone safe. I can't recommend this enough. I agree with our policy on not recommending illegal activity as such but precisely because some of this is a grey area or something that changes by jurisdiction, having accurate info is vital. For instance, hitching is federal illegal in the States but legal in Indiana, so we can (should!) advise travellers on how/where to hitch in my home state but also caution them against it on federal highways. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:37, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Is there such a thing as a "federal highway" in the US? I know it exists in México, but w:AASHTO is a group of state government officials, with no federal voting presence. K7L (talk) 01:53, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

@K7L: Roads in the United States Numbered Highways are administered by the federal Department of Transportation, even though maintenance is the responsibility of individual states (there are even "interstate highways" in Hawai'i!) —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:11, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

There absolutely is such a thing as a Federal highway in the U.S., and Federal routes are distinct from Interstates. The Federal system predates the Interstate system. Route 66 was a Federal highway. On the Eastern Seaboard, we have Federal Route 1, which goes from Key West, Florida all the way up to Maine. Federal routes are at least fairly often multiple lanes (such as 2 each way), but only intermittently limited access, and they typically go through the centers of numerous towns. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:59, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Whoa, here. I have not seen any legal opinion or source other than the odd post in a travel forum that says it is legal to camp overnight in parks and public places across BC (including the link provided by User:Fedcba098, which was to a newspaper article and not the Supreme Court decision). This situation is far more nuanced than is being discussed. Here are some relevant links:

• 2008 decision that struck down Victoria’s bylaw
• 2015 decision that struck down Abbotsford’s bylaw
• City of Vancouver's parks by-law

First of all, neither of those Court cases made it legal to erect a shelter overnight across BC. The decisions only struck down the by-laws in the respective municipalities (Victoria and Abbotsford). As far as I know, the by-laws in other communities are still valid until they are successfully challenged in Court.

Secondly, both Court cases were argued on the basis that the by-laws infringed on the rights of homeless people under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In handing down the decisions, the judges explicitly made reference to rights of the homeless under the Charter and stated the by-laws are invalid to the extent they prohibit homeless people from sleeping in a city park overnight. It seems questionable to me that a traveller vagabonding is a homeless person of the city. It also seems questionable whether an out of country visitor can rely on the same provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that were used in these Court cases.

Thirdly, the City of Vancouver’s by-laws prohibit people from camping overnight in parks and public spaces unless they get prior permission. I’m not aware of any Court case that has ruled Vancouver’s by-law is invalid. If it is, I’m happy to retreat from my position if you can provide proof.

Collectively, these Court decisions seem to have stopped by-law officers from enforcing the no camping by-laws in most circumstances. However, this is not the same thing as saying “It is legal to camp overnight on public property in Vancouver” (or anywhere in BC). The situation seems to be similar to smoking weed in BC: many people say it’s legal because enforcement turns a blind eye to it, but the rule is still there. I think a more accurate statement would be “Travellers pitching tents in city parks is not permitted according to Vancouver laws. However, recent Supreme Court decisions have made this a legal grey area so by-law officers generally won’t disturb you unless you are being disruptive or don’t take your tent down in the morning.”

My other concern with the original and reinstated comments is the tone, particularly relating to safety. I just don’t think it provides enough context to enable an audience as wide as ours to make an informed decision on whether or not this is something they want to do. Doing a quick Google search on Stanley Park, comments ranged from “Don’t walk in Stanley Park at night” to “Best to avoid the wooded areas” to “Stay close to English Bay or Third Beach” to “It’s fine to walk in Stanley Park at night”. I think a more a balanced statement would be along the lines of “If you decide to camp in a park, stay safe. Travellers find Stanley Park to be a beautiful spot, but be aware there are no facilities and some people may not feel safe, particularly in wooded or secluded areas.”

To me, this isn’t about vagabonding vs consumerism. This issue isn’t black and white and it is contentious in some areas (Victoria more than Vancouver), so I'd prefer not to list it. However, if we do think it's worthwhile, I think the words we use need to be carefully chosen to accurately portray the legal situation and the fact that it’s not the same as going to your local KOA. -Shaundd (talk) 07:38, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

There are some things here that are definitely not oriented to tourists, though I'm not certain many of them would fit your definition of "vagabond". See for example Digital nomad, Hitchhiking, Teaching English, Volunteer, & Retiring abroad. Pashley (talk) 19:40, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

San Juan (Puerto Rico)

So I stumbled upon the article on San Juan (Puerto Rico) and it seems clear to me that this article needs work. A city of roughly 300 000 it has been "districtified", but there is no district map and half the "districts" are just redlinks. And this is just where problems begin. A debate on this was raised on the talk page about a year ago - but - as so often happens - went nowhere. What should be done? Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:01, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Someone familiar with Ohio?

A similar thing to the thread right above. Ohio is probably the record holder for number of nearly-empty subarticles in the form of counties. In Talk:Ohio#Counties_-_still_a_good_idea.3F a new division of the state was thought out and at least partially agreed upon a year and a half ago but that was pretty much it. Someone (or preferably more than one :)) here who's familiar with that part of the US and would like to continue the merging project? ϒpsilon (talk) 10:14, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Anyone? ϒpsilon (talk) 17:27, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Have been working in other areas of Wikivoyage but can get back to this topic if people are fine with the proposed restructure. I am familiar with the towns along the I75 but have no personal experience of other areas of the state. --Traveler100 (talk) 09:46, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Pinging Ryan and LtPowers who participated in the earlier discussion. Andre and Justin also hail from nearby. Anyone else? ϒpsilon (talk) 09:59, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

@Ypsilon: Just so you don't think I'm ignoring you: I'm too ignorant of Ohio to help. I haven't spent much time there. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 13:54, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

No problems. :) ϒpsilon (talk) 14:33, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

I have created some new sub-regions but not yet started expanding them. Have also added merge tags to county pages so people can see and comment on changes. Also started Wikivoyage:Ohio Expedition, which does show the number of regions is excessive for the number of city articles in the state. Hopefully provide place to discuss issues on individual articles as well a showing the to-do list. --Traveler100 (talk) 11:01, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Ypsi - about the most I can say is that individual counties definitely aren't the way to go. But I'm not familiar enough with Ohio to be any more specific than that. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 17:17, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

I'm monitoring the discussion on Talk:Ohio but I don't have any further input beyond what I've already contributed there. Powers ^(talk) 17:36, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Even if people are not familiar with the area it would be good to get some assistance moving listing currently at county level down into the relevant city articles. --Traveler100 (talk) 16:20, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Well it took more work that I first thought but I think things are better with less regions. Could do with some tidying up of the sub-region still. --Traveler100 (talk) 19:51, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Suggested change to DotM

Carrying on from this conversation at Wikitravel (external link removed), would it be wise to have multiple destinations per month? That is, one in the Northern and one in the Southern Hemispheres, since their climates will be opposite? Or simply have a more frequent rotation (maybe fortnightly)? Having just 12 places in the world every year seems like too few to me. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:15, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

First of all, we don't link to WT on this site.

Secondly, we actually feature 24 places in the world every year, plus 12 travel topics, itineraries, phrasebooks, airports, etc.

Thirdly, the answer to your question would be a firm "no". It's a tall enough order already filling all the slots with three features that change monthly.

If WT - a site whose content has already been degraded by spam, touting, and other such problems that they don't have the manpower to bring under control - has seen fit to further debase the standards of what they allow on their Main Page by forcing themselves to make space for more feature articles, that's their problem. It's certainly not something we should ape here. It would be completely and totally counterproductive especially given that we're trying to play up the superiority of our content and the differences between us and them.

Frankly, the fact that you're even suggesting we do this raises red flags for me.

-- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 03:52, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

@AndreCarrotflower: Well, that was rude. Wikitravel is not suggesting on having two DotMs. You are mistaken. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:42, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

I agree, this suggestion does not fly. Pashley (talk) 04:00, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

I'll defer to the opinions on DOTM issues to those who are more involved with that feature (sounds like the preference is to maintain the status quo), but given the fact that any mention of WT raises people's ire, I'd ask everyone to please be extra-careful to keep comments civil, and to ensure that you are assuming good faith. In addition, unlike at WT, I'm not aware that we have any policy against linking to them, although it's something Wikivoyage would prefer to discourage as much as possible for various reasons. -- Ryan • (talk) • 04:43, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

I know of no such policy. I also think that Justin has earned a presumption of good faith. Suggesting that perhaps WT might have a good idea about something is no red flag to me, though I fully agree that in this case, our way is better. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:18, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

I just find it amazing that someone who's a fairly active contributor to our site could be so heedless of our checkered history with WT, ignorant of the SEO problems we've been having vis-à-vis the old site (especially since Justin admits to occasionally adding duplicate content to both sites), and forgetful of the pattern of behavior we've often seen with several other users who contributed to both sites. It may not be bad faith and it may not be against policy in a strict sense, but the suggestion does demonstrate an astonishing tone-deafness (in addition to being a bad idea to begin with). -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 14:16, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

We need to differentiate ourselves from the old site, not imitate them. However the suggestion above that featured articles ought to be rewritten first for SEO purposes is I think just a horrifying lot of extra work and little bang for the buck. If something needs to be done vis-à-vis SEO and our featured articles right now, we could rename "Destination of the Month" for instance "Recommended Destination Article" and "Off the Beaten Path" for instance "Less Visited Destinations" (or something else).

Also, it would be great if more people would help out with fixing issues in articles rather than just pointing them out, let alone inventing new requirements. It's already — or should I say, in the last half year it has become — hard finding articles satisfying everyone. Just my 2 cents. ϒpsilon (talk) 16:13, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Well right now Feature discussions don't involve the participation of all that many editors (I am only half active there myself) and increasing the number of slots would certainly not decrease this problem. I also do not consider SEO edits - or rather, edits that keep SEO in mind - a waste of time or little bang for the buck. My anecdotal evidence may not count for much, but surprisingly little effort has sometimes cause articles to rise a lot in the duckduckgo rankings (which I think are independent of who is doing the searching, but I may be wrong in that). There is a general tendency - at the very least on this wiki, maybe on all wikis - not to remove old text in most reversions, so that oftentimes our text is longer than the one on that other site and contains more accurate information, but there is still a huge duplicate penalty because so much old text just sits there unchanged. Having a look at Copyscape has often helped me identify outdated information, or stuff that is contradicted in other parts of the article. Often the previous wordings were clunky and unwieldy but had just stayed due to inertia. Copyscape has also often alerted me to parts of the article I normally do not focus on. If we want to polish our feature nominations prior to featuring them, looking which content has not been looked at and/or changed in years is not wasted time imho. And it does have SEO benefits. Also, but this does not seem to be a major problem, if you dislike my SEO edits, tell me and please don't just reinstate what was there before but try and come up with something else. Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:43, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Of course there's nothing bad with updating the articles, and I would be surprised to learn that anyone would have reverted your or other people's edits of such kind. Nevertheless, I don't think we have the manpower for systematic SEO edits of all articles that are about to go up on the Main Page. While they might help the site as a whole (regardless if they are done on a specific article that soon is featured or not), adding this as an extra requirement for nominated articles is certainly not going to make it easier for people who are actively working to prevent there from being months without articles like myself. ϒpsilon (talk) 18:19, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

I don't think we have the editor power to increase the number of DOTMs in the foreseeable future. This will be a good discussion to have once the community grows. Gizza ^(roam) 08:42, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Maps broken when there are no listings with coordinates

Tracked in Phabricator ^(?)
Task T148971

@RolandUnger, Yurik, Andyrom75: Recently I've noticed that maps render as an empty frame on articles where there are no listings with lat/long coordinates - see for example Marshfield (Massachusetts). I'm using Chrome 53.0.2785.143 on Windows 7, and the error in the Javascript console does not seem particularly informative: "Uncaught SyntaxError: Unexpected token u in JSON at position 0". I've disabled all code in User:Wrh2/common.js and still see the problem, so I don't think it's due to any customizations, but it would be helpful if someone else could check the Marshfield article and indicate whether the map renders for them or not. -- Ryan • (talk) • 07:07, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

We have seen this problem too (in Russian Wikivoyage). I think it is browser-independent, or at least appears in both Chrome and Firefox. --Alexander (talk) 07:09, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

In it:voy we do not use the new map because of the limitation on the number of POI showable in one map (on top on others bugs), so I haven't experienced before this issue. By the way, I confirm you that I cannot see that map in my browsers. I haven't tried with iPad, but I think that the problem will occur there as well. --Andyrom75 (talk) 09:17, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

This behavior is due to a bug in the Kartographer extension. All the marker data are stored after code parsing in the document head in the wgKartographerLiveData variable. If there are no marker data senseless data were stored which are no valid JSON code. That's why you get the "Unexpected token" error message. To solve this problem I opened a phabricator task and attributed it to Yurik and JGirault. --RolandUnger (talk) 14:43, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi everyone, we had no deployments last week, but were very actively working on the code and fixed a number of data bugs. I tried to replicate phab:T148971 on this page at beta cluster and it seems to be working, so I suspect we have already fixed it, and it should be deployed to all Wikivoyage servers on Wednesday. Beta cluster always contains the latest version of the code, making it a good place to experiment. --Yurik (talk) 15:08, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

@Yurik: Thanks for the update - maps are rendering now on pages without POIs, so it looks like your fix resolved the issue. -- Ryan • (talk) • 23:19, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Issue with group names appears to be fixed as well -- Matroc (talk) 23:40, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

A few days ago I completely rewrote {{Mapframe}}. --RolandUnger (talk) 04:46, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Maps are now shown but the JavaScript bug is still existent. Therefore Track T148971 is not yet closed. --RolandUnger (talk) 04:46, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Corsican regions

Apparently the topic of merging Corsica's regions into the main article was raised as early as 2014 with no conclusive result. If nobody objects, can I merge them in one week's time? Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:48, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

How about tomorrow? I wouldn't wait more than about 24 hours. I can't see a good reason not to merge. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:49, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

So I got no objections, I think I will just go ahead right now. Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:32, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

LP's "best destinations"

I read Lonely Planet gives Canada, Colombia and Finland as best destinations 2017. Would it be good to check our coverage, and try to update and improve the most important articles in these countries? --LPfi (talk) 05:36, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

@LPfi: Agreed. If we have some reason to think that travellers will be more likely to look at these places, then we should prioritize those articles (just like we do when a major event like the Olympics comes to town). —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:51, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Looking for your advice on software development

Hello, all. I wonder if a few of you would please review something one of my teammates has been working on? Keegan's been leading the development of a mw:Technical Collaboration Guideline.

The Technical Collaboration Guideline (TCG) is a set of best-practice recommendations related to planning and communicating product and project information, with the goal that content contributors and software developers (both volunteers and WMF staff) will work together better during the product development and deployment cycle. The TCG is intended to be flexible, since every project is unique and also since plans and products change during development.

I thought that with your recent experience with the map project, that you all might have the most helpful feedback on how things could/should work. Please share your thoughts at mw:Talk:Technical Collaboration Guideline. The TCG and the previous conversations about it are written in English, but comments from all languages are welcome.

Keegan promises me that all feedback will be read and taken into consideration when editing the next draft of this advice, even if he doesn't personally reply to every single comment. Please keep in mind that the TCG is intended to be lightweight advice, rather than completely comprehensive. (Or: This is being written by Keegan, the soul of brevity, rather than by me.  ;-) Thanks, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:09, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Facebook links

I am asking primarily because of this edit, but I myself have in the past also added Facebook links when nothing else was at hand.

Is it okay to link to the FB page of something in lieu of a website if there just is no official website? Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:34, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, when a place doesn't have a regular website, it's okay to user their FB page or whatever they use as an alternative. Our external links policy actually makes that specific exception too. Under "what not to link to" you'll find: Blogs, forums and social networking sites (Facebook, etc), with the exception of when a business has no other official web presence. JuliasTravels (talk) 19:41, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Seconding Julia's comment. Many small businesses only have a fb page. ϒpsilon (talk) 19:45, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Okay. Good to know. Good to know that the exception is spelled out in policy as well. Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:17, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Request for a bot

Now I have come across the spelling "Strasse" or "strasse" a lot in articles about Germany. This is not and has never been the correct spelling in either Germany or Austria (I am ignorant as to Namibia, Liechtenstein and Luxembourg or the German speaking part of Belgium). However, Switzerland has gotten rid of the "ß" some time ago. Would it be possible to write a bot that replaces every instance of "strasse" or "Strasse" with "straße" or "Straße" in all articles on Germany and Austria and all destinations contained therein but leave the idiosyncratic Swiss spellings in place? Or would that be too difficult to implement? I would be willing to look after the bot, but doing it by hand is a daunting task. Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:54, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

I thought the double 's' was an accepted typographical substitute for eszet all over the Germanophone world. Powers ^(talk) 23:20, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

You can spell it like that - if no other way to write it is available but that's clearly not the case here. We have all those letters, so why not use them? And Switzerland has in fact eliminated "ß" some time in the 1930s (I think, but don't quote me on the date). At any rate, if you open the Neue Zürcher Zeitung vs. the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, the lack of "ß" in the former will be the most notable spelling difference. Hobbitschuster (talk) 23:55, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

For people with no familiarity with German, the ß is confusing and the 'ss' is much easier to understand. As Powers mentions, the eszet perfectly acceptable in those 3 German speaking countries. I would urge not inserting the ß in Austran and German articles for this reason. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 03:01, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

No, Hobbitschuster is correct. Given that this is the English Wikivoyage, the only time that words in other languages should appear in our articles is in street addresses, subway or bus stations, in the "alt=" argument of listings where we provide the official local-language name of the attraction, and in a few other cases where knowledge of a local-language term is essential. In all those cases, it's necessary to reflect the spelling that visitors will see on signs, maps, menus, etc., which in Germany and Austria includes ß. Far from avoiding confusion, substituting the eszet with the double S will only create confusion for those unfamiliar with German. See Wikivoyage:Foreign words for further details. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 05:01, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

I strongly agree with AndreCarrotflower. The Eszet should be used in articles for countries where it is used in names, and not in articles about Switzerland, where it is no longer used. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:46, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Whatever we decide on, I'd like it to be consistent. And for me consistency with the way it is written locally would be the most logical way to go. Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:06, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

The Ezset is used on all official road signs, so from that point of view I would change my opinion above. I just get the impression that Germans as a whole are not particularly attached to ß Andrewssi2 (talk) 21:50, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

I'd like to give some input on this concerning the case of Liechtenstein. I believe Liechtenstein does not use the eszett (see here for instance). Drat70 (talk) 09:45, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Linking to listings from Wikipedia

An idea to increase the links from Wikipedia to this site. Take a look at Wikipedia:Eiffel tower#External links. Proposal is to add to the Wikivoyage listing template that if a wikidata code entry exists it creates an html anchor. Can then add link template on the Wikipedia page (should be possible to create one that needs no manual parameter input). --Traveler100 (talk) 07:58, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

I implemented something like this: Special:Diff/3076972. See Turda#Q18547952. -- T.seppelt (talk) 08:57, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

@T.seppelt: Great, thanks. I have created Wikipedia:Template:Wikivoyage-listing; just need to add the Wikivoyage page name to the template to get the info box with link to the listing. For example {{Wikivoyage-listing|Paris/7th arrondissement}} on the Wikipedia Eiffel Tower page will create box with link directly to the See listing on the Wikivoyage page. --Traveler100 (talk) 09:26, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Great. Probably one could run a bot on enwiki to replace the old template with yours when the respective article is mentioned in a Wikivoyage article. -- T.seppelt (talk) 09:39, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

w:Eiffel Tower (as an example) uses w:Template:sisterlinks, so the new w:Template:Wikivoyage-listing might look out of place. Is there any way to modify Template:Sisterlinks to link to the listing anchor in certain cases? Powers ^(talk) 15:37, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

It did not use sister links when I wrote this entry earlier in the day. Being counteracted by another user. --Traveler100 (talk) 16:49, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

I have requested an update to the sister links page (do not have admin there). In mean time see example at w:Tower of London#External links (as long as not counteracted there too). --Traveler100 (talk) 17:04, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Why did you create a new one instead of adding this functionality to w:en:Template:Wikivoyage? WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:52, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

I thought it was easier to type a different name for listings rather than articles that add some type of parameter option to the original template. But thinking about it more, could always generate the wikidata page code, if it is to article rather than a listing in an article the anchor tag will not exist in the page so will default to top of the page. Guess could merge them.--Traveler100 (talk) 17:05, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Sister links For what it's worth, I combine sister link templates into the one w:en:Template:Sisterlinks on en.wp. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:14, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

What was the value of switching it during this conversation? --Traveler100 (talk) 17:18, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

@Traveler100: I just happened to notice it. I don't want to edit your comments but if you want, you can just refer others to the permanent link: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Eiffel_Tower&oldid=746913917#External_links —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:27, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Now w:Template:sisterlinks works with listings. Also so does w:en:Template:Wikivoyage and w:en:Template:Wikivoyage-inline, however w:Template:Wikivoyage-listing works with less parameter inputs. Basically on the Wikipedia side you just need to enter the Wikivoyage page name. If on the the Wikivoyage page the listing of the Wikipeida page has an entry for the Wikidata parameter the link will jump directly to that part of the page, otherwise the top of the page will be displayed. --Traveler100 (talk) 14:23, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Slovakia remapping

Hi guys. For whatever reason, Slovakia was mapped using the obsolete political (and too generic) division. I am on the crusade of redoing this in the following days, and I could use someone experienced to create wikivoyage-style maps. For now, I'll just adjust wikipedia svg's (political region and tourist region maps of Slovakia) - maybe that will be best start. Volunteers please head to talk:Slovakia, thanks! :-) Andree.sk (talk) 08:37, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

@Andree.sk: It looks like you've been here a couple of weeks--we're happy to have you. Have you looked at Wikivoyage:Mapmaking Expedition? You may have some luck posting there. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:17, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Buffalo#Buffalo Districts Revisited

I'm sounding out opinions on a proposal to revamp Buffalo's districtification scheme. Please read and share your thoughts at the talk page. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 05:11, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Non-admins can delete pages?

Am I hallucinating or did I just see a non-admin deleting some articles??? User:Andree.sk doesn't even seem to be autopatrolled (which I think a user with a few weeks of good edits should be). --ϒpsilon (talk) 21:06, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

A non-admin can delete a page during a page move, if the target is a redirect without history that points to the page being moved. Example: move page "A" to "B", then "A" becomes a redirect. A non-admin can then move "B" back to "A", which deletes the (redirect) "A" in the process. -- Ryan • (talk) • 21:08, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Map circles, boxes and triangles etc.

• I have written some Lua Module functions to draw circles, ellipses, boxes, triangles or stars and produce a maplink with all the necessary coordinates for display in a mapframe as well as the option to create a centered marker for these shapes. The most difficult (as I know nothing about trigonomety) was to draw fairly accurate circles and account for Mercator distortions (isotropy) at higher and lower latitudes. The circle function may be added later to Module:Map as I already discussed the circle function with Yurik... or perhaps in a separate Module after further testing.
• You can see examples HERE if you wish.
• In the meantime; I have created Module:Mapdraw for anyone to try it out should they wish to... Matroc (talk) 07:59, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
• Have a great day! -- Matroc (talk) 05:33, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Massachusetts Reorg?

Hello! I am a masochist and I'm trying to update the Massachusetts pages. If you have the time, please spend a minute clicking around how the Massachusetts hierarchy is presented now. There are a lot of "lost" and "empty" pages. I'm hoping to leverage work done by previous Wikivoyagers in a more cohesive way. But maybe I am barking up the wrong tree entirely? Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! --ButteBag (talk) 21:26, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

I think the idea is great, but I fear I won't be able to be of much assistance. Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:39, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

yes there are a good number of almost empty articles, frustration for a reader clicking around. Having just done a similar task for Ohio I would suggest first merging cities that do not have any sleep or see entries with nearby towns. Once this is done, what regions make sense should be clearer. To help identify merge-able articles use the bottom row of the second table at Wikivoyage:Massachusetts Expedition (just created this). Need to then check if there are hotels in these towns/villages (google map, tripadviser, etc.), if not check nearby destinations using the map (icon top left) for combination candidates. --Traveler100 (talk) 07:34, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Sp-contributions-footer

Used on user contributions page. vvv's yaec is no longer there due to discontinuation of the old Toolserver and the tool doesn't seem to be on Tool Labs either. ----Arseny1992 (talk) 14:39, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

The broken link has been removed, thank you: Special:Diff/2503673/3083052. -- Ryan • (talk) • 05:45, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Mapframe acting up

Nine-County Region from some reason, the map has a large grey X across it. Can someone explain why or fix it? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:34, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

I don't see an x but there is a mapmask template in the article that is shading the area around what I believe is the Nine-County Region. How accurate that is, I do not know. In the layers dropdown, uncheck the Group:mask and it will disappear. -- Matroc (talk) 01:21, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

From here, it looks to be shaded in some incorrect manner to put 1-Anderson, 11-Cumberland, 13-Greenfield, 18-Greenwood outside an almost-discontiguous shaded area and the others all inside. It's almost as if the points to draw the boundary are being drawn out of sequence? K7L (talk) 02:22, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

I thought that might be the case. The data in the mapmask will need to be corrected or replotted. I will leave a note in the Talk page. -- Matroc (talk) 02:44, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

It looks like the software is transposing some of the co-ordinates, it starts fine with

{{mapmask |39.342,-86.629 |39.470,-86.631 |39.470,-86.685 |39.525,-86.685 |39.550,-86.651 |39.600,-86.654 |39.629,-86.640 |39.630,-86.685 |39.864,-86.685 |39.864,-86.693 |40.178,-86.695 |40.181,-86.243 |40.216,-86.243 |40.221,-85.861 |40.379,-85.861 |40.379,-85.578

becoming

"mask":[{"type":"Feature","geometry":{"coordinates":[[[36000,-180],[36000,180],[-36000,180],[-36000,-180],[36000,-180]], [[-86.629,39.342], [-86.631,39.47], [-86.685,39.47], [-86.685,39.525], [-86.651,39.55], [-86.654,39.6], [-86.64,39.629], [-86.685,39.63], [-86.685,39.864], [-86.693,39.864], [-86.695,40.178], [-86.243,40.181], [-86.243,40.216], [-85.861,40.221], [-85.861,40.379], [-85.578,40.379],

but then the last six co-ordinates end up out of sequence, so:

|39.874,-85.575 |39.874,-85.596 |39.786,-85.596 |39.786,-85.633 |39.351,-85.630 |39.340,-86.381}}

becomes:

[-86.381,39.34], [-85.63,39.351], [-85.575,39.874], [-85.596,39.874], [-85.596,39.786], [-85.633,39.786]]],

Drawn with the last six points out-of-sequence, the outline looks just plain wrong. I'm comparing the template args in the article wiki code to whatever HTML is visible on <ctrl-U> (show page source) in the web browser. Something's happening between the co-ords being fed to the template and the out-of-sequence mess being delivered to the browser, not sure what as I'm not familiar with the code. K7L (talk) 04:03, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Fixed - template needed to have a closing position which is the same as the first set of coordinates given in this case. -- Mapmask is creating a polygon using the new Kartographer extension probably to create a maplink... Since I have played around with mapframe and maplink and polygons I figured it out... -- Matroc (talk) 05:02, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Can we change the Pyeongchang page in Wikivoyage:Article status to Usable status ?

I think the Pyeongchang page is much better than previous one. And can we change the Article status now, Outline status to Usable status? (Added by JongHoon Park, 06:41, 7 November 2016)

The article looks to have all the required sections so I have changed it to Usable. I did notice that there are many phone numbers missing a country code. AlasdairW (talk) 23:06, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

How to remove a redirect?

I'd like to clean up Valencia (region), which is a bit of a mess. Currently Castellón (province) and Valencia (province) both redirect to Costa del Azahar, but this is incorrect as Costa del Azahar should be a bottom-level of Castellón (province) only (and not of Valencia (province)). Alicante (province) currently redirects to Costa Blanca; this is also incorrect as the Costa Blanca should be a bottom-level region of Alicante (province). I can't figure out how to remove the redirects, and would appreciate any suggestions. –StellarD (talk) 10:51, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

After you get redirected, right up the top of the page above the banner and breadcrumbs you'll see: "(Redirected from ...)". If you click on the the link, it'll take you to the original redirect page which you can edit to remove the redirect :) James A ▪ talk 11:17, 7 November 2016 (UTC)