From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
The Zürich Airport Lounge Bar

This is the Wikivoyage Lounge on Meta where we discuss the Wikivoyage project in general and issues related to more than one language version. Old discussions are archived.

Monthly reports from each edition of Wikivoyage can be found on the Summit page.

Please click here to begin a new discussion

Start a new language version[edit]

What needs to happen to get other language versions up? Our main page currently lists seven, while the sidbar on the WT en main page gives:

   ar: الصفحة الرئيسية
   ca: Pàgina principal
   de: Hauptseite
   eo: Ĉefpaĝo
   es: Portada
   fi: Etusivu
   fr: Accueil
   he: עמוד ראשי
   hi: मुखपृष्ठ
   hu: Kezdőlap
   it: Pagina principale
   ja: メインページ
   ko: 대문
   nl: Hoofdpagina
   pl: Strona główna
   pt: Página principal
   ro: Portal
   ru: Заглавная страница
   sv: Huvudsida
   zh: 首页

I saw discussion somewhere of problems bringing up the Portuguese version. What of the rest? Pashley (talk) 11:51, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

You have to import the XML dumps into Wikimedia Incubator to start a new language version. Please see voy:de:Wikivoyage:Lounge#Wikivoyage_im_Incubator.--Aschmidt (talk) 15:44, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Good start![edit]

Hello, This place looks nice. I like the picture. That's a good start! Yann (talk) 12:06, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! It's the traditional picture of Wikivoyage Lounges. On the continent, we prefer the Lounge to the Pub. ;) --Aschmidt (talk) 15:44, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Travel photo of the month[edit]

In German Wikivoyage each month we select a travel destination of the month that is featured on the wiki's main page. I would like to suggest to have the Travel photo of the month in the banner of the Wikivoyage portal on Meta picked by a different language community every month. What do you think about it? (Thx to Rogerhc for bringing up the issue on my user discussion page!) --Aschmidt (talk) 23:32, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Support Support --Ricordisamoa 02:21, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Fine by me. PiRSquared17 (talk) 02:25, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Good idea. May be under the condition that the photo is used in one of the Wikivoyage articles.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:37, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Update on Internet Brands v. Holliday[edit]

Cf. --Aschmidt (talk) 08:25, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

See also: --Aschmidt (talk) 22:17, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikivoyage in French[edit]

They're a problem with the linking to wikipedia article in french wikivoyage. The template WikiPedia:article always link us to the english wikipedia. I've made some changes and i must use WikiPedia:fr:article to go the french side. This will become problematic as most user will not use the :fr to go to the french version. I've not seen how i can change that in french:wikivoyage and i'm not a very good at using template and programmation. How can we fix this thing. Maybe colleague from the nederland or sverige wikivoyage have answer to this problem. , On a more content side i will say that things are starting slowly. Theres a lack of old participants that know the guideline and policies of wikivoyage. So the content part is starting slowly. Not a lot of participant, much less than the english version. But already they are some interesting addition in article. Some wikipedians from the french wikipedia come by and some old wikitravellers also. I will stay in touch here. Excuse my english, hope you're able to understand me. -- ChristianT (talk) 12:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

The w: and wikipedia: links are interwiki prefixes, not templates (modèle). As the list of these prefixes is shared between all Wikimedia projects, it is not possible to fix this by editing a template. The only likely solution is to use some sort of robot script that replaces [[WikiPedia: in every article with something else, such as [[wikipedia:fr: or a template link. K7L (talk) 12:23, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Indeed, [[:wikipedia:fr:xxx]] for the time being seems to be the only option.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:32, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
voy:fr:w: points at French Wikipedia whereas voy:fr:wikipedia: points at English Wikipedia. Can't you just use "w:" instead of "wikipedia:" everywhere? --Stefan2 (talk) 16:52, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
wikipedia: links are moved to the sidebar on article pages, w: links are not - this isn't the same as the convention on Wikipédia itself (where articles have a == Liens externes == section for external links) but is the Wikivoyage convention. That creates a problem for all of our existing non-English articles with sidebar links to what should have been the same-language Wikipedia, but instead is w:en: K7L (talk) 16:56, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

FYI: We have a new template voy:de:Vorlage:Wikipedia in Germany WV for linking to Wikipedia in the sidebar, and we use the w: prefix in other places.

I've already realised that French WV is starting very slowly, and I can say for German WV that we are rather busy at the moment. However, I expect the project to take another half year or so at least to fix all the redlinks and to adapt to Wikimedia standards.--Aschmidt (talk) 17:14, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

BTW, Wikivoyage does not seem to be that popular amongst French-speaking Wikipedians: fr:Wikipédia:Le Bistro/11 novembre 2012#Wikivoyage --Aschmidt (talk) 00:29, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

That doesn't surprise me; there are 3000 {{wikitravel}} templates (and its aliases) on en: pages awaiting robotic disposal (template was voted for deletion as Wikivoyage has the same content locally), on fr: it was 30 pages instead of 3000 and they were all replaced with {{autres projets}} manually. Maybe, because fr: is a smaller community, they're more likely to focus on just one project (Wikipédia) instead of dividing their efforts among multiple siblings? K7L (talk) 01:51, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Official launch[edit]

When should we launch officially? Have been looking around WV and it appears that about half the images are working. What percentage should be fixed before we begin advertising the site? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:41, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

The German one looks quite good. Features and all templates are working, als well as maps and coordinates and all infoboxes. Mostly the interwiki stuff is to be done and adapting some templates to WMF standards. We would say: Around Christmas. What do you think? -- DerFussi 12:22, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Russian Wikivoyage has most of the images redlinks. If the images are done before Christmas, I guess we should be fine, the rest of the work will probably be completed by then.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:06, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
What is the best time to launch with respect to a media campaign? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:44, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Let me think. Ymblanter's message is showing a problem to us. It seems, the transfer bots focus on the main uploaders first. So the images of en: and de: will be uploaded first. OK other language version use these images as well. But the other language versions will be fall behind. Sounds a bit uncomfortable to me. But have no idea, what to do. Just checking the situation again in two weeks? Would love to see all language version starting here with the same level. Have prepared a bottle of a nice drink here... Any chance to help? Should we upload images from the smaller language version by hand? Is help needed with templates interwiki or something? -- DerFussi 21:55, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Please do not start early. We should have more redlinks fixed in de.voy before leaving beta officially.--Aschmidt (talk) 22:19, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
We are definitely unable to start before Christmas. Since holidays may be bad time for any media campaign, we should think about first part of January or any later date, which is suitable for advertising the site. --Atsirlin (talk) 22:44, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
experience suggests thats its best not to think in terms of media campaigns. The reality is that due to copyright issues there are going to be quite a lot of redlinks around whatever. Best approach is probably to work out what the most viewed pages are and fix the redlinks on those. Currently you are tending towards letting perfect be the enemy of good and that never ends well in the context of wikis.Geni (talk) 08:21, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
We (on Russian Wikivoyage) can get rid of redlinks in a couple of days just replacing them with valid images from Commons. I just do not think this is fair to contributors who previously spent time to search for appropriate images, sometimes to upload them, and now they would suddenly find that their images are gone from the WV pages just because we screwed up the process and wanted to open soon.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:46, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
@Aschmidt: Just suggested a recheck intwoo weeks. Not leaving beta. We should do it just to get informed about the situation on all the language versions. -- DerFussi 13:39, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
I'd suspect that the timing of media attention to the case isn't something which can be tightly controlled. It's going to be on the radar at whatever moment the last of the IB litigation (and any counterclaims) reaches final judgement... whether we are ready with images for launch at that time or not. K7L (talk) 14:26, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Interwiki bots[edit]

Several days ago, Russian Wikivoyage became the first Wikivoyage project adopting The standart bot policy. We are now ready to host interwiki bots, who do not require any additional authorization. Is anybody interested in running an interwiki bot between different Wikivoyage versions? --Ymblanter (talk) 14:30, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Odd spot[edit]

This is really weird. Translating Stefan F's name into Ryan's... This, that and the other (talk) 10:53, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Very strange. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:48, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
hi hi: really strange. But I can confirm Stefan and Ryan are different persons. -- DerFussi 08:56, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Project lists[edit]

Hi, why scrapping the Project lists? It's the same for all pages with the name of a Wikimedia project. Ziko (talk) 23:49, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

I removed the page top banner box with the links to the other MWF Projects (template:project lists) because this page (Wikivoyage) is not about those. Meta's Main Page is a more appropriate place for those links and they do look quite nice there; anyone can get there from here with one click on the big WM logo at top left of every page. Meta Wikivoyage is the place for us to focus on Wikivoyage which is rather complex enough already. However, thanks for the warm welcome! --Rogerhc (talk) 21:38, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
I don't get it. :-) Wikisource, Wikibooks etc. have this template too, so what's the problem? By the way, on the Meta Wiki main page in German there is no Wikivoyage. Ziko (talk) 22:06, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
The problem is we have enough distractions already, quite a bit of work to do and there is a place for focus, clarity and simplicity in our lives. Regarding links to Wikivoyage, Wikivoyage on WMF is still in beta and not ripe for publicity yet; we are missing thousands of essential images that must all be imported by hand apparently, and there are lots of details that require our focus. What is "Meta Wiki main page in German" by the way? --Rogerhc (talk) 22:25, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
Please see Main Page/de. Remember that Meta is multiligual. WV should be added there, of course. And if a template is used on other projects' sites, it should also be on the Wikivoyage page on Meta. I am going to add it again in a moment.--Aschmidt (talk) 23:22, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
I've added Wikivoyage to the English and to the German main page template of WM projects.--Aschmidt (talk) 00:04, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
It's been reverted because it's still beta and hence not fit for the main page...--Aschmidt (talk) 00:18, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
No need to be afraid that this link will reach a lot of people - it's even on the main page of WP. :-) Ziko (talk) 19:57, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
Dewiki only. ;) --Aschmidt (talk) 21:44, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
You mean de.WP? :-) Ziko (talk) 17:45, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
dewiki/enwiki normally means de/en.wikipedia, Yes. It's a bad habit, but it's the way it looks on wmf-sites, no matter we like it or not. -- Lavallen 14:35, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Does it? And even if, bad habits are to be changed. "Wiki" as an abbreviation for "Wikipedia" is one of the poorest of them all. :-) Ziko (talk) 14:43, 30 November 2012 (UTC) = de.wp = dewiki, with dewiki more often being used on the more technical platforms, I'm afraid… sorry for causing the confusion… ;) but dewiki still seems to be the only platform to have put devoy ;) on its main page.--Aschmidt (talk) 23:45, 30 November 2012 (UTC) …except for dewikiversity, of course… ;) --Aschmidt (talk) 00:22, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


Could someone create subdomain for Finnish language? There is quite many Finnish articles in Wikitravel, which could be imported to Wikivoyage. --Olli (talk) 10:12, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

There is already a Finnish version on incubator. It will be available under as soon as the community is strong enough to be viable as a language version of its own.--Aschmidt (talk) 18:40, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
If the former WT Finnish community is still around, I guess a request could be filed directly to Langcom, without having the Incubator version first. If there is no community, I think it is better indeed to go through the incubator.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:50, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
It's probably better to import the Finnish version of Wikitravel instead of restarting from scratch. Also, Finnish was one of the languages which got enough votes on the Wikivoyage e.V. site to allow the project to be opened there, although a few of the language versions with enough votes (e.g. Finnish) never opened, for some unknown reason. --Stefan2 (talk) 23:03, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
The reason is as follows. These votes appeared after the migration of en: in the end of August. At that time only four other languages had got sufficient support, while others were left for the future. --Atsirlin (talk) 23:09, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
At the end there was now time, because we started the migration to the WMF. But the finish content is available. Maybe the WMF should be asked whether they can import it. -- DerFussi 12:18, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
See also incubator:Incubator:Wikivoyage import. It seems that there are plans to import more languages and that the first ones will be imported on 1 December. I hope that Finnish and the other languages will follow later. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:46, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
So, will the Finnish Wikivoyage be published in near future or not? Is there really a need to configure the Incubator or something? --Kulmalukko (talk) 15:13, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
The Spanish and Portuguese Wikivoyages are being created right now. I think Romanian will be next, and hopefully the others will be created soon after. It might be helpful to create a request for Finnish here and fill in the correct settings. sumone10154(talk) 16:44, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for a tip. Now I have created the request for Finnish WV. --Kulmalukko (talk) 18:08, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
As I understand the 8 language editions have long been "Approved" for import (-> Requests for new languages#Wikivoyage or earlier in Wikivoyage/New language versions) but nobody feels responsible, and except talk nothing productive happens. Or who can finally import it? --Alan ffm (talk) 18:22, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
The developers are working on creating the Spanish [1] and Portuguese [2] versions right now. sumone10154(talk) 18:38, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
And what is the status or where is the problem with all the other approved language versions? What are we waiting for? --Alan ffm (talk) 19:23, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
As I just said, the developers are working on Spanish and Portuguese first (those versions got the most support on their request pages), and the others will be next. Also, the remaining versions (besides Romanian and Finnish) don't have a request page yet with the needed settings. sumone10154(talk) 22:00, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
OK, now I've created also a polish request page with the settings -> Requests for new languages/Wikivoyage Polish -- Alan ffm (talk) 01:24, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
There are already the Spanish and Porguguese versions visible. When the Finnish version Wikivoyage is expected to be started? --Kulmalukko (talk) 08:18, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm not sure what the delay is now. You could try asking User:MF-Warburg. sumone10154(talk) 21:42, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Should something still be done before the Finnish version will be started? (Request exists.) --Kulmalukko (talk) 12:33, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
It should be approved by the Language Committee, then a bugzilla request should be filed.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:54, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
Now the request status has been verified for 10 days. How long should it take before the Finnish Wikivoyage actually starts? --Kulmalukko (talk) 15:00, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
Normally not long after the Bugzilla request. So now we are waiting the Language Committee's decision to accept it... and then Bugzilla request will be made. --Stryn (talk) 20:54, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Requests for new languages#Wikivoyage tells that the Finnish version has been approved, but the request page doesn't mention anything about this. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:16, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
How the status approved should be shown in request page? Should the verification be changed into final decision? --Kulmalukko (talk) 11:04, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

The WV Fi request was created 9 months ago. The request was verified almost 3 months ago. Nothing is happened. Have the Language Committee decided that Finnish Wikivoyage will not be opened? --Kulmalukko (talk) 15:54, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

I do not think anybody here can answer this question. The Language Committee would be a better place to ask.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:28, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
Ok. --Kulmalukko (talk) 18:32, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Italian Wikivoyage[edit]

See also stats:wikivoyage/EN/TablesWikipediaIT.htm

At this time voyage/it has only two active contributors assiduously I think it is better to move it on incubator until there is an adequate number of contributors 21:01, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Why is it better? The project is more active than most small wikis. And as far I can see there's also not much vandalism/spam. Greetings, Vogone (talk) 21:04, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Because two contributors is not yet a community but a personal site for a wikimedia major project in the near future and if I'm not mistaken wikimedia requires more than three users for a project82.51.127.28 21:19, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
To get out of the incubator, there should be five active users. But here we talk about an existing project, with a lot of content to be maintained. Nobody closes existing projects just because some active users have left.--Ymblanter (talk) 01:02, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
It's probably safe to say that wv/it will gain contributors once we leave Beta and put up a notice, send out the press release, etc. --Peter Talk 01:50, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Absolutely.--Ymblanter (talk) 02:28, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Regardless, it will not be closed with two active contributors and an existing body of content for sure. The solution at most would be to get involved with it, rather than asking for it to be moved back to the incubator. Snowolf How can I help? 05:58, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Legacy admin rights[edit]

Where do we request legacy admin rights for "new" language versions? es and pt both currently have no admins! Texugo needs bureaucrat rights for :es and :pt, I need them for :es only. --Peter Talk 17:49, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

  • I would normally expect elections running for a week, and if the result is successfull, request the rights on Meta.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:46, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Rather than do that every time, couldn't we have a discussion here demonstrating that there is support for legacy rights? --Peter Talk 05:55, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Support -- Peter and Texugo for admin and bureaucrat rights per Peter's above request. Please make it so before January 15 public launch. --Rogerhc (talk) 01:38, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
I'd argue that getting legacy rights (so if a user had adminship on the old equivalent Wikivoyage language version) shouldn't require any particular votes/discussion but rather could be just granted as "part of the migration". Thehelpfulone 18:22, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
The users active in es.wy are currently holding sysop elections at es:voy:Wikiviajes:Elección de administradores temporales. I'd think everyone who wants to be an admin there should candidate there as well. If a user previously was an active contributor and sysop already on Wikitravel, his request for adminship will probably met with approval by the community. --MF-W 19:22, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support sumone10154(talk) 18:18, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Support I think that people who had a sysop or bureaucrat flag at Wikitravel should have the same flag here, unless the person is employed by Internet Brands. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:07, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I´m still wondering how I can get the burocrat/admin rights on pt:/es:. Can anyone help me out here? Texugo (talk) 16:15, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

You can make a request at Steward requests/Permissions. sumone10154(talk) 21:02, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
I personally would disagree the fact that these five users reflect community consensus. To me, in the cases of the Spanish and Portuguese communities, this wikis were not set up from wikitravel, but from various wikis that had, on their turn, used Wikitravel's contents. They are as such, in my eyes, new projects, and in the case of the Spanish Wikivoyage already have a far bigger involved community. I disagree, thus, that these users are granted adminship over there without any local process, as a kind of back-door deal. There is a big difference between Wikitravel and here, where Global Sysops and stewards can act in emergencies, and it is therefore IMO unnecesary to flag users who don't speak the language fluently, even if they did help build the content that is now on Wikivoyage. And for the record, I Oppose Oppose this general rule, going through an RfA on two projects is no big deal, and this would show that the user has the trust of the community, which IMO an admin should have at all moments. Savhñ 16:28, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for joining the discussion, Savh. I think the :es community made it clear that they want a clean break from the history of the project pre:WMF move. That's a little bit of a surprise for the people who worked to make that move possible, but the :es community on WT wasn't very big or active for the past several years.
I hope you will follow developments on this page, so you can relay them back to the rest of the :es community that might not be following Meta discussions regarding Wikivoyage. In particular, we are working on potential major feature development, and I'm a little worried that the :es version has been diverging from the rest of our project to make it so different from the rest of Wikivoyage that it won't be able to benefit from new proposed features. But if you join such discussions (which are about to start here), then you should be able to preserve some integration with the rest of Wikivoyage. --Peter Talk 00:14, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Btw generally do we have all communities involved? I had contacts at different stages with representatives of German, English, Dutch, Russian and Swedish Wikivoyage, but I do not think I have ever seen anybody from French, Italian, Portuguese or Spanish Wikivoyage, at least not I know of (obviously I know that Particio Lorente was elected an es.wv admin and that he is a Board member, but this is about it).--Ymblanter (talk) 09:14, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Social media[edit]

I notice the twitter account still uses the old logo and description?

Also there are several Wikivoyage facebook pages - and I'm not sure which is the official one - goes to a German language one (again, with the old logo). -- Chuq (talk) 06:28, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Yeah. I've noticed it last weekend. This reminds me to my duties. Thanks. I will change it. -- DerFussi 12:03, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
I have renamed our old wikivoyage facebook site to the "Wikivoyage - deutsch" because its related to the German content. After getting some likes I have grabbed an other Facebook page: [3]. This one can be used for the whole project. Anybody interested in admin it? I suffer from lack of time. You can contact/add me on facebook ([4]). -- DerFussi 12:12, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
It may be best to have just one per language; I'm not sure how a multi-language page would work. I created and admin'ed the Wikitravel FB page until I handed it over to IBobi; I've been thinking about setting one up for English Wikivoyage too. LtPowers (talk) 15:21, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Sounds good. I've just grabbed the other one just because of somebody use the like button. Facebook seems to display pages even when somebody did not created it. -- DerFussi 08:57, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
You guys may be interested in a discussion I started a few days ago here. I wasn't even aware of this discussion. We're planning on making one Wikivoyage English Facebook page with the name "Wikivoyage", and preferably the domain, although that leads to the de page right now. As English is generally the lingua franca of the internet, I think cross-wiki issues are best broadcast through that page. Also, there are methods on Facebook to claim ownership of the various pages and create one, unified page through merging, something we'd want to look into. JamesA (talk) 06:22, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Notice - In case anyone missed it, Wikivoyage English now has an official, regularly-updated Facebook page at [5]. Please go ahead and like us! :) JamesA (talk) 12:12, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

New feature developments[edit]

It appears this page can sometimes be neglected, but I thought other language versions may benefit from discussions at voy:Wikivoyage:Roadmap#Long_term_goals and voy:Wikivoyage:Travellers'_pub#News_from_the_German_WV_guys. JamesA (talk) 06:33, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

New Interlingual Portal[edit]

A related discussion on the English WV is archived at Travellers' pub/2013#New Interlingual Portal.

Hi! A while ago I saw that one of the goals on the English Roadmap was to improve WV's interlingual portal. So, with that in mind, I tried my hand at making a new one. Unfortunately the page is made in HTML; not Wiki-markup so can't be viewed as yet, however, you can find the code here and a screenshot of the proposed design below. The background image is only 50kb so shouldn't cause any loading issues. I'm sure lots of the translations are very poor, so please let me know what they should be! The reason the Romanian link is separate is that it had the lowest number of articles and there's only room for 10 links around the logo. It would be joined by any new version that commenced now. Any thoughts would be much appreciated! --Nicholasjf21 (talk) 02:26, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

The proposed portal
That looks really cool! (And about 1,000,000 times cooler than what we have right now.) There's a sort of telescope effect to the focus, like you are a voyager on the bow of a ship, searching for some destination ahead. It also harmonizes with our color scheme well. The transition from beautiful ocean to whaBAM gray box is pretty rough, though. Could they somehow be integrated into the image, or be placed into a different sort of graphic, with a frame? --Peter Talk 04:55, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks very much! I will try to smooth the transition a bit! In reality it shouldn't be quite as distressing on the eyes, as most users will have to scroll down to view the other links. --Nicholasjf21 (talk) 09:48, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
I suspect that it may be difficult for some people to read dark blue text written on a light blue background. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:01, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Right- I've changed it a little in order to reflect some of the above opinions; I'll take a look at font colours later on. You can view it 'live' here. Please ignore the chinese characters at the bottom - they are not part of the design, but something either inflicted upon me by the host or an internal WM script that won't work on that host. Any thoughts? --Nicholasjf21 (talk) 15:56, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Where and how are our and other WMF portal pages actually implemented? What pages, templates, etc. are involved? What roll does portal play in this? --Rogerhc (talk) 23:32, 18 March 2013 (UTC) template, template, template, etc. Only Meta admins (and stewards) can edit these. See Talk:Www.wikipedia.org_template and Talk:Www.wikivoyage.org_template. πr2 (t • c) 23:36, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
I see those templates take HTML. Good. That opens up possibilities. --Rogerhc (talk) 23:41, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
There are instructions to request changes on template, on the box at the top. I replied to your question on portal too. If you have any other questions about Meta-related stuff, feel free to ask and I'll try to help. ;) πr2 (t • c) 23:43, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Mock 1[edit]

Mock 1 version of proposal as of March 20, 2013

Mock 1: Www.wikivoyage.org_template/temp sky background (It's HTML; to preview it, select "Preview HTML" from the drop down menu next to the Search box on that page.) I darkened the links, fit all 11 languages around the logo, removed the pedantic "Search" translations (so unlike us to pester travelers, who come first, with stuff they don't need), and removed the white background from Other Projects so that they show on the sky. How does it look? --Rogerhc (talk) 05:36, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for coming up with this new idea about the design. I like it. How about chaning backgrounud images? Just a handfull of images, randomly choosen. -- DerFussi 06:52, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Like it. Gusta (talk) 16:50, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
I think the sky image only works because it is more a background gradient that an image. But anyone is welcome to prove me wrong. --Rogerhc (talk) 23:56, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Please everyone who cares, speak up--shall we go like with Mock 1 for now? Dose it have any issues in various browsers or other issues you would like fixed first? Do you support going live with it? Got other versions to consider? Please pipe up. It would be great to have views from all WV language version communities. Thx! --Rogerhc (talk) 00:22, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Should you advertise this on the various language editions of Wikivoyage or does everyone watch this page? πr2 (t • c) 00:23, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Right, I will go advertise at each individual language version's community page... gotta run now though... so in a couple hours... when I'm back. --Rogerhc (talk) 00:25, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
So nobody can say this wasn't advertised: Meta:Babel#Change_Www.wikivoyage.org_template, Wikimedia_Forum#Again_www.wikimedia.org_hasty_changes. πr2 (t • c) 00:30, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Just noticed it was already spammed on all the local community discussion pages. πr2 (t • c) 00:42, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Yes, sorry! I did that yesterday but forgot to tell everyone! --Nicholasjf21 (talk) 00:54, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for notifying the communities. ;) I meant "spammed" in a good way, for what it's worth. πr2 (t • c) 02:15, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
To down a beer at each of 11 Pubs is to be smashed. Nick, you outdid me with the translations. I drank and ran before the locals could beat me up, I think. ;~] Rogerhc (talk) 04:32, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Haha, I'm feeling a bit ill! --Nicholasjf21 (talk) 11:44, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Comments on m1[edit] template/temp sky background is pretty. Eleven languages surrounding the Wikivoyage icon is a little awkward though. And it isn't totally obvious what the grid of (sister projects) icons is. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:37, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

True. The current has these same defects and I haven't thought of any way to solve them. Suggestions? --Rogerhc (talk) 04:32, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I am not a designer, so I don't have any good suggestions on how to improve the page, but there are several things that I really dislike:

  • The colored background image is opposite to the style of Wikivoyage and Wikimedia projects in general. They always use simple graphics and mild colors that look much better to my taste. It is kind of ridiculous to have this fancy image on the title page and lots of plain text in individual articles.
  • Why do we need the words "Travel guide" written under each language? They look excessive.
  • What shall we do with the 12th, 13th, etc. languages that will imminently appear?
  • The links to sister projects are not well readable on this background. They take as much space as links to Wikivoyage itself and distract the reader.

--Atsirlin (talk) 06:57, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Few comments.
- No issue neither with Chrome, Firefox nor IE with both the version of the main pages.
- Comparing just the two versions I would say that the "fullscreen" image (second version) it's better than the first one, but from the first version I'll keep the number of articles because it give at the first glance an idea of the completeness of the project and a stimulus for the writer to do more (e.g. has recently celebrate 1M articles).
- Comparing these two voy home page versions with the other wiki's home pages, I agree with the first comment of Atsirlin, where he says that this style it's not coherent with the others and it's the only fullscreen image in the whole site. I don't say that's it's necessary a bad/wrong thing; it's just something to think of if it worths and/or make sense. --Andyrom75 (talk) 07:24, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I think (if the words "Travel guide" are kept) for the Russian language the second line should be "Путеводитель" (travel guide), rather than "Туристический" (travellers') as it is now. --Л.П. Джепко (talk) 09:58, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I see "Travel Guide" is a tricky translation in Russian. Could a few more Russian speakers comment please? Meanwhile, I have changed Mock 1 Russian tag line to "Путеводитель" and left the link title (hover text) as "Russkiy — wikivoyage — Туристический путеводитель". Is it right? Easy for me to cut and paste changes into the Mock; just let me know what the tag line and link title (hover text) should be in Russian. Same goes for other WV languages, too. I can only read and write English, myself. --Rogerhc (talk) 16:47, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Yes, "Путеводитель" seems to be the best option. It is a straightforward translation of Travel guide.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:58, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
The hover text should be "Русский - Викигид - Путеводитель", all written in Cyrillic letters. --Atsirlin (talk) 19:07, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I also am not satisfied with Mock 1. I feel it

  • is too dark, and
  • has too much info pulling the user in too many directions.

I will try lightening it in a Mock 1.1 later today. As for simplifying the page, something like what looks like might work but may require a fresh start I. I personally feel we could skip the "portal" thing altogether and go direct to English, with a prominent Language switching element on page and a cookie to remember the users preferred language. However, if we are going to use a "portal" I am thinking making it primarily a Search box with everything else standing off in the wings like does it might work. --Rogerhc (talk) 17:09, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

1. Hi everyone! I like the general idea of Mock 1 but I also think that it looks a little too dark. It has no proper contrast between text and pictures and the bottom lines in Chinese look like the sort of mandatory information that has to be placed accordingly to local laws but that no one wants them to be read. However, this is my opinion on taking a look at the screenshot above and at the "live version", since the command "preview html" is not working in my browser (Win 7 Pro / Firefox 19.0.2 / Adblock Plus deactivated).
2. I think it would be a good idea to rotate pictures, which could be on a regular basis determined by whatever (season, country, time) but still should be using pictures which can make a good contrast with all the text around.
3. I also like the distribution of text around the logo as a circle, since it could appear to be a telescope or a tire. But a distribution as wings could also be interesting. Wouldn't it? I also like having more languages around the logo, since a few ones (like the current 8 in the "live" version) make the whole image look like empty, as if something was missing or incomplete.
4. Considering the current tag line, one better option for the Spanish title could be "La guía de viaje gratuita" (the free travel guide) instead "guía para viajar" (guide to travel), which is not a correct expression in Spanish.
I guess that's all for the moment on this subject. Cheers from the es-wikivoyage! Soljaguar (talk) 08:22, 22 March 2013 (UTC)


v2 as of March 21, 2013 template/temp v2, same as Mock 1 but with plain white background. --Rogerhc (talk) 21:06, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Comments on v2[edit]

The Other Projects links have been let out of the coral and need to be wrangled back in again. I'll work on that. --Rogerhc (talk) 21:06, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

This one is more like the other portals (,, etc.). This could be considered good (branding, similarities) or bad (just the same idea with a different logo, etc.). πr2 (t • c) 21:23, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Just go with eight or ten languages around the logo and start a "smaller projects" list. The current model isn't scalable. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:52, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Lol! I just posted my comments on Mock 1... Anyway, I like this design as well but it looks somehow a little boring. I agree it looks more wiki-alike but I have the feeling that there's something missing that could give this general page a better sense of movement or fun. Soljaguar (talk) 08:30, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
I like this version. Its idea is apparently copied from Wikipedia, but it looks nice and it is better than the previous version with colored background. --Atsirlin (talk) 18:38, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
This version is fine, but if I'm honest, probably no more than that - as Soljaguar it's lacking a certain something. Personally I prefer the coloured background of the earlier prototype. --Nicholasjf21 (talk) 19:16, 22 March 2013 (UTC)


v3 as of March 22, 2013 template/temp v3, same as v2 but with Other Projects in the wings at page top. --Rogerhc (talk) 23:54, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Comments on v3[edit]

Very nice indeed! That top bar looks great! I'd still like to see a return of the coloured background potentially, but this is really good! --Nicholasjf21 (talk) 00:43, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

I like this one a lot! --Atsirlin (talk) 08:46, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

I like it, but it still feels like something is missing.> Soljaguar (talk) 17:28, 23 March 2013 (UTC)


v5 as of March 23, 2013 template/temp v5, same as v3 but with sky background.

v4? I did no submitted v4, in which I experimented switching the emphasis in the language links, because having tried it I found it did not communicate well. --Rogerhc (talk) 22:42, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Comments on v5[edit]


v6 as of March 24, 2013 template/temp v6, same as v5 but with drop shadow highlighting on language links around logo. I will do same for "Wikivoyage"... no time right now... gotta run. --Rogerhc (talk) 23:14, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Comments on v6[edit]

I really like this one. No further comments now. Soljaguar (talk) 00:33, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Very nice indeed - I like this a lot! I'm not completely sure about the shadows, but it is looking really good. The only thing is, there's a blue bar to the right hand side on the html preview - could we lose it? But really, great work Roger! :) --Nicholasjf21 (talk) 11:13, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't know what is causing the bottom scroll bar to think there is something to scroll right to see. Alas. However, I have now covered that mysterious space with background-size: 102% 100% -- hides the mysterious blue line to right of background which showed when background was width 100% 100% and you scroll right. I think I've used up about all my design momentum now. Hope it has helped. Think I will focus on getting the #Universal Language Selector extension configured for us and installed, next. I think that could make the portal obsolete anyway. Okay with me if we use portal v6 or any other meanwhile. Guess I like v6 best. --Rogerhc (talk) 23:33, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
I think this is great, and, I think I've changed my mind about the shadows too! Now we need to see if we can attract a consensus! --Nicholasjf21 (talk) 23:40, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
This looks really great and original. I could see this being used on [6]. πr2 (t • c) 23:58, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
I would just modify the Italian lable "Guida" into "Guida turistica", because the first one is very generic, while the second one is the exact translation of "Travel guide". I tried to ask comment in the it:lounge but no one reply since now. The rest is fine. --Andyrom75 (talk) 19:50, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done diff πr2 (t • c) 19:52, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
The only issue now is that another language (Ukrainian) has now been launched - we may need to move some links to the bottom again. --Nicholasjf21 (talk) 22:57, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Also Hebrew. πr2 (t • c) 23:13, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Okay, added those to v6. Will refine the spacing after dinner. Please check the Hebrew and Ukrainian translations for me... --Rogerhc (talk) 01:34, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done! Could an admin please take v6 live now? It is more up to date than the current live version (which lacks Hebrew and Ukrainian) and has consensus support above. Thanks! --Rogerhc (talk) 02:54, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
You can add a request on RFH or template (use {{editprotected}}). BTW, the translations look fine to me, but I can have some users who can speak those languages check, if you'd like. πr2 (t • c) 03:00, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
I've just put the 'other project' links in a table so they spread across the page equally. Hopefully we can get this implemented soon! --Nicholasjf21 (talk) 15:40, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Undecided, but not opposed. I'm fine with the v6 if others want it. My misgivings with v6 are that it is too dark, too busy, and finally simply distracting. What does it mean, asks the viewer. Why am I looking at a sunset here? A plain white background is simpler too look at and does not leave the user wondering about these things. Hence, v7. --Rogerhc (talk) 00:07, 2 April 2013 (UTC)


v7 as of April 1, 2013 template/temp v7, same as v6 but with plain white background.

Comments on v7[edit]

How is this different from v3? πr2 (t • c) 00:53, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

v7 has:
  • Bigger "Wikivoyage" wordmark
  • All 13 languages around logo (v3 has only 11)
  • Sister projects list at top that stretches when window is very wide.
  • White text-shadows on wordmark and languages. This of course does not show on white background but would show if, for example, a light blue background were experimented with. It's a carry over from the sunset background code and could be refactored out if consensus moves to a white background.
--Rogerhc (talk) 04:01, 3 April 2013 (UTC)


v8 as of April 2, 2013 template/temp v8, same as v6 but with lighter sunset image and relocated WIKIMEDIA badge. Work in progress -- gotta go to bed now... --Rogerhc (talk) 06:20, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

+ photo credit (below MEDIAWIKI badge), and switched to a version of the MEDIAWIKI badge that has a opacity 0.25 (25%) background so that it does not pop off the page so much. This version of the badge needs some fine tuning as the text is getting lost. Where can I get an SVG of the MEDIAWIKI badge from which to work? I've contacted User talk:Philippe (WMF)#Transparent WIKIMEDIA badge for guidance on that. --Rogerhc (talk) 04:11, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

+ links to "Terms of Use" and "Privacy Policy" at bottom. Just noticed those two links at page bottom on the current portal, Guess we should keep those. --Rogerhc (talk) 06:01, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Comments on v8[edit]

  • Support Support Very very nice! --Nicholasjf21 (talk) 10:36, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Support πr2 (t • c) 17:19, 9 April 2013 (UTC
  • Support Support I have put the request in at Talk:Www.wikivoyage.org_template#Proposal for an admin to take us live with v8. The lighter background has resolved my former doubts. --Rogerhc (talk) 17:25, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
  • It would be nice to get rid of the horizontal scroll bar. It seems to be related to the "other projects" bar across the top. Nurg (talk) 04:46, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
I agree - is this do-able? --Nicholasjf21 (talk) 17:26, 20 May 2013 (UTC)


(Copied from voy:Wikivoyage:Travellers'_pub#Tagline)

From the comments above it looks like we're going to need a new tagline. If possible, can we try and make it short and it would probably would help if it weren't idiomatic. Here's a couple of thoughts: 'Liberating travel'; 'Set travel free'; 'Travel Freedom'. Any more ideas? --Nick (talk) 18:25, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Travellers helping travellers. Texugo (talk) 18:40, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
My vote goes with the above. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 18:50, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) There was some discussion earlier at Talk:Wikivoyage/Logo#Tagline issue, but it didn't go anywhere. The other languages should probably have some input; maybe we can talk about it at Wikivoyage/Lounge? LtPowers (talk) 18:43, 18 March 2013 (UTC)Links to Meta fixed. πr2 (t • c) 00:26, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Why don't we ask Legal if using "The free travel guide" is likely to cause legal trouble? If it is not, then I think we may want to just go ahead and use the tag line _we_ always have. It describes _us_. _We_ made it (or, um, who did?). _Who_ owns it? Peter or Powers, would one of you ask WMF Legal please? I don't feel quite entitled to do so myself; am I being too modest? --Rogerhc (talk) 23:26, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
When proposals were being made for WV logos, legal removed "The Free Travel Guide" from all of them out of legal concerns. Anyway, why should we insist on having the same tagline as our nemesis, who has incorporated into the logo on every page of their site? Texugo (talk) 11:26, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
I do like 'Travellers helping travellers' - I think it's very clear and effective, but also gives as slight hint at this project's history. --Nicholasjf21 (talk) 12:40, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
@Rogerhd: I am in contact with the General Counsel of the WMF. Should I ask him? I absolutely agree. The "Free travel guide" is fine to me as well. -- DerFussi 07:01, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
User K7L commented in the English Wikivoyage pub that Wikipedia's tagline is "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit", so Wikimedia clearly has an established right to that branding, and thus it seems that legally we would have as much (and probably more) right to the "the free worldwide travel guide that anyone can edit" tagline than any other site would. It would be great to get a legal opinion on the matter, but it doesn't seem like we're the site that should have to change, and thus I'd prefer to keep the existing tagline. -- Ryan • (talk) • 16:11, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
We should come up with another tagline that is in line with the other wikimedia projects. Instead of copying the tagline of a project that like very like wikivoyage. Carsrac (talk) 20:37, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
We editors and maintainers are the living project. The host is just a shell. Our former host owns a trademark and a domain name, that's it. We replace those with new, but not the rest. I say our tag line is part of what we keep. It always has and still does described what we are doing. No one has a trademark on "The Free /anything/". It's just a description. We have a moral obligation to stand up for our rights. We have a right to use "The Free Travel Guide," as does anyone else I would think. All the same, on Mock 1 I used just "Travel Guide" in its 11 translations because I like it better and find it less cluttered there, for that particularly repetitive page's purposes. --Rogerhc (talk) 04:47, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
How about 'The Open Travel Guide'? - most people assume everything on the web these days is free, so I think 'open' is a more important description. Plus it highlights a quality that another wiki-based online travel guide does not always espouse! --Nicholasjf21 (talk) 14:12, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Quite good idea. I would support it, if its not too similar to the "Free Travel Guide" one. Is suppose "The free travel guide" is not an option, although i would love it. -- DerFussi 08:47, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Or how about 'The Traveller's Travel Guide'? --Nicholasjf21 (talk) 13:10, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

No portal[edit]

I have a sinking feeling that a Web portal, any Web portal, is annoying useless anti-user Web design. Why do we have one? Politics of the meek? Here's the solution:

  1. Default to the most common language--English, or the language we have most articles in--English, or if we can, detect the browser's default language and serve that language version.
  2. If the user choses a different language, take them to it and save the choice in a cookie for ever.

It is that simple. That's what we should be working on.

Any portal is going to be an embarrassment that no designing can fix, because it is just in the way. So remove it (as soon as we get a persistent language choice cookie working). A portal just doesn't do anything remotely useful enough to warrant serving it to everyone who goes to our main domain name, ever. I'm quite serious and I'm only saying this because it is a simple fact that no amount of designing can "fix" or change. Portals are an embarrassingly annoying waste of users' attention, every time they type our primary domain name into their browser. No, we cannot expect anyone to type a language code first. We should remove the portal, plain and simple, provide language choices in left sidebar, remember user's choice with a cookie, and let everyone in all languages use to go directly to the language version they were most recently on. That's simple. That's smart interface design that just works. No fuss. Who can help us do the auto browser language detection and persistent language choice cookie? (We already have a cookie in the current portal that remembers the Search language choice, but only for a lame 24 hours; so I know we can do a cookie, although I don't know how and it should be long term, not a lame 24 hours.)

Maybe I'm wrong; maybe it is best the way Wikipedia is doing it. But I don't think so. We never had a Web portal at WT and didn't need one. Why do we need this suddenly? What does it do for our users that they want done and are not simply annoyed by? Please comment. Thanks! --Rogerhc (talk) 22:54, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but I do not wish to direct international people to only the English Wikivoyage, but let them decide which language they want to visit if I direct them to This portal is working fine, and if you do not see any use for it: please do not use it, but let others do as it is useful for the worldwide human beings which also may be not experienced with English as language. Romaine (talk) 00:45, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
I think that use case is imaginary. How many websites do that? Are they all broken? --Rogerhc (talk) 01:07, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Do you have any idea how that could be implemented? I suppose it should be filed as a bug on Bugzilla so the developers can implement this (if/when there is sufficient consensus). Not everyone uses cookies, so it might be inconvenient for them. I think Commons has a script to get the browser's language setting, which may be helpful if you decide to do that kind of thing. πr2 (t • c) 02:37, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
I think that redirecting people to one single project could look like some sort of an obligatory step for them (it makes me think on airport controls), which I think is not necessarily the best perception one wants to have for a new project. Does one? Soljaguar (talk) 08:38, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
I really can understand your points Roger that this practice seems outdated and anti-user: there are very few websites outside of the WMF sphere that use such a system and it can slow things down. I do know however that, were the default page set to something other than English I'd probably find that annoying and I can imagine that this would be the case for speakers of other languages. The only alternative I can think of is having 1 main page - ie one page with content in many different languages (with an emphasis on the most popular) although that would also no doubt come with a series of problems! I might have a go at it later and show you the results. --Nicholasjf21 (talk) 11:43, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
I understand your argument, Roger, but I think that a redirect to English Wikivoyage is unfair. Let's choose a simple, unobtrusive layout for the portal page, and leave it in peace. Some people may use it, others will go directly to individual languages. --Atsirlin (talk) 18:43, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Unfair? Is that why we did this? Does throwing up multilingual "portals" in front of Wikimedia sites make it fair that English is the common language on the Internet? Hm. Does it make us look like politically correct geese and add an extra page to figure out and click on to get to our site? Well, it does at the moment. I was annoyed the first time, more than a year ago, when I found a "portal" in front of But Wikipedia is "not my wiki." I let it go. It is still there and annoying. But on Wikivoyage? Hm, who did this, anyway? What WV community consensus was achieved before throwing a "portal" up in front of our site? We are a travel guide in 11 languages, not an apology for the common language on the Internet. Our left sidebar links to our multiplicity of languages already, and our new Main Page bottom has an "Other Projects" icon tray already. People really don't want an extra page to digest. Fair doesn't enter the equation, they just want a travel guide already. Awesome, it has language links in the sidebar. How easy is that? Awesome, it remembered my language choice (wait.. we haven't implemented that yet, have we? Let's do--who can do this language cookie?). (See next section.) --Rogerhc (talk) 21:12, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

I have changed my mind. I went to Chinese WT and asked myself if a newcomer who does not read Chinese could easily find the language links down page in the left sidebar. No, he couldn't. If the language links were at top right, where people will look for them on such a page, yes. But they are alas not there. We should fix that on WV first—see #Universal Language Selector, below. --Rogerhc (talk) 04:02, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

As a disclaimer, I am a native English speaker however I do understand why we should not want to give undue prominence to the English language. Nevertheless, I believe the existing wikitravel portal page is a much more compelling entrance to the site than the wikivoyage portal that (frankly) looks like a low quality intranet site. Since we are trying to establish this site as the leading travel resource on the internet, can we please use the Wikipedia convention of English as the default? As an IT professional, I do see this as a big issue (although not a critical issue) for site adoption. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 14:25, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

If doing away with a portal, which I'm not convinced is the right solution, we would need a much more prominent notice on the individual main pages showing that we provide travel information in many languages. Our defining goal is to provide an open-content travel guide to the world in your own language. English is our biggest language version, in no small part because it is the so-called global lingua franca, but it should be as obvious as possible to German speakers (just one example) that they can get (and contribute!) great information in their own language too. --Peter Talk 19:22, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Language cookie[edit]

I'd like to build consensus for a Bug request to have a "language cookie" implemented on that would remember, for both anonymous and logged in users, the language version of Wikivoyage they were last on and redirect them to it instead of displaying the "portal" the next time they go to or The portal has no functionality that the Main Pages lack and is therefore irrelevant (see section above). This cookie would make it easier for repeat visitors to Wikivoyage to got to the language version of their choice, by anticipating that it is most often the one they were on last time and taking them to it. Simple, really. Please comment. Thx --Rogerhc (talk) 21:18, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

It could be very simple if for registered and logged in users that cookie is linked to his/her preferences. However, for an anonymous visitor can be very annoying if the cookie recognises a region and redirects or uses the language of that geographical region instead of the preferred or wished language. I think of Google as example. If I'm logged in, the system shows a search engine in Spanish according to my account preferences but the text on it is shown in German and the results are mostly located through the German search engine when I am located in Germany. So, I still have to make a couple clicks here and there to get to the English version and its results (even if the menus and other texts are still shown in German or Spanish)! If there was a portal where I could choose my preferred search engine, that'd be simply great! And yes, I know there are some tricks to get to the version I want a little more directly, but the same idea applies there: I still have to find a way to go around the (for me) annoying mix of languages to get to my preferred search engine instead of having a simple page with all accurate options. Cheers! Soljaguar (talk) 23:20, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
You are right. Let's not do this cookie. At least not unless we get the language selection links into an obvious place at page top right where people will look for it. The language links down the left sidebar are just not obvious enough when you are on a Wikivoygae page in a language you don't know. --Rogerhc (talk) 04:08, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
The language drop down from the top on meta works great, I think. Why can't we use something like that? --Inas (talk) 09:25, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
That's brilliant! Why didn't I think of that. Yes, that is what we should do instead of a portal. Of course, it would not offer to change the site's navigational language in our case, it would offer to take you to whatever language version of Wikivoyage you want (we have 11 to choose from at the moment). And it's a page top right interface item right where anyone can easily find it. Excellent! Checking Special:Version I see that it is, I think, mw:Extension:UniversalLanguageSelector. I want it yesterday already! Do any of us have any experience configuring this? It should be on all language versions of Wikivoyage so that no user gets stranded on a language version lacking it. Once we have UniversalLanguageSelector working, then we can revisit loosing the portal. --Rogerhc (talk) 21:59, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Universal Language Selector[edit]

Extension Universal Language Selector, if configured wisely, may be the language version switcher that simply works for Wikivoyage in any language, no "portal" needed. Who knows more about this? Who can help us figure out how to configure it? I'd like to have a test area in which to install and configure this, and let everyone kick the tires and make suggestions, before we push it out to all Wikivoyage language versions. Do we have a Wikivoyage test wiki we could install it on? --Rogerhc (talk) 22:05, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

I want an easy to find languages switching icon at page top where most people will look for it, (like at top of this Meta page) that would do the following:
  • Offer language choices of all the Wikivoyage language versions, and take you to that language version when you click on that choice.
Useful additional information might be shown on this Universal Language Selector language choices drop down pagelet, such as:
  • How many articles exist in that language version.
  • A link to that versions Main Page.
  • If the equivalent page to the one you are currently on _exists_ in a given language version, a link to that page. That page wont necessarily have the same name, eg Rome (en.voy) -> Roma (it.voy). If it _does not exist,_ a note indicating that.
Those would be the core functions we want for WV I think. Universal Language Selector has other functionality that I think we would not want, such as changing the interface language. On Meta that functionality makes sense because Meta tries to be one multilingual wiki. But at WV (and WP) we use separate wikis for each language. So we would keep that functionality turned off, I think, on WV wikis. Keep it simple so people can use it without thinking about it.
Might Stephan's new locdb (new "Page information" link, in Tools, in left sidebar on WV) be useful as part of extension Universal Language Selector, to provide the page counts and equivalent page names?
Could we do that with Universal Language Selector? --Rogerhc (talk) 19:53, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
I don't think that's what the Universal Language Selector is for. I think that the ULS is intended for multilingual projects, where people would like to switch languages (e.g., Wikidata and Meta-Wiki). You might be able to get it to do something like that. πr2 (t • c) 16:26, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

New script : Semi-automatic merging of recent changes from WT to Wikivoyage[edit]

WT still gets good edits, mostly by Wikivoyage-unaware IPs. We should merge these good edits into WikiVoyage. I wrote a Linux script that makes it semi-automatic:

For each article recently modified on WT, it shows the differences between WT&WV in a diff editor, and give you a link to easily upload the merged wikicode if there are edits worth taking. You can easily choose what changes to take in the diff editor. To make it perfectly legal, the script also gives you the list of attributions to paste as an edit summary.

The script is pre-configured for English, but for another language just change the LANGUAGE setting at the top of the ** file.
Please use it :-) Waiting for your feedback! Nicolas1981 (talk) 07:46, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

That's very cool. SJ talk  03:23, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Re: legal issues[edit]

If there are legal issues with current one why dont we just change it's colors? As i can remember there was choosing color discussion when it was elected. I think its better idea than use something extremely different. And there was other proposals during the last vote - why we look only on one? Sure voting by nonvoycommunity is bad but im not sure we can change it. E.g. current name of voy:uk: have been choosen mostly by ones that are not contributing in it, wy/uk editors supported mostly other variant. --Base (talk) 10:25, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

While using different colors may have prevented the WTO from complaining, now that they have filed a cease and desist, changing the colors would be similar to plagiarizing text, but changing the word order. In any rate, how to respond to legal issues is the one thing that is not community-decided; WMF legal makes this decision. --Peter Talk 19:59, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
I was explicitly told that we must start from scratch and cannot use a derivative of the current logo. LtPowers (talk) 20:52, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
Originally current logo was created as some portal's logo, as I can remember, and the font was created before choosing logo and there were no problems with them in that time so I don't understand why we cant just create a new one that will only have different colors. I see no similarities to plagiarizing text here because the problem is only in appearance. WTO cant usurpate all logos that have horizontal strokes in it. I think it's too trivial picture and here only colors have some value. I think we should rollback to Wikivoyage/Logo/Round_2 but not create new from scratch. It will be not derivative from current, it will be derivative from the same material, IMO. --Base (talk) 16:03, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
I'm afraid your opinion on the matter is irrelevant. WMF insists. LtPowers (talk) 20:09, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

If we must choose a new logo then I believe that it would only be fair that we held a new contest to the old one. ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 05:36, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

We're working on it; please see Wikivoyage/Logo announcement and Logo selection procedure and their associated talk pages. LtPowers (talk) 15:28, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Interwiki map[edit]

Can anyone help me adjust the interwiki map on pt:? We don't know how to do it. When we put the wikipedia interwiki [[wikipedia:Pagename]] at the bottom of articles to create the sidebar links, those automatically go to English wikipedia unless we put "pt:" before the page name every time. I'd like to set it to go to the corresponding WP:pt: page every time without having to specify the language every time. Does anyone know how to do that? Is it something we have to open a bugzilla request for? Any help would be greatly appreciated... Texugo (talk) 02:13, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Try [[w:Foo]]. wikipedia: -> enwiki, w: -> PiRSquared17 (talk) 16:34, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
Sorry if I wasn't clear. I know that w: works, but that creates an in-line link in the article, not the sidebar interwiki link I'm trying to fix. Any other ideas? 17:06, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
Have a look at #Wikivoyage_in_French above. Looks like the Germans created a new template. -- Torty3 (talk) 14:05, 7 June 2013 (UTC)


Hello, en.wikivoyage is looking at implementing pagebanners (example en:voy:Garibaldi_Provincial_Park) throughout the site, and a few other language versions have copied over their own. Concerns have come up over the duplication of titles, and we've been informed that we need to set $wgRestrictDisplayTitle to false in InitialSettings.php in order to remove the duplication. We were in the middle of requesting this for en alone, before expanding it to all of Wikivoyage (bugzilla report).

The decision to use pagebanners will still need to be made on each individual Wikivoyage, and this is a global technical change as a proactive step in any future usage of pagebanners for all Wikivoyages, removing the need for individual site requests. There will not be a visible change on sites that do not use pagebanners, but do note that this setting will allow the title to be displayed/renamed without restrictions.


  • I have found discussion about pagebanners in en, fr, it and uk among others and will need further comments about using pagebanners or about the configuration request. Firm support for pagebanners would be great. -- Torty3 (talk) 14:22, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Question: setting $wgRestrictDisplayTitle to false in InitialSettings.php, will vanish the title in ALL the pages, or it can be configured to hide it only in the ones equipped with topbanner? --Andyrom75 (talk) 15:52, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
It allows changing the title arbitrarily, while the default is to allow only minor changes (capitalisation, accents, dashes etcetera?). The setting seems not to change how the title is displayed by default. There might of course be security issues with being able to make the title of one page be that of another, but I cannot think of any exploits. --LPfi (talk) 18:38, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Looks nice at the first glance. As long as it does not look as ugly as your main page on my screen (here). Be sure to use a minimum of 1920px image. But i suppose there wont be not that many suitable pictures on commons. Hopefully I am not right. -- DerFussi 05:56, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
I renew my doubt stated above, because I'm not sure that I've properly highlighted the main point.
If the $wgRestrictDisplayTitle it's not able to automatically show/hide the title according to the presence of the topbanner (consequently it's a global setting), maybe, regardless of it's current value, it would be better/easier to manage it through JS.
Let me know your thoughts. --Andyrom75 (talk) 08:24, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
What this setting does is allows free use of the magic word DISPLAYTITLE. The pagebanner template uses this and CSS to hide the title, ie only pages with the pagebanner will be affected. Other pages without the banner (or the magic word) will look the same as always.
If there is a solution with JS, that would be nice too, but I think a basic config is simpler (though tedious to request). -- Torty3 (talk) 08:58, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
Got it. I've understood the purpose and that it will work only for the article with the pagebanner. Now, since I haven't seen the desired layout (if you have a screenshot, it would be fine), I can only make some guess with the JS. Try to test these two patch and let me know how they works:
1) $(".topbanner").closest(".mw-body").children(".firstHeading").hide(); ... this will hide both the page title and the line below it
2) $(".topbanner").closest(".mw-body").children(".firstHeading").children("span").children("span").text(""); ... this will hide just the title, leaving the line below of it.
In both cases the world icone should be relocated, but if I'm not wrong the final position of it should be inside the pagebanner (topright corner) as in en:voy:Garibaldi Provincial Park, right?
Let me know, --Andyrom75 (talk) 11:30, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
Works great Andy, so question is what do we do now? I feel like this is technically against the rules of changing page titles, or maybe it just shows how easy it is to break MediaWiki. -- Torty3 (talk) 01:41, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Doesn't really break MediaWiki--in fact, it only works with JavaScript enabled. PiRSquared17 (talk) 02:05, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Setting $wgRestrictDisplayTitle to false is not a problem, quite the contrary: we can display completely different titles for instance for sites and subsites containing for instance slashes. But I am not really sure if it is useful to suppress the display of the article title. Because users of the mediawiki software expect the title at this place. Another problem is the breadcrumb trail which is not shown any longer or flying in the nonentity. --RolandUnger (talk) 08:26, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
  • ru: is still undecided about page banners, but we certainly do not object this request. --Atsirlin (talk) 12:35, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Interlingual liaisons[edit]

I and others have worried that we haven't had very good interlingual communication and coordination in our first year as a WMF project, and I've been thinking of how to change this. Long, long ago we had liaisons for each language version who would write up a little report now and then of anything interesting going on in their particular language version, to share with the broader community. We could start this again, just to check in and mention what major projects are being developed (like the table of contents banners, dynamic maps, etc.), what technical difficulties have been experienced, what project goals have been reached, or even just to let others know that great work has been done recently on a particular guide.

Would anyone be interested in this? I don't think it would need to be very formal—we could just use Wikivoyage/Summit and have a new section by the month. It would give us all a good reason to look at Meta/Wikivoyage more often. --Peter Talk 05:27, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

We can try this. We need some coordination anyway, because different versions slowly become technically incompatible.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:56, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
Technically incompatible how? Can you give an example? Personally, I never paid much attention to the other language versions before the move to WMF; is there any particular reason we all have to remain in sync? LtPowers (talk) 13:50, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
wikivoyage:ru:Лукка, for example: If you click on the only link in the citybar template, you get to a map with various signs. Clicking then on (almost) any sign produces a name and a picture. All this is done by templates which are I believe not supported by any other language version. Well, no, there is no particular reason we should stay in sync, but it would be nice since then we could easily translate articles or collectively solve technical problems.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:08, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
Ideally, we should be able to copy content from one language to another and only translate the text. Smaller language versions could also benefit from technical developments introduced on en: and de: --Atsirlin (talk) 20:31, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
I would be very much interested in such a project because I strongly believe in overall positive effects of interlanguage cooperation (sadly this has failed as far Wikipedia is concerned). Monthly reports with several sections (tech, featured articles, policies etc) would be sufficient I think. It seems that model adapted by Tech News team would be the best way to go for us. Kpjas (talk) 14:34, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
I have created a very basic version and an initial [en] report, just to see if we can get this started. It's at Wikivoyage/Summit. We will need volunteer "ambassadors" from different language versions. I don't think we need to think of that as a designated responsibility—anyone should feel welcome to contribute, and no one should feel obligated to do so. --Peter Talk 18:37, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, Peter! We would be happy to join. --Atsirlin (talk) 20:31, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Multilingual statistics report[edit]

Way back in the day, we had a page, updated weekly, of multilingual statistics (old Wt page here), showing article and edit counts, numbers of new pages and new users, edits per article and per user, etc., plus a nice article count chart showing which versions grew or shrank, by how much, etc. I assume it must have been something updated by a bot. Personally, I think it would be great if we could get something like that set up here. What do others think? Texugo (talk) 13:37, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

this page looks pretty sufficient as far as statistics goes. :Kpjas (talk) 15:38, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
The problem is it is Wikitravel page, not ours.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:46, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
It would be great to resurrect this feature. I won't be of much help, though ;) --Peter Talk 20:14, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
sorry, my mistake - the link got missing somehow → Kpjas (talk) 20:27, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Those are very helpful! --Peter Talk 20:57, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
en:voy's average bytes-per-article stat took a 20% jump from April to May. I wonder what could cause that. LtPowers (talk) 23:48, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
The updated current picture is shown in this page that I've created few days ago. Clearly to have an historic situation, other tool are needed. de:voy made a great work on this field (server side). You should contact them. --Andyrom75 (talk) 10:04, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Re: the 20% jump LtPowers noticed, my best guess would be the switch from XML tags to templates in listings across all articles by Wrh2bot. --Peter Talk 22:10, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
Did that happen in May? LtPowers (talk) 19:51, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
Yes. --Peter Talk 02:26, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for creating the page.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:53, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

By the way, I made manually such a list at Wikivoyage-old. --RolandUnger (talk) 06:45, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:52, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Pagebanner nomenclature[edit]

According to the discussion started in en:voy, I suggest that someone from en:voy should write a brief (and agreed) rule on the Pagebanner nomenclature and spread a message on the various wiki-bar/lounges (in particular the ones that are using the Pagebanner) in order to let them know what's going on behind this renaming activity.

Personally, I've received several user's questions via talk/IRC, and maybe the same story is happening on other wikis.

Furthermore, once the policy has been written, it can be spread all over the other wikis to avoid further rework. --Andyrom75 (talk) 10:13, 12 July 2013 (UTC)


I've noticed that on the phrasebooks there are differences between the various wikis that should be harmonized.

At the first glance this group of articles have been placed under different namespaces (NS:x)

  • The various phrasebooks have been placed:
    • by it:voy under Tematica NS
    • by de:voy under Thema NS
    • all the other in the main namespace (NS:0)
  • The phrasebooks list has been placed:
    • by it:voy under Tematica NS
    • by de:voy under Thema NS
    • by fr:voy, ru:voy, sv:voy under Wikivoyage NS
    • by ro:voy under Project NS
    • all the other in the main namespace (NS:0)

I think that we should select a common way to store them.

Possible solution are the followings:

  1. main namespce
  2. Tematica/Thema .... translated in all the languages
  3. Phrasebook/Frasario .... translated in all the languages
  4. Other proposals .... to be translated for each language
  5. Wikivoyage .... the same for each language
  6. Other proposals .... with a common name for all the languages

At the moment my favour goes to #3 because:

  • I see it as a parallel project inside wikivoyage (I don't like to mix "place articles" with "support articles");
  • each wiki felt naturally the need to specify this words in the title of each article of this group;
  • furthermore it's the same choice made by Lonely Planet, so maybe it's not so extravagant :-)

However, I'd like to listen to your opinions.

Please share your ideas. --Andyrom75 (talk) 16:30, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

In the german Wikivoyage only places are stored in the main namespace. I don't think that the community will change this. The "Thema" namespace is for all other content for travellers. The phrasebooks are no Voy-Internals, so the should in my oppinion not in the Project namespace. I don't think we need an extra namespace for only a couple of pages. Wy do we need to move the pages in all wikis to the same namespace? --Pyfisch (talk) 18:06, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
I am somehow confused. Do all Wikivoyages use the same set of namespaces, to start with?--Ymblanter (talk) 20:23, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
It would seem that they do not. As in en: we have no namespace equivalent to Thema/Thematica and have all articles intended for public view in main space. Remember that de: and it: went their own way for several years, and developed differently. I think that some compelling reason would be necessary to get consensus for a change either way. Does a compelling reason exist? I think en: would argue that we have not noticed one yet. If we were to change, Phrasebook or is to me the obvious choice, with translated equivalents with the same namespace identity number in the other languages.· · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 20:54, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
en:voy's community would most likely oppose moving it to any other namespace except the mainspace. We have decided that all content articles, regardless of whether they are destinations, travel topics, lists of star articles, or phrasebooks, belong in the mainspace. We don't have separate namespaces for different types of reader content, and I don't think we should. JamesA (talk) 03:52, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Honestly speaking I was expecting that de:voy would oppose to put out the phrasebooks out the Thema NS like I was expecting that en:voy would oppose to put them out the main NS. That's another reason (that I haven't written above :-)) to use a third NS.
If all the time we all tend to stuck in our own position we hardly could find a common approach, furthermore in this case we are talking of just renaming the article's titles. Let's reflect on this point.
Personally I'm open to any common solution including those that are different from the current it:voy asset, in fact as a sign of good will I've proposed a different one. I suggest to not loose any chance that we have to increase the sense of an interlingual community. --Andyrom75 (talk) 06:40, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Other than possibly getting a common solution, is there any practical advantage to a change? We should remain open to a suggestion which has a practical advantage. · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 11:31, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Change for change's sake is pointless. Why should every language version operate exactly the same? I even question why every language should use the same pagebanner imagery. We are different, and we should embrace those differences, not seek to minimize them. LtPowers (talk) 13:35, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Homogeneity in general is always a good thing and putting this in doubt it's not a great step ahead :-). However, organized contents can be better managed and utilized. Let's take for example the help pages of wikipedia. All of them are stored under help/aiuto/Hilfe/etc... NS for the same reason. To reach the in the different wikis it doesn't oblige to know the translated word because through the NS magic word the can easily reached. Usually in a NS are collected pages with omogeneous content that can be treated in a similar way so just to mention an example it's easier to apply scripts or run a bot in the whole NS instead of filter all the time those pages. Through NS magic word it's also easy to apply the same code in for all language. Now we are talking only of phrasebook but the same way of thinking can be applied to anything.
To answer to Lt, omogeneous doesn't mean identical. So, remaining in your pagebanner example, it could be good that if a wiki use the pagebanner, they should use the same set of templates with the same standard on the image, otherwise there's a huge waste of effort in reinventing the wheel. Then each wiki is free to put the image that they likes more in their own pages. A good cooperation between the wikis IMO is when we create a banner for a page, this banner can be added with a very low effort in each page those wikis that has implemented the pagebanner system and that do not have any banner in that page, because for sure it's an enrichment. --Andyrom75 (talk) 13:45, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
In de:voy we had the decision: all articles with coordinates belong to the main namespace, the others to the "theme" namespace. So the phrasebooks are "theme" topics. -- Balou46 (talk) 14:04, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
IMO it was a wise decision in the direction of classifying the contents. --Andyrom75 (talk) 12:29, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
Let me recap the background information shared until now.
In the past has been decided within: en:voy to put everything in the NS:0 and de:voy to split the sites from the topics.
I assume that it:voy has followed de:voy because it was the only existing project and I assume that the other wikis has followed en:voy because English is wide understandable.
Now, I think that we should think on what we could do. --Andyrom75 (talk) 13:23, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
It looks like neither de nor en are likely to change their decision, which means there is nothing which can be done about it. On the other hand, I am not sure that NS is such an important issue (contrary to map compatibility, for instance), and they are interlinked anyway (next week, all interwiki links will go to WikiData).--Ymblanter (talk) 14:40, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
NS it's just one of the several difference arisen from a sealed compartment approach that it 's easy to mitigate, the difficulty consist only in the will of people the looks just in their own "garden" instead of looking "the whole panorama" :-)
Region division unfortunately it will be a mess because there are a lot of discrepancy and to mitigate it, it will took months of works. I've started to work on it:voy in January and I haven't finished yet.
My point is: if we are not able to find an agreement on easy things, how can we manage the more complex one?
--Andyrom75 (talk) 16:05, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
Actually, it might be easier to agree on the regional division than on the NS. For example, at some point I discovered that the regional division in wikivoyage:ru:Poland is different from en.wv . I took it to the village pump and re-designed the division. We do not have an ambition to construct our own division of the US, for example, but we spend there a lot of time discussing divisions of the Russian and Kazakh regions, and I hope colleagues from other Wikivoyages would accept that we know these regions better than they do, and just take our division.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:04, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
I would love to belive you :-) --Andyrom75 (talk) 18:10, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Hopefully not hijacking this thread too much, but I also usually try to defer to language versions' choice of regions in which that language is most commonly used. The Russian version is one of the best organized and run (IMO), so it would seem a little crazy for en.voy to try and come up with its own, different structures for districted Russian cities and regions. The Spanish version, on the other hand, seems to have abandoned some/most of the precepts of Wikivoyage's traditional geographical hierarchy, so I don't know if it's possible to look to them for help with regions of Spanish speaking countries :( It's still possible to use the same multilingual file for regions maps, though, since we can simply use multiple sublayers of the regions layer.

By the way, I was worried by Ymblanter's comment that ru.voy didn't like my Kazakhstan regions, but am happy to see that they were approved by our Russian speakers ;) --Peter Talk 20:00, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Peter no problem for the digression but at least leave your opinion on the topic :-) --Andyrom75 (talk) 20:50, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
Good point ;) I guess I don't see the tangible advantage to harmonizing our placement of phrasebooks in namespaces. How would using a consistent namespace help with interlingual cooperation? --Peter Talk 03:43, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
Above I've answered to LtPowers for the same question. NSs are used to group pages with the same kind of content, and these pages usually has a similar structure, so cleaning/changes bot activity could be performed just addressing all the NSs pages instead of looking for them page by page. I've started the thread talking of the phrasebook, but this can be applied to other group of pages like help or others. --Andyrom75 (talk) 12:15, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
Gotcha, the advantage is for crosswiki bots. Could you give an example of what sorts of bots would be useful for phrasebooks in particular? --Peter Talk 19:10, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
I haven't yet thougth anything in particular, but just to brainstorming the first thing that comes out into my mind I would say that with the same structure of sections and words/sentences inside each section, it would be possible to provide the translation for each language. If the structure would be different, although it would be still theoretically feasible, the complexity would be exponentially higher. --Andyrom75 (talk) 20:16, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
Keep on brainstorming in the opposite direction. Stocking all the pages in the same NS, the minor effect is just to slowdown the bot activity (as far is pure automatic.... otherwise, in sami-automatic scenario it's a pain...), but the major issue is that increase the chance to make a mess because the possibility to find a "false positive" it's higher. --Andyrom75 (talk) 13:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
I think you're overestimating the extent of namespace separation on most wikis. Take Wikipedia, for instance. You correctly noted that help pages are in the Help namespace. But Help pages are not content. All encyclopedia articles are in the main namespace, as they should be. Likewise, on en.voy, all guides are in the main namespace, as they should be. Wikipedia does not segregate biographies into a Bio: namespace, geographic articles into a Geo: namespace, and science topics into a Science: namespace. So I don't understand why Wikivoyage would segregate phrasebooks (/travel topics/itineraries) from destination guides. They're all part of the main content of the site; the other namespaces are all for meta content that non-editors don't need to see. If you need a more specific reason, look at search functionality; if we have additional content namespaces beyond (Main), then users have to pay more attention to what namespaces they're searching. That adds complexity, and we're trying to be simple.
That said, I'm not interested in trying to get de: and it: to conform to en:. If they're happy with having phrasebooks in a separate namespace, it's no big deal to me. I think heterogeneity is fine. But I also don't think it's the right solution for en:. LtPowers (talk) 20:00, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

As per most of the above comments I think it's clear that there is no real interest to have a common interlingual approach. Anyway, in order to close officially this thread and to avoid misunderstanding, it's important to express an opinion by vote. --Andyrom75 (talk) 23:17, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

I warn everybody here: Don't vote! We are facing a case of bias. I'm sure of that. I have no fear of saying that this guy acts in Italian Wikivoyage without seeking for community consensus. His abuses forced me to move to French Wikivoyage. There I will find what I absolutely need: Respect! --Gobbler (talk) 03:59, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
As far as I can see you're definitely biased towards Andyrom75 and you should ofc rember that bunch of weird extensions you and another user activated on it.voy with a 1 day/2 votes-pool over there. I must suggest to go on dealing with the topic rather than with the guy who did propose it. --Vituzzu (talk) 23:18, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
A vote here is kind of pointless--language versions have independence and can therefore ignore it. The language versions I work on don't even allow voting. --Peter Talk 07:07, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
Peter, so how can be reached an agreement without voting? (generally speaking, not in this case in particular) --Andyrom75 (talk) 19:35, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
On en.voy we just use voy:Wikivoyage:Consensus. We discuss, try to find a good solution, and if everyone or almost everyone thinks it's an OK solution, then we do it. Sometimes we get deadlocked, and then we start productive work on something else that we can agree on. It works surprisingly well--possibly because it forces us to work cooperatively, not polemically. In the case of this issue, I don't think there's much support for a change of namespace for phrasebooks on en.voy, so we'll have to work on something else ;) --Peter Talk 05:31, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
That's ok, but my doubt is, how you measure the concept of "almost everyone"? Chatting a part, a vote summarize the various positions, no? At the end it's what is currently in place for the vfd in en:voy, isn't it?
Just for the sake of clarity, from my point of view, in this specific case, the vote is needed just to formalize the closure of this proposal, otherwise it seems an open point. --Andyrom75 (talk) 16:23, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
We just look at the arguments presented, and whether anyone disagreed with the solution that most people seem to want. It really is as simple as that. I don't see any reason with leaving this an open point. If we want to revisit the idea later, we can. --Peter Talk 18:38, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
Here a little excerpt from our policies about voting "Wikivoyage does not use voting because, unlike consensus, it does not require that contributors present their arguments and carefully respond to each others' arguments. In short, it depresses the kind of careful analysis and discussion that ensures that changes are made thoughtfully. Moreover, voting is complicated by the realities of the semi-anonymous online world; it is often not possible to ensure the one-person one-vote model of majoritarian democracy." And here the Italian text. --Gobbler (talk) 23:08, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
As far as I can see no Italian read the rule. So, just for the challenge, I really do suggest that they change the text and allow voting in it/wv. It's a matter of few minutes there. No discussion, no consensus needed, isn't it? --Gobbler (talk) 00:05, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
So Peter, if I got your point is: if there is zero objections, a proposal is approved, otherwise everything would remain as it is, right? --Andyrom75 (talk) 06:37, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
Incorrect. Consensus means a strong agreement, not unanimity. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:21, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorry. There was no time to follow the whole discussion. Just one point. We have the thematic namespace on de: amnd en: All travel related articles that do not represent a geographical destination go to the Topic namespace (itineraries, phrasebooks, religion, sports). One of the reason was our location database - the kind of Wikidata we had before. So.. all extensions and bots with geographical features (hierarchy, coordinates, map tools ... whatever) worked in the main namespace and did not affect any other articles. No bot can complain about a missing coordinate in a phrasebook. This fact cvan be useful in the future as well. We wont give it up on de: -- DerFussi 06:50, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Technically speaking it makes a lot of sense. Question, you said "we HAD before". Does that tool still work or it has been dismissed? --Andyrom75 (talk) 07:04, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
This special tool has been dismissed. We have a new map tool and more will come. Besides we have some special guidelines and manuals of style related to our thematic namespace. And not to forget.... We have a news and a election namespace as well :) -- DerFussi 05:21, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Uniform interlingual NS[edit]

Support Pro --Andyrom75 (talk) 23:17, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Different NS (now and afterwards)[edit]

Wikidata and Phrasebooks[edit]

Let us switch to smth else. As most of you likely noticed, yesterday Wikivoyage migrated to Wikidata. A specific question which today originated at the Wikidata Project Chat is whether the phrasebooks should have separate items on Wikidata or be in the language items. For example, Vietnamese Phrasebook has currently been added to d:Q9199, which is the item for Vietnamese and contains also links to WP articles and other stuff. Another option would be to create a separate item which would only contain links for the three phrasebooks (English, Swedish, and Russian). For me the current option seems to be more reasonable, but if there is strong majority for separate items it could be implemented.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:07, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm with you that the current asset is the most reasonable, otherwise instead of creating a common interlingual approach we would have a separatist project approach :-D --Andyrom75 (talk) 13:50, 24 July 2013 (UTC)


Please translate it. PiRSquared17 (talk) 03:35, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Done. --Andyrom75 (talk) 17:26, 31 July 2013 (UTC)


Which projects do actually use pagebanners? I am aware about English, French, and Russian. Any others? Any plans to introduce banners in other versions?--Ymblanter (talk) 19:20, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Lang Using pagebanner Usage (pagebanners / destinations[articles?]) Notes/discussions/projects (fill out yourself)
de 0 0 Lounge - No banners planned till now
el 96 ~0.52 Περίπτερο επισκεπτών
en voy:Category:Has_banner
3,059 custom, 22,728 default, 25878 total as of 8 Aug 2013
99.7% of main space articles have banners
18.3% have custom banners as of 27 August 2013
voy:Wikivoyage talk:Banner Expedition
es 0 (?) 0 La posada, etc.
fr 767 ~0.25 Café des Voyageurs, etc.
he 0 (?) 0 he:voy:משתמש:ויקיג'אנקי/טיוטה/וושינגטון_די._סי. has banner ?
it 999 (100% custom banner - no default banner has been implemented) (9 August 2013) 999/3071 ~33% (9 August 2013) it:voy:Wikivoyage:Lounge/Archivio/2013/07#Pagebanner etc.
nl Negligible (~0) ~0 Reizigerscafé
pl 0 (?) 0  ?
pt 330 custom banners, default banner in all other articles 100% implementation, roughly 10% with custom banners pt:voy:Wikivoyage:Banners
ro 0 (?) 0  ?
ru 265 roughly 12% Пивная путешественников (2013), original
sv 0 (?) 0  ?
uk 352 (incl. default) ? too bored to compute Кнайпа, etc.?
vi used in all articles (per Wikivoyage/Summit#vi)  ?  ?

Feel free to update/fix this, and add links to discussions and local expeditions. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:17, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Great, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:59, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
en: is up to date. · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 08:18, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
it: updated as well. --Andyrom75 (talk) 07:51, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
pt: updated. Texugo (talk) 19:39, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Uploads, non-free content, and EDPs[edit]

Hello Wikivoyagers - just a little policy request for you. Could people from all Wikivoyage editions please check out Non-free_content#Wikivoyage, the global index of Exemption Doctrine Policy links, and update it if the entry for your project is wrong?

Can I also suggest that Wikivoyage editions edit their MediaWiki:Uploadtext page to mention whether non-free content is allowed or not. (Particularly Russian Wikivoyage needs to do this.) That way, uploaders can be clearer about whether their upload will be accepted.

Thanks, This, that and the other (talk) 10:28, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Russian is correct in the table. I will discuss the Mediawiki edits in the project.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:57, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done for voy:ru--Ymblanter (talk) 05:50, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done (& discussed) for it:voy as well. --Andyrom75 (talk) 13:52, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Listings/VCards to Wikidata[edit]

I think it's time to collaborate with Wikidata. If started a request for comments to create a listing/vcard structure on Wikidata. At the end all listings should go to Wikidata to have them available on all language versions here. -- DerFussi 05:33, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Looking to gather a unified technical wishlist[edit]

Hi, Wikivoyagers! I am the Engineering Community Manager at the Wikimedia Foundation, which means I'm a liaison for people who want to improve the technical capabilities of our projects. In the en:voy:Wikivoyage:Travellers' pub#Presentation for Wikimania thread, I asked for more details about the English Wikivoyage's technical wishlist. There are some details in en:voy:Wikivoyage:Roadmap, and en:voy:User:Peterfitzgerald provided some more, but I would very much love a unified technical wishlist for all the Wikivoyages. And that way, developers could take a look and see which are things that less technical Wikivoyagers could do (with built-in wiki administration tools, a bit of training and some "how-to" guides), and which are things that need MediaWiki or other experts to write code. For instance, you probably do not need any developers' support to set up your site to participate in the Wiki Loves Monuments photo contest -- there are readymade templates you can simply add to your site.

Ideally, for the requests that do need developers to work on them, we'd make sure that there's a bug filed for each thing that people want. I know Wikivoyagers have already done that for several requests (for example, bug 44590: GeoCrumbs doesn't handle cases where a destination on a region boundary #isIn: more than one region and bug 43977: grouped edits not patrollable).

I know 80% of the people reading this already know what's in this paragraph, but I just want to repeat it for the other 20%: "How to create a good first bug report" is a guide you can use to tell us if you see a technical problem on a Wikimedia website. It shows you how to file a defect report ("bug report") in our Bugzilla site so the engineers can see it and follow up. You can also use this method to request things. It's a good rule of thumb to file a request in Bugzilla whenever you think "oh it would be handy to have such-and-such functionality" and to mark it as an "enhancement". For instance, if you want an extension like WikiLove installed, the procedure includes filing a Bugzilla request.

And for those of you who want to know about new features you can use: Tech/News is a weekly human-readable tech newsletter that tells you about new things that are going to affect you. You can subscribe at Global message delivery/Targets/Tech ambassadors to get it delivered directly to your talk page and/or to the pub/salon/cafe on your Wikivoyage. Right now, in that delivery list, I only see one user who has it delivered to a page -- I think several of you might find it useful.

I hope this is helpful! Where can this wishlist live? Here on meta, as a subpage of Wikivoyage?

Thanks. Sharihareswara (WMF) (talk) 16:51, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Sumana, this is very helpful indeed. My private opinion is that the list should be on Meta, with notification at all Wikivoyage village pumps. You may also want to look at Wikivoyage/Summit, some issues (including communication) are currently being discussed there.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:30, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
I think Wikivoyage/Wishlist would be the best place. Discussion would still need to take place on the individual language versions (so voy:Wikivoyage:Roadmap will still have a use), but it would be very helpful to have all tech requests collected in one place! --Peter Talk 20:05, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Just wanted to raise this question again. Can I have a unified wishlist to show our bug wrangler and engineers? Thanks! Sharihareswara (WMF) (talk) 23:32, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
(And thanks for the reminder - I've viewed the Summit discussion, and that's interesting and useful.) Sharihareswara (WMF) (talk) 23:36, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
@Sharihareswara (WMF): a rough draft at Wikivoyage/Wishlist. Everyone else should chip in their thoughts as well.
@DerFussi: perhaps send a message round to all the pubs for translation and discussion? -- torty3 (talk) 12:58, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I think it would be good to send around.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:13, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for putting this together! Did you also get input from the other pubs as well? As is, I'm sending a link to Andre Klapper (the Bug Wrangler), and the product managers for VisualEditor and MediaWiki Core, and Lydia Pintscher of Wikimedia Germany (who knows a lot about Wikidata). Sharihareswara (WMF) (talk) 23:49, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
I picked up most of it from looking around, so it definitely still needs more input (@DerFussi:?). The ideas are also not fully formed, just mostly tossed around as potential improvements by different Wikivoyagers, depending on the technical effort required and not purely consensus. I think more in-depth discussion should go on at Talk:Wikivoyage/Wishlist. -- torty3 (talk) 13:07, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Google PageRank issues[edit]

Three of the Wikivoyage projects - en, ro, and pl - have a Google PageRank of 0, which means they will almost never show up in Google search results. This is probably because Google considers the sites to be mirrors of Wikitravel. Anyone have any idea for how to fix this problem? Kaldari (talk) 18:53, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

There has been significant discussion of this issue on voy:Wikivoyage:Search Expedition and the corresponding talk page. voy:User:JamesA indicated that having access to the Google Webmaster Tools would help significantly in tracking down the problem (voy:Wikivoyage talk:Search Expedition#Google Webmaster Tools) but I think James had indicated that the request to have access to those tools was denied by WMF - hopefully someone else can provide further details. -- Ryan • (talk) • 19:52, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
If I remember correctly Sumana from tech at the WMF was going to look into this. I will ping her. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:48, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
Don't believe all the yarns that Google spins about "no-follow".
A significant self-help move we can make tomorrow is to stop signalling to their robots that we are only an inferior derivative work every time they spider us. We should immediately junk the two free hyperlinks of relevant anchor text we give those nice, friendly folk at InternetBrands on the vast majority of our article pages (and on their associated discussion pages). We should immediately replace this kind of hyperlinked text
"This article is derived from the article Dresden on in its revision as of 08:30, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
with this minimally compliant but legal attribution:
"This article is derived from the Dresden article on in its revision as of 08:30, 6 July 2012 (UTC).
There was (and is) absolutely nothing in Wikitravel's licensing regime that mandated hyperlinking when giving attribution! --W. Franke-mailtalk 20:08, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
And since we have moved over the entire history of edits attribution is given that way as well. We probably do not need to mention WT at all. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:55, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
I tend to agree, but I thought Legal was involved in the decision to put a notice at the bottom of each page. LtPowers (talk) 17:53, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
If that is indeed the case, then "Legal" need to URGENTLY re-visit their decision, paying particular attention to the significance (or not) of including actual working anchor text to produce all these SEO significant hyperlinks to our erstwhile antagonist. --W. Franke-mailtalk 18:55, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
If you download a PDF version ("Print/export": "Download as PDF" in the menu to the left), then Wikitravel isn't mentioned at all. Is this an error? If a clickable link is required, then I'm a bit troubled about voy:Wikivoyage:Offline reader Expedition as you can't include a clickable link in a paper copy of Wikivoyage. --Stefan2 (talk) 19:50, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
I also agree that losing the links would be an excellent starting point, though we will need some attribution text on the PDFs. --Nick talk 14:01, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
PageRank is not about a website, it is about a particular page. What page have a PageRank of 0? I just compared Tokyo/Roppongi: 2 for WV, and 4 for WT even though it is largely out-of-date and somewhat spammy. I agree the hyperlinks should be removed. Nicolas1981 (talk) 03:05, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
I have noticed there is a large delay in ranking. For example "new" WV page Jihlava (created in April) has no rank yet. The same for Nuclear tourism (April) and Lower Saxon Wadden Sea National Park (June). Good idea with removing the WT hyperlinks. --Danapit (talk) 09:33, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
For the records, this problem is also covered in bugzilla:52688. --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 13:19, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

BUMP There are some technical tricks that our webmasters can do to mitigate our Google duplicate penalty (and I'm certainly not going to even outline them here in plain text - if anyone is interested they can phone, and those are, presumably the subject of the rather woolly bugzilla report) but there are also two things that we can do to help ourselves IMMEDIATELY and I have seen no cogent opposition to:

1) Stop signalling to search engine robots that we are only an inferior derivative work every time they spider us. We should immediately junk the two free hyperlinks of relevant anchor text we give those nice, friendly folk at InternetBrands on the vast majority of our article pages (and on their associated discussion pages). We should IMMEDIATELY replace this kind of hyperlinked text

"This article is derived from the article Dresden on in its revision as of 08:30, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

with this minimally compliant but legal attribution:

"This article is derived from the Dresden article on in its revision as of 08:30, 6 July 2012 (UTC).

2) Delete the literally thousands of "outline" articles that consist of only an opening "lede paragraph" in the form "x is a city/region in y" and a skeleton of (empty) standard sections. (Oh, I forgot, now thanks to the bot brigade these mostly now have a fine new banner and a link to a relevant Wikipedia article). We are not a Gazetteer and getting rid of roughly 20% of our articles and starting them again (as and when there is someone to take an interest in developing them properly), without duplicate text and the WV attribution to completely non-useful content, would go a long way towards signalling that we are a different (rather than a derivative) site.

I'd do this myself tomorrow but after the better part of a decade of editing at Wikitravel and its' better successor, I don't even have autopatroller status. --W. Franke-mailtalk 18:13, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Your English WT editing history under this username dates to 2007, in which year you made a grand total of 51 edits. You then apparently disappeared until this time last year when the move to WV began. That's hardly "the better part of a decade". LtPowers (talk) 20:40, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
Even if it were true that I always logged on and never used an IP address to edit (which it isn't - almost all of the various Glasgow IP edits have been mine over the years, I'd bet, and I've made more than 1000 edits in the last 30 days and more than 1000 in the 30 days before that - none of them using a bot or tool like AWB), how precisely is this relevant to improving our search engine ranking and, consequently, our readership? Try and keep your club's personal vendetta within reasonable bounds. State clearly whether the two things I propose (and others have agreed with) is a "good idea" or a "bad idea" and why, please. --W. Franke-mailtalk 23:34, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
In it:voy we have deleted long time ago all the skeleton article (the magnitudo is ~1.000), now (apart few hidden exceptions that may still exists) we have only articles with a minimum piece of information, and it's not allowed to create skeleton articles.
As written in the last summit, regarding the very small articles (but not empty), I'm rewriting them from scratch (and adding where I can more information) in order to recreate those article but putting the credit into the subject of the change/creation instead of the "clickable footnote". For the longer one, I've open a bug to turn the link into a plain text.
Now regarding the ranking I have the opposite problem, in some cases google is indexing also the page that I haven't created yet, but just mentioning (with a red link) in existing article. I've noticed that this cases are the ones where an article with that name exist in en:w but not in it:w. It could be good to develope those articles but I can't do all at once... :-( --Andyrom75 (talk) 09:33, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
I very much agree with both Frank's points. To the topic of the skeletal articles we've had a discussion, which did not lead to any actions yet. I am not sure if we've reached any consensus there... --Danapit (talk) 15:45, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Congratulations to the Italian Wikivoyage in achieving good organic search engine results and, presumably, consequently getting lots of eyeballs to view the efforts of your editors.
It seems you are proving how bad this duplicate penalty can be by not suffering from it because you have been pro-active and not dragged your feet on simple SEO housekeeping!
Now I know I'm going to get another brickbat in my direction, but I'm very disappointed that the only response to my proposal from LtPowers seems to be to try and shoot or discredit the messenger. Why the "movers and shakers" at the English Wikivoyage seem not to understand that the number one strategic task for the English Wikivoyage is to increase the readership continues to baffle me. We've done some great work - assisted by our German Wikivoyage colleagues - with introducing dynamic maps and folks are furiously sharpening up the prose of our articles and keeping them up to date, but all this is somewhat in vain if nobody can find us in the search engines. So, LtPowers and other English language Wikivoyagers, please state clearly whether the two things I propose (and others have agreed with) is a "good idea" or a "bad idea" and why, please. --W. Franke-mailtalk 00:25, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
Quite honestly you do not really need the "movers and shakers" to drive this change forward, and "they" don't necessarily have the power either (there are legal and technical issues here). Furthermore, there have been various fierce disagreements over dynamic maps, spelling, Wikipedia links, Wikidata and external links (yay washing dirty laundry!), so why group them as one homogenous bunch, and accept that everyone has their own viewpoints which may or may not concur with each other. Which does make for a lot of frustrating inertia but cannot be put at the feet of a singular "club". This also points to a larger problem for the entire Wikivoyage community, as it is hard enough making decisions in-house at the English Wikivoyage, let alone across 15 different languages, and it would do well for the Thematic Organisation to kind of guide the way.
I think the above discussion shows that everyone is agreeable to removing the link in the credits, but are understandably reluctant due to the legal aspects. It seems the primary way to move forward would be to directly contact legal, which has been done so in bugzilla:52688#c4, so @Philippe (WMF): has to weigh in on the issue (who/where exactly?). Secondly, the code for mw:extension:CreditsSource must be changed, and Andyrom75 has kindly filed bugzilla:53942. The necessary fixes will then have to be merged in.
As to the skeleton articles, I thought there was already a standing agreement to delete them on sight. Tag them as speedy delete? -- torty3 (talk) 02:08, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
It's not all doom and gloom and ferocious duplicate penalties by the search engines. Search for a string like "travel guide Nelson, England" and our new (WT never had one) English Wikivoyage article on that destination will probably pop up in number one position in the organic search results. (That new article doesn't tell the robots at the footer that it's a derivative work, of course).
As I wrote earlier, unless the "legal team" made a secret agreement to scatter hyperlinks to WT around our guides, I simply do not believe that there are any reasons in law why we cannot remove those hyperlinks today and still preserve legal attribution! --W. Franke-mailtalk 10:15, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
I repeat that there is a technical step involved - so it is not as easy as it appears and cannot be done immediately/today. Someone has to go and rewrite the CreditsSource.php, submit it, get it approved and finally merged into a Mediawiki update, say a week at minimum. And this extension affects all Wikivoyages or at least those with import history, hence a general consensus would be needed from en, de, it, ru, pt, es and others. With that much happy red tape, I hope you understand that any coder would probably prefer to have a straight answer from legal before doing anything, especially with trigger happy notices like [7]. A direct answer would end all doubt, and a positive one would surely lead to community support.
"travemunde travel guide" and "mitzpe ramon travel guide" search terms look to be doing well, both existing pre-import, though the aim would be for "travemunde" and "mitzpe ramon" themselves to rank. -- torty3 (talk) 11:26, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for taking the time, torty3, to explain what is causing the delay - it's much appreciated!
I know that you are well respected in the en.wv community and an ace coder. I also think you know how important it is that readers should actually be able to find us in Google. Can we nominate you as a plenipotentiary extraordinaire to liaise with other language versions and actually get these hyperlinks removed?
I think you know that 95% of searchers don't go past the first 3 results. I think you also know that the results for "travemunde travel guide" and "mitzpe ramon travel guide" search terms will vary according to your IP, time of day, google domain and server that you are using, search history and other variables. That said, although the WT articles always appeared higher up the search result page by more than 4 places when I tried some tests, they did do much better than most WV "legacy attributed and hyperlinked articles" and I think I know the reason. In both cases, they are currently wearing Star nomination templates which changes the lede substantially as far as the Google spider is concerned. This gives the clue to another thing we should think about doing: try and drop the formulaic "x is a city in y" introductions in most ledes which almost always duplicates the WT intro. --W. Franke-mailtalk 12:05, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
No thank you, my plate is pretty full. I just wanted to point out what I see is the quickest way to expedite the process, and that it is quite a bit work for high risk and reward, which also involves corralling someone (meaning not me) to fix the code in bugzilla:53942. I actually think the better search results come from the intensive amount of work that was put into the articles to differentiate them, rather than the lead paragraph alone, though rewriting the intros would be a good start. Shouldn't the star nom template be placed at the bottom then? -- torty3 (talk) 07:47, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
Although we must have an official legal answer, according to our Terms of Use, we (correctly and fairly) need to give credit to the source of the inserted information, but do not say explicitely how to do. So, my personal interpretation, is that a permanent link on the subject of the change it's ok, also because WT it's not the only free information source, but just for example the most famous one is wikipedia, or another are the "foreign" versions of wikivoyage. When I translate an en:voy article I credit en:voy for that change (sometimes I've missed it... sorry :-P). It would be ridiculous (IMHO) to add the full list on the footnote of the article of all the free source site through CreditsSource. The history page would exist for a reason, ot not? :-) Here some example: voy:it:Isole Fær Øer for WT+it:w and voy:it:Ghana for it:w+en:voy. --Andyrom75 (talk) 12:51, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
I've just seen another interesting way to import and credit the article from WT. See the history of voy:fr:Praha. --Andyrom75 (talk) 14:44, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
Like everyone above, I'd be very keen to see the WT attribution changed if the suggested version is permissible. Plainly, we want to distance ourselves from that site as much as possible.
The prospect of deleting large numbers of articles ( even if they are stubs) leaves me somewhat conflicted. I would much rather we encouraged people to improve these articles, rather than jump to deletion as a first option. However, if it can be proved that removing these stubs has a substantial impact on our search rankings, the benefits would probably outweigh the negatives.
As Frank suggested, I think moving away from the WT "X is city in Y" style of introductions would be a good place to start diversifying our articles. Not only does it separate us from other repositories but I think it also adds more room for the written 'style' and 'flair' that is so important to Wikivoyage. --Nick talk 02:02, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
The exact ranking algorithm use by google is unkown (at least to me :-P), but for sure I can say two things: 1) an empty page can't be ranked, and even if ranked it would go on the lasts result pages not the firsts 2) a huge amount of empty pages have a negative impact on the user perception, would you buy a 1.000 pages book where hundres of pages are blank?
There's an impact on ranking? I don't know it for sure. But several times in the past google has penalized site categories that have tried to leverage with "flaw" of their algorithm. For example: those sites that has a huge hidden text (same foreground color of the background, or with microscopic dimension of the font) that was put there just for increase the "hit rate". Or the web-farm (consisting in thousands...maybe more... web site) that against money they will include huge amount of links to a target site in order to escalate the ranking. Sometimes they also penalize manually some spam sites (but I don't think it's the case).
For sure it's better to add information on the existing stub, but I tend to be realistic and no one in the short term will do it, so we've deleted them all. If we want one article back we would spend less than 1 minute to recreate it. So in my opinion the first facts are more than enough, but I may understand that for others would need other element before taking a decision. --Andyrom75 (talk) 13:36, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Polite reminder to everyone: the legal team can't possibly follow every conversation going on on-wiki, though we try :) Please email if you want to flag our attention. The #1 reason legal hasn't weighed in here is because we didn't know about the discussion until today. On bugzilla, I personally follow bugzilla fairly religiously, but not everyone does, so unless you cc me directly bugzilla isn't a reliable way to get in touch with legal/LCA. -LVilla (WMF) (talk) 23:14, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

LVilla, thank you for your feedback and great you were able to find bugzilla:53942 anyway. Looking forward to hear the legal opinion on this issue. --Danapit (talk) 05:55, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
LVilla, thanks a lot for jumping in this thread and sorry for not involving you earlier. As highlighted by Danapit, we need a legal bless for the changed requested on bugzilla:53942, so please take a look on the consideration stated in the lines above; they may help to see our interpretation of the ToU.
Generally speaking, I would share my thought on our current google ranking. WT is an older site, so it's normal that has a better ranking. I've taken a quick look on the source sites from where the visitor comes from (HTTP_REFERER). Our primary sources are linked to the big WMF-familiy network, while in WT people are coming almost from everywhere. This is also because during all these years a lot of people has written many journalistic article and/or forum post about WT.
An idea to improve our visibility is to work outside WMF not just inside where we are already the #1 site. I suggest a "judo-approach" :-D that consist on using the strength of your opponent. Search through google all the main forum (or article where we can reply) where they discuss and link WT. Add an honest post where we state the difference between the two site and, most important, add a link! As an example, look at this one. This kind of activity should be done as an "interlingual expedition". In the long term this would be highly beneficial also to the ranking improvement. --Andyrom75 (talk) 07:32, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, everyone. Under certain rules that apply to lawyers, we are ethically obligated to represent only the Foundation. We cannot unfortunately give legal advice to the community at large, particularly in cases like this one that may be complex and where we may not know all that facts. With that in mind, we'd urge you to carefully consider any changes you make, on this issue or any other - you should avoid placing yourself in situations beyond your individual tolerance for legal risk. I have written about the responsibility of contributors to the Wikimedia projects elsewhere, which you may wish to review.

As a more general matter, I understand that some are finding the situation a bit vexing. That said, I would urge the WV community to focus their efforts on improving the content of WV rather than spending time worrying about another site and who links to it. Other techniques suggested in this thread (such as killing stub articles that are identical) as well as elsewhere (such as ensuring that appropriate Wikipedia articles link to WV) seem to us to be constructive in the short run and more likely to succeed with Google's algorithms in the long run. I apologize that I cannot be of more help here. Geoffbrigham (talk) 16:31, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Geoff just to avoid misunderstanding, this means that we won't have a legal answer on the subject of this bugzilla request? --Andyrom75 (talk) 17:34, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Correct, under legal ethics rules, I cannot give legal advice except to WMF. But, to be honest, from my personal point of view, I also feel that further focus on these sorts of details, rather than the overall quality of the product we are providing to readers, and the legitimate accessibility of that information, is not that productive. Geoffbrigham (talk) 16:49, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
The Great Wall of China is made by a huge amount of tiny bricks (in comparison of its dimension), so you shouldn't judge the single brick... Do you know any lawyer that has some spare time to help us? PS Because of my job I know how a lawyer is unwilling to take a legal position ;-) --Andyrom75 (talk) 07:47, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Interwiki links to incubator versions[edit]

I see that the Wikivoyage article on Japan is able to link to the Chinese Wikivoyage article in Wikimedia Incubator.

Can someone also help enable the English Wikipedia articles to link to Wikipedia test editions in Wikimedia Incubator? --DaveZ122 (talk) 09:13, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

(Same question answered here). --MF-W 23:20, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Global spam blacklist[edit]

I'm getting a very negative vibe on Talk:Spam blacklist#Hotel web site regarding Wikivoyage. They seem disinclined to do anything for us, be it add a site to the global blacklist due to spamming on Wikivoyage, or remove one from the blacklist so that we can link to them from our guides. We might have an image problem developing here. LtPowers (talk) 18:37, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I can technically remove it, but is it really so hard to whitelist it? The comments do not seem to be negative about Wikivoyage specifically. They might say that in other situations too. If you really want, I can see if this really should be kept on the bl. PiRSquared17 (talk) 18:46, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
The hotels are maybe not the best example here, since they are individual businesses; it's just where the discussion developed. I have another request slightly farther up the page to remove the official tourism site for the city of Daugavpils, Latvia that I see as more important. "Add it to the whitelist" shouldn't be the default suggestion when dealing with non-Wikipedia projects, because we have 15 projects and editing 15 whitelists is a pain the butt compared to just removing an entry from the blacklist. However, the reason I brought it up here is because of comments like "Wikivoyage is a spam-magnet by itself" and "I think there is a bit of an unwritten code here on the blacklist that we do not blacklist unless it expands outside of wikivoyage, the rest of the spamming is 'your' problem"; these are troubling to me. LtPowers (talk) 19:20, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
I can't say that he's totally wrong, maybe rude :-) but not wrong. I think that the greatest part of the hotel that we have on voy aren't advised by traveller, but from advertiser (not necessarely spammer). The problem is that is too difficult to understand who they are, and it's a waste of time to discuss with them all the times. I always try to ask to whitelist those sites, and a couple of times I got the green light. I agree that the other wikis doesn't need them. The wrong thing that he said is that an Italian hotel is used just by it:voy, because an article of an Italian city can be included by all the voy versions. It could be useful (but I don't know if technically possible) if wikivoayge can have a project-whitelist, on top of the several standard local-whitelist. --Andyrom75 (talk) 21:12, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
A project (e.g., Wikivoyage or Wikipedia, not a single wiki like en:voy or en:w:) whitelist would be interesting. Nothing like that exists now. Do you think this issue about different project families having different standards for linking should be brought up somewhere, like on a RfC? PiRSquared17 (talk) 21:44, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think that would be enough if we would discuss about it inside the voy community (in this thread, informing all the lounges through the DerFussi tool about this discussion) because is something that affect just wikivoyage. If we come out with an ok (as I suppose) I would just open an enhancement request on bugzilla. But if someone think that we need to discuss with people from other wiki we should move to an RfC discussion. --Andyrom75 (talk) 06:46, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
You're right, but it might be nice to notify the anti-spam people about this. They might want to know about a cross-Wikivoyage whitelist. PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:38, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Good point. If they have a community/group page we can have a brief discussion there too. On the other hand, if your was just an example of a numerous amount of different communty, well... go for RfC :-) I just would like to put into the discussion only the people affected by this proposal.--Andyrom75 (talk) 07:01, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
The issue is that the links usually get added beyond wikivoyage and to multiple wikis where they are in fact spam, though maybe less so at the wikivoyages. The expectation that 50+ WPs should blacklist a url, whereas 15 Vy should not whitelist does not seem equitable where the site is clearly a commercial site and has been spammed. [There are consequences for sites that spam and I hope that you can acknowledge that their misbehaviour should not be ignored by the Voyages.] With relation to the other comment, you misinterpret and jump to conclusions on what the other person said. We have bots that monitor links and these are interpreted by humans, so where we see the links being added to the Voyages, we often do not revert such links as we would on the other wikis. Your rules about commercial links are a lot looser and comparatively it is too hard for us to know your rules of what is in and out.

I know of no request from the Voyages to blacklist a site that has been refused, so your extrapolation I think lacks accuracy. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:43, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

  • I personally think this is a good idea, but is not currently technically feasible. PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:14, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Are you talking of the whole "project whitelist" idea o to discuss with just the voy+anti-spam communities? If just the second, let's go for the RfC as you have suggested, otherwise let's talk about it. --Andyrom75 (talk) 07:51, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
To inquire about the possibility of a project-wide whitelist, I would suggest that you raise a bugzilla: request and see what is possible. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:43, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

I would welcome the development of project-wide whitelists (wikivoyage only, wikiversity only and even wikipedia-only). The different project-types do look differently at spam-issues, and what is spam in one community is not always spam in another community - however, when it develops to a mediawiki-wide situation it is a concern that can sometimes only be stopped by a global blacklist. Asking to de-list because 15 out of >800 MediaWiki projects don't think it is spam is a bit unreasonable (having 785 wikis having to blacklist it, or having to combat the editors spamming it there .. 'if my hotelsite is fine on voy:en:Paris, why is it not on w:en:Paris?' (and that is often how xwiki spam develops, moving from the smaller or a subgroup of wikis to cross-wiki, going from places where it is fine to everywhere, venturing into places where it is not fine too often). Otherwise the solution is, unfortunately, probably going to be to whitelist it over the projects that have use for it (which is cumbersome, but that is the technical limit). I do note that this is not a wikivoyage-only problem, wikiversity has similar 'issues' - self-promotion is there to a certain extend 'encouraged', and also that has sometimes 'spilled over'. Note that a MediaWiki wide whitelist would also be welcome in this regard, we now sometimes have to write difficult blacklist rules to filter out good stuff from the bad ones (the mostly redirect sites, but not always redirect sites, e.g. and, having the whole domain blacklisted globally, and whitelist the good stuff makes it easier to handle (and what is useful on one wiki is sometimes useful on all wikis ..). --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 09:48, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Just opened the request on bugzilla. Feel free to add comments. --Andyrom75 (talk) 17:23, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Wishlist: Enhance inter-project links[edit]

It is very easy to add more items for the "Related Sites" list in the sidebar (see Wikivoyage/Wishlist#Miscellany). The extension must not be changed! Only the settings (see Wikimedia Settings).

  1. Check if the item is noted at the Interwiki special page.
  2. Modify the $wmgExtraLanguageNames and $wmgRelatedSitesPrefixes.

Below I make a proposal. We should discuss it, make a small voting to get support by the community and send a bugzilla request like bugzilla:51794

The first addition is to give a language name to the abbreviation like 'de' => 'German'. This is formally but the sidebar items are handled like language specifiers.

'wmgExtraLanguageNames' => array(
	'default' => array(),
	'wikivoyage' => array(
		'wikipedia' => 'Wikipedia', // already set
		'WikiPedia' => 'Wikipedia', // already set
		'citizendium' => 'Citizendium', // already set
		'dmoz' => 'Open Directory', // already set
		'Radreise-Wiki' => 'Radreise-Wiki', // already set
		'rezepte' => 'Rezepte-Wiki', // already set
		'commons' => 'Wikimedia Commons', // already set
		'meta' => 'Meta-Wiki',
		'metawikipedia' => 'Meta-Wiki',
		'wikibooks' => 'Wikibooks',
		'wikidata' => 'Wikidata',
		'wikinews' => 'Wikinews',
		'wikiquote' => 'Wikiquote',
		'wikisource' => 'Wikisource',
		'wikispecies' => 'Wikispecies',
		'wikiversity' => 'Wikiversity',
		'wiktionary' => 'Wiktionary',

The second list defines which "languages" should be placed in a separate list, the Related Sites list:

'wmgRelatedSitesPrefixes' => array(
	'default' => array(),
	'wikivoyage' => array(
		'wikipedia', // already set
		'dmoz', // already set
		'citizendium', // already set
		'commons', // already set

So let's start discussing. --RolandUnger (talk) 08:14, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, we have to see what will happen with Wikidata integration, since interwiki project links may be handled through there instead. --Rschen7754 08:29, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
@Rschen7754 : The enhancement proposed has nothing to do with Wikidata. It is a special feature only available on Wikivoyage to show interproject links like interwiki links in the sidebar. Up to now only wikipedia, commons, dmoz, and citizendium links could be shown. As we demonstrated at WV/de source of these links could be entries from Wikidata. --RolandUnger (talk) 10:20, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
We never had an occasion to link to Wikiversity or Wikispecies, but I think that these links will not hurt. Good proposal. Let's try to implement it! --Alexander (talk) 10:27, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
But the question is, now that Wikidata contains links to Wikipedia and Commons, and soon other projects, why should the extension not use that information? --Rschen7754 21:35, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
I don't see an actual proposal here. What sites are you recommending be added, Roland? LtPowers (talk) 15:20, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
The sites to be added have no comment "already set". --RolandUnger (talk) 15:29, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Is Wikidata considered as present with "Data item" in the sidebar? I do think Wikipedia and Commons covers most of the WMF links, but I noticed the different setup at Italian Wikivoyage, plus the additional note at en.voy's roadmap. It should help with the phrasebooks at least. -- torty3 (talk) 13:20, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
As far as I know, Wikidata is currently being used to link just to Wikivoyage in other languages. It does not yet check for commons: or dmoz: links, nor does it look for other WMF projects in the local language (WP, Wikinews...). Our current method of linking to siblings is mw:extension:RelatedSites which is kludgy - both for the hard-coding of target site names in the server config file and for the issue of "Wikipedia" appearing as a language in WV (bugzilla:55355). It is possible that some future version of Wikidata will supplant RelatedSites, but in the meantime I disagree with the "enhancement" label on RelatedSites bugs. RelatedSites is an ugly kludge which deserves to be labelled as a bug. I have no objection to linking the other WMF projects but at some point we do need to determine if Wikidata will replace the extension and, if it does not, fix RelatedSites. Using the list of languages for a list of other projects is ugly. K7L (talk) 16:29, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Apparently there's a Wikidata bugzilla:54374 request to put interproject links in the sidebar. No idea on the status though. Thanks for the effort Roland. -- torty3 (talk) 11:12, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Inter-Wikivoyage front-page features[edit]

Hi, everyone. I know I haven't participated much here, because I unfortunately forget these forums exist, but I'll try to rectify that. Anyway, I'm not sure how many of those of you who don't participate at voy:en or voy:de know about the cross-wiki front-page feature of voy:en:Travemünde/voy:de:Travemünde, which will take place during the month of June, 2014. I'm wondering whether there are particular articles other Wikivoyages might want to propose for a joint feature. Any places you would you like to promote to the English-language readership, voy:it, voy:fr, voy:ru, et al.? I should add that I personally can do some work in French and Italian, though my level for the purposes of writing and editing travel articles is just middling. Quand je suis en practique, mon francais c'est pas mal./Quando sono in prattica, il mio italiano non c'e male. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:15, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

I don't know anything about the "cross-wiki front-page" that "will take place during the month of June, 2014". Can you give me/us more details? --Andyrom75 (talk) 11:28, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Andyrom, Travemünde is planned to be a featured front page article on both en and ge at the same time. --Danapit (talk) 12:45, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

dmoz property on wikidata[edit]

The dmoz property is the d:Property:P998 on wikidata. Is there a bot to collect the information on the wikivoyage article to introduce them on wikidata? --Adehertogh (talk) 08:44, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

@Adehertogh: Sorry for the late reply! I think there is one: d:Wikidata:Bot_requests#Dmoz (permalink). PiRSquared17 (talk) 18:17, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
One potential problem with moving the DMOZ links to Wikidata: DMOZ has a separate section for non-English links. We'd want each WV to link to the DMOZ section in the same language, not the English-language section of DMOZ. No idea if there's any way around this issue. K7L (talk) 20:27, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Username policy[edit]

Does Wikivoyage allow usernames that consist of a name of a travel agency? Is it fair to block users that made such a choice at their first step on Wv without any preliminary warning?

May sysops block anybody just because they assumed inappropriately promotional behaviors in wv articles? Gobbler (talk) 17:06, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

en.wikivoyage doesn't seem to have a policy against promotional usernames. PiRSquared17 (talk) 18:23, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
In fact I perceived an unfair sysop' practice and one user already expressed his complaints about those serial blocks and account deletions. However the matter is not resolved and a collective action should be taken. Should Italian Wikivoyage add an Username Policy as en/wv already does in order to avoid any misunderstanding? New users that dare describe themselves as tourist agents are sentenced guilty there and banned from Wikivoyage even before editing anything. --Gobbler (talk) 02:57, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
I think that's unfortunate, and I disagree with that point of view. It is a basic principle of Wikivoyage that purely promotional posts are forbidden, and we also have the policy (at least on en/wv, but I presume in every language) of restricting tour listings, but it certainly does not follow that a tour guide cannot share very useful information, if s/he so chooses. I could understand why, with Italy absolutely crawling with tour agencies, there would be much more wariness, but if things are the way you describe, I think that's going too far. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:51, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
en.Wikipedia has a username policy which forbids posting as a company or organisation, among other things. Not sure if it's helpful or only serving to hide the w:WP:COI, though. In any case, WP policy doesn't bind WV in any way. Various WV's have voy:WV:Don't tout or a variant but that's on content and not usernames. K7L (talk) 20:27, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Only a user was blocked whit this motivation, Jato Travel and he is guilty of spam, see here and user contribs (first and only edit at 12:01, 12 nov 2013, blocked at 03:11, 17 nov 2013). 5 days later... Gobbler, please, don't don't act as a victim, the italian WV's community has decided to be aganist the promotional user name, lately your contribution on it:voy is just limited to polemics and trolling, nothing that can increase the value of the project. BTW: the decision of community is here--Wim b / [ t ] 14:20, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
In all language versions of Wikivoyage that I have looked at, the listings of the URLs, phone numbers, addresses, etc of sights, activities, restaurants, hotels, etc is more prolific and explicit than in Wikipedia and it is best to work with the grain of human nature and encourage explicit and transparent user names that make clearer any conflict of interest or special knowledge. --118.93nzp (talk) 03:31, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Coordinates from wikidata[edit]

Hi, fr.voy uses the coordinates from wikidata, it worked perfectly since today and now it's not working at all. Any idea why? We haven't change nor the modul (Modul:Basic) nor the template (Template:Info carte)...--Adehertogh (talk) 09:22, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

I have no idea. Pt: uses the WP link from wikidata, and that has stopped working too. Have you brought this up on WD? Texugo (talk) 19:45, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
WP links are also not working on fr.voy. I'll immediately let a message on WD ([8]).--Adehertogh (talk) 20:20, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Bug fixed. see: Wikidata:Contact the development team--Adehertogh (talk) 08:07, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Archived discussion, for the record. PiRSquared17 (talk) 18:39, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Newspaper launched on the Italian Wikivoyage[edit]

I've been experimenting with it:voy:Wikivoyage:Diario di viaggio for a while, and it seems to work well. Does something like that exist on other language versions? --Ricordisamoa 17:46, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Certainly not in Russian, but we are still at the stage when it is possible to follow edits with the recent changes.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:44, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
No, we have one. Other languages have it as well, as one can see from the interwiki links. --Alexander (talk) 16:01, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
this is a bit similar in french.--Adehertogh (talk) 23:14, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Need help for the automatic listing counter[edit]

If some one could help, the general listing template only display the number 1 before each listing item. Any idea? (CSS code) Thanks for help.--Adehertogh (talk) 11:25, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

I've opened a random page and it seems to work now, if not, contact me on my home page. --Andyrom75 (talk) 08:14, 9 March 2014 (UTC) language positioning[edit]

Between yesterday and today, the links on the main page have changed; specifically German and English have switched locations. Anyone know the reason for this? LtPowers (talk) 15:15, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

See special:diff/7358677/7731978. You could ask Mxn or discuss on template. PiRSquared17 (talk) 16:00, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Ah, my mistake. For some reason I thought the Wikivoyage portal arranges wikis by the number of page views per hour, as on the Wikipedia and Wikibooks portals. But template indicates otherwise. I've reverted the changes. Sorry for the confusion. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 08:41, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
I wasn't sure how the languages were sorted, and the only indication I found on the talk page (looking just now) was that it was indeed sorted by pageviews. (I always thought it was number of articles, in which en is still beating de by a significant margin.) The oddity here seems to be that de's pageviews spiked big time last month for some reason. If that's the way we're sorting them, then de should be first; I just didn't know the reason for the change at the time. LtPowers (talk) 18:23, 7 March 2014 (UTC)