Hello! Our team, Wikimedia Germany’s Technical Wishes project, is developing a series of improvements to make working with templates easier. Maybe you’ve already heard of some of the projects that have recently been deployed: . We plan to release more improvements to make working with templates easier over the course of this year:

• It will become easier to find templates and to insert them into a page.
• Removing a template from a page (with Visual Editor) will become easier.
• Several problems with the existing interface for editing templates in the VisualEditor will be tackled.
• Template creators and maintainers will be offered more guidance when they are managing TemplateData with the template documentation editor.

Now we’re looking for a few wikis who want to be the first to benefit from these changes, and ideally that includes a few of Wikipedia's sister projects. If your wiki community is interested, all the improvements listed above would be deployed to your wiki in a series of releases, likely between May and July 2021. Of course, each deployment would be announced beforehand.

If English Wikivoyage is interested to have early access to these improvements, give me a ping here, or let me know on my talk page. It would be great to have English Wikivoyage on board! -- Best, Johanna Strodt (WMDE) (talk) 16:12, 19 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

I'd think Wikivoyage could be a good testbed for some of these changes, as our use of templates is both broad and shallow -- only a few, widely-used templates. Powers ^(talk) 17:49, 19 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Johanna Strodt (WMDE), has your team spent much time editing Wikivoyage? I'm sure we could put together a little video-based editing party if the team wanted to explore how we do things here.

We're a little strange about templates here. We use them a lot, but we only use about six or eight of them in articles. The things that would be most useful to us here are probably phab:T96710 (drop-down menu of our most commonly used templates VisualEditor, to match what we've got in the 2010 wikitext editor) and phab:T275457 (we use complex but extremely predictable formatting, which the visual editor screws up). WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:17, 19 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

@WhatamIdoing: Thanks for your remarks and for the offer! I'm sorry for replying so late, there's a lot going on right now. As for the most useful changes for this wiki, we have already decided which projects we'll be working on in our focus area Templates. And we hope those will be helpful for Wikivoyage as well. I have forwarded your wishes anyway, it's good to have them in mind in case we come across potential opportunities for improvement. -- Best, 95.91.213.7 10:48, 28 April 2021 (UTC) —The preceding comment was added by Johanna Strodt (WMDE) (talk • contribs) Reply

Maybe log in and sign that comment?--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:07, 28 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi ThunderingTyphoons!, I deliverately didn't because – at least in dewiki – it's common practice to use a template like {{unsigned}}, which is why I did that. -- Best, Johanna Strodt (WMDE) (talk) 08:37, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, that makes no sense. You made the comment while logged out, so nobody knew who was writing.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 08:44, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@ThunderingTyphoons!: Yes, not signing the comment was a mistake. I tried to fix it by adding the {{unsigned}} template so people would know it was me. In dewiki it's common practice not to sign a comment when you forgot to sign it before, but to use such a template instead. -- Best, Johanna Strodt (WMDE) (talk) 09:22, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thanks.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:42, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hello, sorry for asking again, but it would be great to have English Wikivoyage on board: Would your project like to get the set of planned changes early, to be able to give early feedback? If so, please let me know on my talk page on Meta. -- Thanks a lot, Johanna Strodt (WMDE) (talk) 09:20, 18 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi everyone. I still think this would be useful but I don't want to tell Johanna to go ahead without more buy-in. Powers ^(talk) 02:18, 21 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I'm not seeing any downside. I think we should participate. Nelson Ricardo (talk) 02:25, 21 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi! I'm looking to request a translation of the Spanish, German, or Italian versions of Cueva de las Manos (https://es.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Cueva_de_las_Manos) into English. It doesn't have to be anything fancy, just a paragraph or two on an independent page would be nice. In fact, just creating a beginning page would be great. Is anyone interested? Thanks, Tyrone Madera (talk) 18:13, 30 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Google Translate usually does a good enough job for a starter page. That said, I think we would consider that to be an attraction, not a destination, meaning it would not get its own travel guide in the English Wikivoyage. Powers ^(talk) 00:15, 1 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Powers, So does that mean that the information on the attraction would go inside the destination page, more or less? Thanks, Tyrone Madera (talk) 19:20, 1 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Tyrone Madera, it's currently listed at Patagonia (Argentina)#See and also mentioned at National Route 40 (Argentina)#Detour Cueva de las Manos, Caves#Argentina, UNESCO World Heritage List#Argentina, and El Calafate#By bus. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:48, 2 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

The Spanish article gives a route description for going by foot. If you think the normal listing format does not give you room for describing the destination in enough detail, it is possible to create a subsection, for describing the Cueva in a few paragraphs instead of one. The Spanish article is in an odd format, so translating it directly is probably not the way to go, but one could use the information to create a suitable description. –LPfi (talk) 20:39, 3 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Extending the listing in the 'super-region' is probably not a good idea, so either a new article should be created for the national park, or a more nearby city perhaps? There's also the german de:Cueva de las Manos article we can use for sources... -- andree.sk(talk) 06:07, 6 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

In section Australia#Trading hours​ I see:

• 09:00-17:00
• 4PM
• 6pm

Is there one way to specify time in Australia? If not what should the standard be for Wikivoyage articles? Something like "in one article only one standard". Or is it "do what ever you like", as is done now in the mentioned Australia article section? --FredTC (talk) 10:49, 3 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I'm planning to create a new article for Australia's time. Not only is the time zones confusing but the way we write it is also confusing.

So for

• 09:00-17:00 - North Queensland
• 4PM - Victoria
• 6pm - Everywhere else but NSW, S Qld and SA
• 06:00pm - NSW, SA and South Queensland

Tbh, we're just a weird country. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 11:04, 3 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your quick response. In Wikivoyage:Time and date formats it says Use upper case "AM" and "PM". In the case of Australia, as a traveler, I would expect to see the formatting in the "Time" section, not in a separate article. I think it could be added as a new column in the table that is there already. That column could have this information like:

• 24-hours notation
• AM/PM notation
• AM/PM, locally often written as am/pm
• 24-hours notation in the bigger cities, AM/PM in most villages

--FredTC (talk) 13:20, 3 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

This thing's hard for Aussie's to understand as well but thanks to my mum who's been all over the country, I sort of get this. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 08:19, 4 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi all,

Would just like to seek clarification on Australian phone numbers. For most of my articles, I've formatted them like +61 [2 digit area code] [8 digit number], so, say, +61 03 1234 5678. I've noticed on a lot of other articles, the 0 will be removed, leaving just the single digit of the area code. This seems a bit counterintuitive to me. In almost all the businesses I see (though, granted, I have seen some that format it without the 0) the phone number starts with 03. Certainly, within Australia, if I call a number without the 0 it won't work. I get that the phone numbers are designed for international use, but given it works just as fine with the 0, should the 0 be used when formatting Australian numbers? --LivelyRatification (talk) 22:15, 3 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

On a mobile phone, can you enter "+610312345678", and get connected? AlasdairW (talk) 22:21, 3 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

It's not connected on my end, but I did make the number up so that's probably why. I tried calling my local KFC as a test, once without the 0 and once with. Worked with the 0 but not without. --LivelyRatification (talk) 22:25, 3 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

The most important part of our phone number guidelines is that the numbers should be written in a way that works as such on (non-domestic) mobile phones, and as a result, when clicking on a phone number in a listing.

In most of the world, the leading zero in the area code is removed when calling from abroad or using the +... notation (there are a few exceptions). In a large country, most calls are made domestically, and thus writing out the zero makes sense, and the country code is often left out. When writing the zero together with country code, it is often in parenthesis, meaning it should be left out when using the country code. This convention makes sense locally, but it is not universally known and not what we use on Wikivoyage, and thus often confusing.

So if +31 2 1234 5678 works, then that is the format to use. It is also the format listed in Wikivoyage:Phone numbers-

–LPfi (talk) 08:01, 4 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Yes, if I dial +610895819463 (fake phone number), it will work but it's generally preferred as +61895819463 rather than with the 0. And to User:LivelyRatification, that's the case since we're dialling the number locally and not internationally. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 08:15, 4 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

So including the "0" will work for those writing the numbers, but not for those calling from overseas? I'd suppose calls from abroad would work equally, as the part after +61 should be parsed by an Australian exchange. Anyway, including the zero is confusing as it is left out in most of the world, and both Wikivoyage:Phone numbers and Australia#Dialling codes leaves it out.

The phone number format is explained in Australia#Dialling codes, as it should. Having read it, travellers can easily transform our number format to something usable on land lines (the same system is used in most of the world, so confusing for few). The section includes discussion on the "+" notation, which is valid globally and could probably be left out.

–LPfi (talk) 08:26, 4 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hope this table helps:

SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 08:37, 4 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I think the real question is resolved: we should use +61 x 123-456 without the leading zero of the area code.

But the table is confusing (including or not including +61 both horizontally and vertically). As I interpret it it makes little sense, are the +61/not +61 columns reversed? Are some of these numbers special (such as 04 the Australian-wide prefix)?

–LPfi (talk) 09:16, 4 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Only use 04 if it's an Aussie phone. If not, then use +614. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 09:30, 4 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

But what does it mean that +61820395205 works without +61, sometimes also with +61? You say "will not work" for 0412345678 means "works only with Aussie phones", which is not the obvious interpretation. You say 0412345678 works with +61 (presumably as +610412345678) while +61491837573 "will go to local dialling area", is that equivalent to 12345678 from a landline? And what is the difference between +61820395205 with and without +61, and how does +61820395205 with "not +61" differ from with "+61, with +61 not included"? I am afraid the table did not help me to figure out how the scheme works. –LPfi (talk) 14:07, 5 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

If I may, I believe the column headers refer to whether or not the call is being placed from the +61 country code, not whether the +61 is included in the number dialed. Powers ^(talk) 16:45, 5 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Yes, as i'as too lazy to type Australian mobile and vice versa. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 08:54, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Can you assemble various parts and the divine spark to make this creature walk? Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:42, 6 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

The message "View new changes since ..." does not appear anymore on the Watchlist, since yesterday. It still appears on Wikipedia. I tried it in several browsers. --FredTC (talk) 09:59, 7 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

It shows for me. Do you have some security extension across browsers? I haven't restarted my browser for several days, so if there is some update to the javascript I might still be running the old version. –LPfi (talk) 11:48, 7 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hey friends. For several years, Wikivoyage:Star nominations has suffered from a lack of participation from the wider community, especially in comparison to votes for deletion or user rights nominations. This means that each article's nomination drags on for months, sometimes years, and most nominations are only successful based on the views of a tiny, unrepresentative proportion of our community.

By contrast, on the French Wikivoyage, each time a new article is proposed for Star status, MediaWiki message delivery sends a m:MassMessage to the talk page of every user on this list. The list is opt-in by default for all reasonably active users, however any user may voluntarily opt out with just a couple of clicks. The positive result is that, despite a much smaller and overall less-engaged community than English Wikivoyage, every single star nomination on fr.wikivoyage receives enough votes to reach a consensus within two weeks - yes weeks, not months or years.

Should en.wikivoyage steal this idea of a mass-messaging list, and if so should we opt in users by default? I conceive that the list should contain the user names of all active auto-patrolled users by default, and that each user may subsequently opt out of receiving the messages at any time, either by removing their name from the list, or by adding their user talk page to Category:Opted-out of message delivery (currently red-links, but works on other wikis e.g. W:Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery).

Thoughts? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 14:15, 7 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I agree that participation is sadly lacking, but I don't like the idea of "spamming" users. If your idea is implemented, it should be opt-in. And those who would choose opt in likely already have the page on their watchlist. The reason I haven't participated in the discussions is that I don't find most of the nominated articles to fall within my realm of interest. Nelson Ricardo (talk) 20:58, 7 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

"Opt-in by default" sure sounds like "opt-out" to me. I don't favor this. For my part, I don't participate in these discussions often because it is so hard to judge whether an article should be considered a star, it requires really close reading, and there are others (for example, User:LtPowers) who are much better at noticing when details that would make an article much closer to perfect are absent or small blemishes are present. I would opt out. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:23, 7 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

It would hardly result in "spamming" users. We get maybe five or six of these nominations at most per year. It's fine to choose to opt out, and I'm not asking people to say individually whether they would opt in or out (although somehow I knew that Ikan would opt out!), but the point of opting everyone in is to attract users who may not otherwise think about taking part to think about it. Such as users who maybe don't even take part in Pub discussions that often, let alone any other community pages.

I get that assessing star noms isn't for everyone, and participation in any part of WV is always voluntary, but when someone (and it usually is just one editor) who has put in hours and hours of time preparing an article to reach a certain level, solicits general feedback and all they get is one or two replies out of an otherwise very active community, it's embarrassing. And the result is a nomination process that's generally slower than the one undertaken by the Nobel Prize committee. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 23:47, 7 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Can't speak for the others who've put effort into a star article but I agree with Jamie's statement

"but when someone (and it usually is just one editor) who has put in hours and hours of time preparing an article to reach a certain level, solicits general feedback and all they get is one or two replies out of an otherwise very active community, it's embarrassing"

It's taken me 6 weeks to get it TD33 to that level, and it was rushed. And a lack of participation is also not very good and may be disheartening for the writer. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 05:36, 8 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I would also be concerned about making it opt-out, just because there are quite a number of inactive users who probably have very little interest. I agree it'd be nice if they got more attention, though. If you could narrow down the field of opt-ins to active users somehow, it might work better. Powers ^(talk) 00:42, 8 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Yes, user:LtPowers, the proposal is for active users, as stated. Usernames would be added manually (probably by me), so it wouldn't be difficult to distinguish active from inactive users.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 07:58, 8 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Apologies, I saw "auto-patrolled" and missed the "active" qualifier. Powers ^(talk) 02:48, 9 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I'd support such a proposal for TT's reasons. I'm not fully comfortable yet with the star process, but I'm studying it and striving to leave helpful comments even on articles I might not be "interested" in (featured content processes on any project depend on people who might not be subject-matter experts participating). Star nominations shouldn't be hanging around forever. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 23:49, 7 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

This is definitely needed. Not only do we have lack of participations but for some of them (e.g. TD33), there's only one vote excluding myself. Lack of participation is a problem and many end up going into the Slush pile. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 01:57, 8 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I'm not much interested in Star nominations so I say make it opt-in, to save people like me the trouble of opting out. (As an aside, there seem to be problems with the Star nominations process. I could probably make some suggestions, but not sure how welcome they would be, given that improvements to the process would still not lead me to participate.) Nurg (talk) 04:15, 8 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Please give us your suggestions. I'm not going to judge you. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 04:24, 8 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Personally, I don't often comment on star nominations because I find it hard to evaluate the star criteria at Wikivoyage:Article status if I don't know the destination. —Granger (talk · contribs) 06:45, 8 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I also do not support mass messaging, other than as opt-in if there are people who think it would be useful for them personally. I do have the page on my watchlist, but like others I don't think I'm the best person to judge the articles, and seldom take the time to read an article thoroughly enough to have an opinion, when it is not about a place I have a special interest in.

I understand the concern, and I think it is not the mass messaging that makes the French nomination succeed, but a culture of participating on that page. Nothing hinders us from posting a reminder in the pub every now and then, but I suppose the key is people like me not to trust others handling the process, but taking the time a few times a year – which really isn't that plenty.

–LPfi (talk) 07:52, 8 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I mean, that would be nice. There are lots of processes on this site that various people could claim lack of expertise in and therefore not participate, but in general people chip in regardless of experience, to keep the site ticking over. You don't need to know a place intimately to judge its article, and in fact sometimes it helps because you ask questions that the person who wrote the article would never have thought of. Most experienced editors know what really excellent Wikivoyage articles look like, because we've written them ourselves.

Those of who you have been kind enough to comment here, thank you. It would take a fraction of the time it took you to write your comment to remove your name from the list.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 08:14, 8 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

No. If anyone opts me into anything without my explicit consent, I'll be furious. I have star nominations on my watchlist; that is enough.

If you feel one is not getting enough attention, you can mention it in the pub or on the RFC page. Or message individuals who have edited the page substantially, or tag them in a comment. Pashley (talk) 08:47, 8 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I don't have any qualms with an opt-out system. As I was an active Wikipedian before I was an active Wikivoyager, I'm very much used to receiving numerous automated messages about everything, some of which are useful and some of which are not. It's easy to "unsubscribe" when the messages get annoying and stale. With regards to star articles, I've hardly participated in the process or with the DOTM candidates. Most of my content work involves improving bad articles to a medium level of quality (solid usable or low-end guide) rather than going further to a high-end guide or star suitable for DOTM. But I would like to turn my attention to it one day. Gizza ^(roam) 09:03, 8 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Pashley: - Usually the one who nominates it is the one who edits it substantially. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 11:24, 8 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

No. One of the drawbacks of email is that it has become too easy to send marketing mail. When suppliers has to print and pay postage on their "news" they were much more restrained and I was more likely to read what I received.

I would be ok with an annual Wikivoyage email which said what had changed in the past year, and could include a list of the star nominations, but more than twice a year would be annoying. I don't think that we should use mass mailings for this or any other single issue, but I would not object to a very occasional mass mailing to keep in touch with editors who may not have been around lately.

Emails or talk page messages to editors who have contributed to nearby destinations would be fine - telling those who have edited Southampton about Eastleigh's nomination etc. AlasdairW (talk) 17:09, 8 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

It's not an emailing list. It's a proposal to message you all on your talk page.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:56, 8 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I wonder if @Pashley also thought it was an e-mail system, instead of a normal note on your regular User_talk: page. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:20, 8 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

No, I did not think that.

To me, unsolicited talk page messages would be worse than email spam because I don't have filters set up, there's no one-click delete & the admins are not likely inclined to discipline the spammer. Pashley (talk) 22:59, 8 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

One click delete = rollback. If you ever used rollback on a message mass-sent by me, I would have removed your name from the list. However, rest assured that your name won't be going on such a list to begin with; you've made your feelings quite clear.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 06:39, 9 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I've just increased the capabilities of Template:Ping from 5 people to 15 people. This means that to ping more than 5 names, you'll no longer have to use two or three separate templates and you can now use one. Thanks!, SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 05:53, 9 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi there, Please take a moment to check the proposal, as the Australia section in Places with unusual names is getting too long, and it's only 50% complete. Thanks, and enjoy mothers day, for those celebrating it. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 07:54, 9 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

This shortcut currently redirects here, to the Travellers' pub, however I think it could also redirect to WV:Talk pages. Which one do you think is best? 82.3.185.12 16:26, 10 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I prefer having it here. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:45, 11 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

+1 -- andree.sk(talk) 20:04, 11 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Here is better SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 21:21, 11 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Obviously this etiquette (below) should be reviewed:
"And, forgive and forget when someone changes a nasty comment to something more civil and productive."

Obviously, this rule doesn't work, and really, only puts more stress and pressure on someone. A prime example of this is, User:Antandrus - been attacked for 16 years, obviously, someone shouldn't deserve this for reverting Ljupco's attacks or simply edit a wiki. While I usually just laugh at GRP's attacks towards me (not funny towards others), but for me, once it gets 15 years, it does get annoying. So seriously, while one offs can be forgiven, it being continuous is not.

Thanks, SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 06:21, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I don't understand what you're suggesting. The quoted guideline at Wikivoyage:Using talk pages is not about someone making a nasty comment and leaving it. It's about someone making an intemperate comment in the heat of the moment, and then regretting it and changing it to something more civil. Nurg (talk) 07:10, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Oh i see. Apologies SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 07:17, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I am wondering whether city articles without attractions or activities should be deleted or redirected to a more populous city. I unilaterally redirected Kalwa to Thane since Kalwa don't have any attractions or activities listed under "See" or "Do" respectively. However, the edit was since been reverted. --Soumya-8974 (he) (talk • contribs) 08:49, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I noticed that SHB2000 has created a discussion at Talk:Kalwa whether Kalwa should be merged to Thane. --Soumya-8974 (he) (talk • contribs) 08:53, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I reverted your edit because you made some unilateral changes, without discussing on the article's talk page. If there's consensus then yes, it may - but first seek consensus. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 08:51, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Actually, I have been stuck with Wikipedia for three years without having major edits in Wikivoyage. Therefore, I am not well aware about the editorial conduct of this project. Anyway, I understand that virtually everything requires consensus in Wikivoyage. --Soumya-8974 (he) (talk • contribs) 08:59, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Everything requires consensus on all Wikimedia Projects. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 09:03, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I have unilaterally redirected some stub articles where there is little reason to believe that the article can be developed into something useful for travellers. I don't think that active Wikipedia editors should have their work directed by a random passer-by who creates an empty stub. And I think the empty stub are frustrating to readers. Someone who clicks on a link from Wikipedia and finds a stub article on Wikivoyage is less likely to bother with Wikivoyage again.

I think redirects from articles with no information are not contentious, and don't need discussion. (In these cases, I leave the existing structure in the articles but use "<!-- text -->" to comment it out.)

In this case, there was a fair bit of text in the article that User:Soumya-8974 redirected, so I think that User:SHB2000's approach of making the article useful by finding some points on interest was the better one. Ground Zero (talk) 11:01, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I've also done this, but this had a fair bit of text in the understand and get in bit, so this needs discussion SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 11:10, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

An older discussion covers some of these issues. Pashley (talk) 11:18, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

these aren't empty, it has information in the understand and the get in section SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 11:21, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

That's an interesting discussion, Pashley, but much of it deals with page creation vandalism and with the delete/redirect debate. I think we're pretty settled on "don't delete real places". I would be interested to know what people think about Uruma, created a week ago. I will contact the creator to ask if they are going to add anything, but as it stands, it is of no use to a traveller, who would be better off with a redirect to Okinawa Island until someone decides to create an article about this place. Ground Zero (talk) 11:48, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

we did delete the french teachers unused articles, even though they were real places SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 11:55, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Regardless, you don't have to build a consensus for uncontroversial edits. Some understanding of whether a an edit is controversial is needed before doing massive changes, such as redirecting tens of articles, for an isolated one there is more trouble participating in the discussion than just reverting the controversial edit with a suitable comment. We have the Plunge forward guideline, just as Wikipedia has Be brave; Be brave–revert–discuss is good practice. –LPfi (talk) 14:26, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

For what it's worth, I tend to trust Soumya-8974's local knowledge and defer to him on these kinds of matters, but Soumya-8974, I think that in situations that seem unlikely to be controversial, you can smooth out any ruffled feathers more effectively by posting on the relevant article's talk page, stating why you redirected it and that you thought this wouldn't be controversial but that if anyone disagreed, they could revert the redirect and start a discussion about it in that thread. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:17, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Soumya-8974's reasoning is that there weren't any see or do. Obviously looking at google maps shows that there are SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 21:39, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

But none of them in See or Do. Whether an outline article should stay there as such or wait as a redirect (perhaps with content commented out as suggested above – if there is valuable content the solution sounds better than just redirecting) is a judgement call. Is this a place likely to attract visitors, who'd benefit from the article as is and who might add the attractions, or is it better to have it as redirect not to disappoint readers until somebody decides to make the article "usable" (starting by uncommenting the hidden outline)? –LPfi (talk) 09:22, 13 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

For clarity, Wikivoyage:Plunge forward is a policy here, and if you think that an edit is uncontroversial, then we don't expect you to start a discussion first. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:21, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Avi0012 recently added some new anime franchises at Anime and manga in Japan#Anime pilgrimages, in which I doubt whether they are sufficiently notable. Certainly we also don't want crappy works like Kemono Friends Season 2 (a notoriously bad anime series) to be included, so I'd like to start for a discussion on the inclusion criteria for the article of Anime and manga in Japan, regards.廣九直通車 (talk) 12:39, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

For me to have an opinion, there needs to be some more information on them, probably in the still missing Understand section. The lead of Anime pilgrimages now just states "Anime pilgrimages (聖地巡礼, Seichi-junrei) are trips to locations that became the models for manga and anime." I'd like to know what kind of destinations really attract "pilgrimages". Any place that features in any book or film? –LPfi (talk) 09:46, 13 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

To be honest, I'm not the most fanatical anime fan. In general, destinations which serves as the main stage of ACGN works are most likely to become pilgrimage sites, although there should also be exceptions. Usually comments about a location on Google Map should give sufficient information about the popularity of these destinations.廣九直通車 (talk) 11:55, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

So, it seems that way back when, somebody decided and everyone else went along with a "no categories (outside of templates)" policy. Is it time to revisit this policy? Many non-destination articles do relate to a destination. Why not have Shopping in Japan in Category:Japan or Portuguese cuisine in Category:Portugal? Would this be such a bad thing? Nelson Ricardo (talk) 07:50, 13 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

tbh, that'll just make things more cleaner. And for provinces, states and territories, they could also have their own category (e.g. Category:Quebec or Category:New South Wales.) But the policy chooses to not do so. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 07:53, 13 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Well, actually, Wikivoyage uses categories extensively. We have a breadcrumb hierarchy, which relies entirely on categories and subcategories. Every destination article in Japan and Portugal should be under their respective country's categories - check them, and they should be. But Shopping in Japan is under Category:Shopping, and Portuguese Cuisine is under Category:Food and drink, because they're travel topics, not destination articles. The main difference between Wikivoyage and other wikis is pages should only be in one immediate category, presumably to keep the breadcrumb trail clear.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 08:02, 13 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

(And you'll see that all the categories you're both saying we should have bluelink and are populated by pages and subcategories).ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 08:06, 13 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

The breadcrumb trail is controlled by Template:IsPartOf. Categories outside that template do not affect the breadcrumbs. I see little downside to categorization, but I realize that many Wikivoyagers are opposed to them. I'm not sure I buy the arguments against. Nelson Ricardo (talk) 08:19, 13 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I didn't mean that the categories don't exist. I meant that we're not allowed to add articles to them. Unless I am mistaken on this point. Nelson Ricardo (talk) 08:26, 13 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

For categories to be useful, they have to be applied consistently, at least inside a specific scope. Thus there would be a huge project adding the non-breadcrumb categories. It is possible that the categories can be added by bot, but then it is even more important to have clear criteria on what pages should go in what categories.

At Wikipedia and Commons, many category trees are added and pages recategorised without any consensus, just because some editor who likes working with the category tree had a whim. Cleaning up inconsistent or non-sensible category trees requires real hours of work from the rest of the community. That work is worthwhile as the categories provide real value, on Wikipedia mostly for insiders, on Commons for all users.

I am not against changing the category policy in Wikivoyage, but I'd like to see a well thought out plan on how they should be used, how the adding of categories should be carried out, and a convincing argument about them being real value. It would probably be best to first tell what use they will be, and if the reasoning seems to get support, then create a project page, and after some time of working with that write a formal proposal.

I suppose convincing people the project is worthwhile is hard enough that you need solid arguments. Until you have them, there is probably little use "revisiting the policy". Perhaps you have them already?

–LPfi (talk) 09:40, 13 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for sharing your insights. It sounds like resolution would take more effort and bother than I'm willing to undertake at this time, so I'll just push it onto the back burner for now. Nelson Ricardo (talk) 03:01, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Template:PartOfTopic does allow multiple parents and therefore an article can appear in multiple categories. The first one mentioned will be where it is breadcrumbed to. For example, Khmer Empire has "{{PartOfTopic|Historical travel|Southeast Asia}}". You will see the article appear both in Category:Historical travel and Category:Topics in Southeast Asia. Shopping in Japan similarly is both in Category:Shopping and Category:Topics in Japan. At the moment for Portuguese cuisine, there is no Category:Topics in Portugal but there is Category:Topics in Europe. You can add that or create a new Topics in Portugal category in addition to Category:Food and drink which is the primary category for Portuguese cuisine. Note that unlike travel topics, destination articles only have a single category/breadcrumb (they use the IsPartOf template instead of PartofTopic). Gizza ^(roam) 03:29, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Is/should this be reflected in the documentation? We have at least Template:PartOfTopic/doc, Wikivoyage:Breadcrumb navigation, Wikivoyage:Travel topic article template and MediaWiki:Newarticletext (where travel topics could be added). –LPfi (talk) 11:04, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

This is mentioned in the /doc, reached from the breadcrumb navigation page. I suppose it should be added to the travel topic article template. We try to keep the article templates simple, but we don't have a Wikivoyage:Travel topics. –LPfi (talk) 11:10, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, Gizza and LPfi! This is useful information. I didn't realize the template could take multiple parameters. Nelson Ricardo (talk) 20:15, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I asked a few years back at Talk:Mobile phones#Phone numbers. Now the question popped up again in Talk:Australia#Phone number format:

There seems to be no section about phone numbers. The issue can be somewhat confusing, as numbers are often found in domestic form, and many enter phone numbers in domestic form when not travelling. Some discussion would be helpful.

Under what circumstances is a number without international prefix (+code) treated as referencing that number in the home country of the SIM, and when as one in the local operator's country? Many numbers are unreachable from abroad, are they reachable from roaming phones?

The issue popped up for Norwegian emergency numbers. 112 is treated as a special case by the phone and by the network (at least GSM and successors), but what about 113 & al, and service numbers such as 08505? And what about 911, 999, 111 & co if recognized by the phone but possibly in conflicting use locally?

--LPfi (talk) 08:45, 6 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

LivelyRatification wrote in Talk:Australia:

"In most cases, you simply don't have to call these listings overseas. Maybe for booking accomodation, but [...]. My personal preference would be to format numbers as you see them in Australia, +61 XX XXXX XXXX. If we must keep it internationalised, [...]"

So does anybody know the standard or have experience from around the world? If you call 02 1234 5678 from Queensland with a SIM from France, does it get answered in New South Wales or in Brittany? Does whether you have the number saved in your phone (without prefix) matter? Are special numbers such as 113 in Norway guaranteed to work as expected with a foreign SIM? What about the 0800 toll-free numbers in many countries?

–LPfi (talk) 10:38, 13 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

My experience in Thailand (but already a few years ago): Calling 02 123 4567 (no country code) would connect me to a wired phone in Bangkok. But my Dutch phone company had some extra information that said: "When in Thailand, make shure you are connected to Thai phone company X, when connected to another Thai phone company than X the call will be more expensive". So if there is a kind of business arrangement between both companies, you get the best price by selecting the advised connection from the available connections. In another country it could be possible that you cannot make any call unless you connect to the right phone company, because without a business arrangement with your own phone company your call cannot be charged to you own phone company. --FredTC (talk) 11:56, 13 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I see two possibilities for that advice: either the Dutch company has roaming agreements with different companies, with different terms, or the Thai companies have different policies/agreements with the landline company, and letting that spill over on the foreign roaming customers. I'd suppose there are international frameworks for the roaming agreements, and those would influence what customers should expect. Does anyone know? –LPfi (talk) 07:48, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Another COVID-19 victim. Greyhound announced today that it will close all its Canadian bus routes. If you come across any Canadian articles that mention Greyhound (with the exception of 5 routes that originate from the US), please remove them. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 17:49, 13 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I had a look around, and I didn't see any obvious ones left. Thanks for this note, so we can keep an eye out. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:28, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

That's not good. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 06:21, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Other carriers are stepping into the breach, and Maritime Bus, a regional carrier, is planning to set up a national network of regional carriers for coordinated schedules and joint ticketing. Things will sort themselves out. Ground Zero (talk) 22:25, 19 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Given that both articles are quite short, I was wondering if we should merge Cold War Europe in the Cold War article. After all, the Cold War was in many ways a global conflict, and you could in a sense see the Korean War and Vietnam War as an offshoot of the Cold War. This merger would also adequately allow us to cover things like the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Sino-Soviet Split and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, which were very much a part of the Cold War. The dog2 (talk) 18:09, 13 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Cold War Europe is a usable article, and I see no problems with its size. If the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the conflicts in Africa, Latin America, Middle East and the war in Afghanistan are included and covered adequately, its size will become unwieldy. Why cannot these other conflicts be covered in Cold War, making it grow to more than a stub? –LPfi (talk) 18:50, 13 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Only the first two paragraphs in Cold War Europe are relevant for the other continents. The Understand section would have to be much developed, probably making the article structure convoluted. Groups trained and armed by CIA and Cuba fighting in Africa, Iraq getting weapons in turns from the USA and the Soviet Union, these are things that did not happen in Europe, although we were aware of them, some more than others. –LPfi (talk) 19:12, 13 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I recently unhid some listings at the bottom of the Science tourism article, and they are all numbered 99. Is there a limit that stops listing numbers from going higher than this? 82.3.185.12 18:57, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Yes. The main solutions are to split the listings into more than one color (which is what we did, for instance, in United States National Monuments) or split the article. —Granger (talk · contribs) 19:15, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I noticed this phenomenon when I was reading Interstate 5. Nelson Ricardo (talk) 20:17, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

The listing template can't handle 3 digit numbers SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 21:32, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I was just wondering if I should add a code containing 2-4 letters. l to each barncompass I create. This way, it's less typing, and the use of slangs (e.g. Kiwi) are close to zero. I've done this to Australian State ones (e.g. BCNSW or BCSA). While there may be duplicates like SA meaning South Australia or South Africa (which can be RSA). This plan doesn't include the original one and Vat's continent barncompasses which can be left alone. Should I do this, or is it too confusing? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 05:48, 15 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

And to clarify, these codes are mostly derived from internet codes. So BCCA will go to Canada and not California. That can have BCCAL. Washington would have to be BCWASH. (WA taken up by Western Australia) SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 11:56, 15 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Somehow I thought barncompass is something special to "give"... If you plan to spread them so much you can't be even bothered to write a few appreciation words manually, then what's the point? You can also just click "thanks" in the page history, you know... :) -- andree.sk(talk) 06:51, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

No, that's not the point. While I do not mind typing a few words, knowing each barncompass is difficult. For example, BCCA is easily identifiable as Canada. And if you realise, I only chose to expand this, as I feel like there's not enough thankfulness here. And a personalised one is always a much more appreciative one, rather than a simple one. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 06:55, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Andree.sk: I explained the idea on my talk page, it is not removing the words typed after the barncompass, but to write the type of barncompass quicker as a lot more have been created recently. 82.3.185.12 18:01, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

tbh, I'd actually prefer a variable style barncompass (the idea that you explained). The problem comes when the original BC. So for example if the original one is meant to be blank, {{Barncompass|reason here}} and when you introduce the variables (e.g. {{Barncompass|AU|reason here}}), that can make it confusing. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 08:27, 18 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@SHB2000: Couldn't you just name the variable "Original"? Another option would be to number them (original: 1, Australian, 2 etc.) and put a list of numbers of the Template:Barncompass page. 82.3.185.12 15:06, 19 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I don't like having to look up codes, and I suppose others do neither. What about checking whether there is a second parameter and treat the first one depending on that? I suppose there haven't been any second parameters before. –LPfi (talk) 15:14, 19 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

But if you leave it blank, it'll come up as an error. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 21:26, 19 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Depending on your code. It should handle both variants. –LPfi (talk) 05:46, 20 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

There are multiple nominations on this page, it would be helpful if some users could leave comments on them. 82.3.185.12 19:43, 15 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I tagged two articles with {{merge}}, and they show up at Wikivoyage:Requests for comment#Merge proposals, but as this happens without editing that page, I believe it does not show up on the Watchlist of interested parties, so here is your official notice. I believe that Talk:Quinta do Lago and Talk:Vilamoura should be merged and redirected to Loulé. Please discuss if you wish to do so. Thanks! Nelson Ricardo (talk) 03:42, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I noticed the toilet section in Manilla (New South Wales)#Public toilets. Do we include toilets? Doesn't that just make an article dull? And considering Manilla's highlight is a cemetery, which is dull, wouldn't this make it more dull? I know that Manilla would have been the most controversial article this year, but I have not seen a public toilet section on any other article. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 10:21, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Edit: This was the article with the litter bin dispute, for those that are unaware.

It depends on the article, but they can be good to include, yes. This information may be dull, but it's very useful when you need it. —Granger (talk · contribs) 10:41, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Manilla is a tiny town. It's not hard to find. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 10:45, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

We have directives where to put that type of information in Wikivoyage:Where you can stick it. And dull ... we have Toilets as an article. --FredTC (talk) 10:48, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

To be honest, it makes sense for large towns or cities. But this is just a small one. I'm not against the WV:ABC page, but really? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 10:57, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Yes, you are right. The section "Cope" does not appear in Wikivoyage:Quick small city article template. --FredTC (talk) 11:04, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Just because "Cope" is not an obligatory section of the small city article template doesn't mean it can't be added when appropriate. I don't take a position on toilets, though, except that if they're truly easy to find, there's probably no reason to list them, and if they're not so easy to find and the last toilets within x-number of kilometres, they should be mentioned. It might be, in fact, that the best compromise is to mention that they're the last toilets in x kilometres and not have full listings for them, but I would leave these decisions to the expertise of Australians and anyone else familiar with this area of Australia (and that wouldn't be me). Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:09, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

That's either User:DaGizza or retired User:KevRobbSCO. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 11:11, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

we know what KevRobb's opinion is. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:11, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

While I appreciate his content, I sometimes think his articles are overly complicated. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 08:23, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Maybe if it's dull, then you need to consider your writing style.

In the instant case, I'd keep at least the one labeled as being "wheelchair accessible" and the one labeled as having "parking". I think that would be useful information to any person traveling through the town. In particular, the 'patterns' for public toilets are opaque to people from other countries. I could tell you, as an American, that if you're driving across the US, you should expect to find free toilets (also trash cans) at most gas stations, large rest stops, and fast food restaurants with an indoor seating area. I suspect that the pattern is different in other countries. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:22, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Toilets, and litter bins are very easy to find in Australia, and even easier than the US (at least, the west coast). This was done to prevent people pissing in the bush, but unlike Europe, all toilets at servos (gas/fuel stations) are free. And I have not seen a servo or a public toilet without litter bins, making the complete litter bin a few months ago unnecessary. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 08:00, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I would concur with WAID, even though public toilets are quite accessible here, for reasons of disability accessibility. It's useful to specifically call out when there are disability accommodations, as disabled travellers can't necessarily expect to find them or have any sort of consistency in where they are, especially in rural areas. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 05:51, 18 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Problem with Wikivoyage's template in Portuguese, anyone know who could help? pt:Wikivoyage:Itens da lista de acomodação.--Felipe da Fonseca (talk) 13:56, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Felipe da Fonseca: I won't be able to assist with anything template-related, but it would be really helpful if you could give as much detail of the problem as possible, so people reading know whether they can help or not.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 14:57, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

ThunderingTyphoons! hi: the first variable, "name", does not appear on the page, it is hidden. Thanks,--Felipe da Fonseca (talk) 15:02, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Felipe da Fonseca:, fixed :) -- andree.sk(talk) 18:40, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Many thanks, @Andree.sk! I had noticed a while back but failed to say anything (hangs head in vergonha). It was the main reason I did not contribute on pt, and I suspect that may be part of why that community is practically dead. While I'm here, I'll mention that I don't see an Edit link on listings. You can see this at pt:Utilizador:Nricardo/Sandbox. Thanks again! Nelson Ricardo (talk) 19:26, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, one more thing: the images to add listings from the editor toolbar look messed up. Nelson Ricardo (talk) 19:30, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Andree.sk Thank you very much. I will try to follow that wiki and reactivate the community. --Felipe da Fonseca (talk) 19:35, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I'll try to summon Andyrom75, he's the local "listing editor" guru :) Perhaps he'll know right away - it seems it's done by some javascript magic that processes span's with class listing-metadata-items, so maybe you have old listing editor JS?. And good luck restarting pt.WV to you all! I can imagine it won't be easy, considering how hard it is making HebVoy lift off... :( -- andree.sk(talk) 20:20, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

andree, I haven't understood which is the current issue.

Ricardo (or anyone else), is there a test page where I can clearly the issue? --Andyrom75 (talk) 21:46, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Andyrom75, please let me know if pt:Utilizador:Nricardo/Sandbox isn't sufficient. It has sleep (durma), eat (coma), and see (veja) listings. Thanks! Nelson Ricardo (talk) 21:53, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Andyrom75 the 'edit' button in pt.wikivoyage doesn't show up next to listings. It seemed it could be some old/improperly configured JS code? If you have time/will to check it... :) -- andree.sk(talk) 07:03, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

andree, Ricardo, thanks, now I got the problem :-)

The first thing I've seen is that pt:voy use a very old version of listing editor. I suggest to use the last one. Since I'm not an admin on pt:voy I'll try to use the right one in my personal page (without any kind of translation). If it works, an admin can translate and move the script in the most appropriate location. --Andyrom75 (talk) 15:11, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Ricardo, see the pages I've created. Replicate it on pt:voy and you'll see that everything will work as in pt:Utilizador:Andyrom75/Sandbox :-) PS I can see the [edit] link in your sandbox but listing editor doesn't work becasue currently my script is configured for en:voy, you have to customized it first. --Andyrom75 (talk) 15:55, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Andyrom75, Thank you for looking into this. I cannot see the Edit link in either your sandbox nor mine. Could it be a preferences setting? Or maybe the custom code applies to your account only? Do you see it from a private/incognito window? (At any rate, I'm just an end user without special privileges, so I won't be able to act on anything that needs extra rights. Also, I'm mostly clueless on the code.) Nelson Ricardo (talk) 22:52, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Ricardo, sorry for my late reply. As previously said, I'm not an admin on pt:voy, so I can't change pt:voy config files. I've added the new script on my pt:voy account, if you want to test it, copy the same on your account. However, if you want to allow all the user to benefit of such script, you have to engage DARIO SEVERI that is the only active admin on pt:voy. --Andyrom75 (talk) 08:11, 24 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, @Andyrom75. I'll try to ping him here.

Olá, @DARIO SEVERI. My written Portuguese is assim-assim, so I hope it's alright if I address you in English. Please see the above conversation. Lusophone Wikivoyagers, including myself, would be grateful if you would please investigate and resolve this issue. Obrigado! Nelson Ricardo (talk) 08:43, 24 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Andyrom75, @Nricardo: and @Felipe da Fonseca:, I became an administrator there to help mainly to eliminate spam because I understand very little of the technical part. I read the above discussion and the difficulty is it on the pt:Wikivoyage:Itens da lista de acomodação? I created this sandbox there and despite using an old system it seems that it still works. In order not to disturb the colleagues here, I suggest discussing the subject there. Regards. DARIO SEVERI (talk) 10:22, 24 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Felipe da Fonseca: Where do I apply to become an administrator? I will help you there. I will soon realize a project with implications on Wikivoyage and I also want to be able to control things quickly (see: meta:Wikisul User Group/Projects). --Felipe da Fonseca (talk) 11:05, 24 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

There is another problematic error: when one opens the source code editor, there are some links in the taskbar to add the common templates automatically, but they appear, today, disfigured and it is not possible to understand their functions, can someone help?--Felipe da Fonseca (talk) 16:15, 24 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Guys, please, there is another strange problem: how do one control the categories? They seem to be added automatically... but are you adding categories in English... how do one add and remove them manually? Thanks.--Felipe da Fonseca (talk) 23:26, 24 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Felipe da Fonseca, Most categories here are added by template. Look at Caldas da Rainha, for example. At the bottom there's a {{starcity}} template. It adds not only the box at the end of the article but also the following categories: "Star cities", "Star articles", "City articles", and "All destination articles". {{IsPartOf|Oeste}} adds the breadcrumb trail at the top of the page, as well as the "Oeste category". {{mapframe}} in the Get around section adds a dynamic map to the page and the adds the "Has mapframe" category. Each listing template adds a category such as "Has see listing", etc. You can get more info. at Wikivoyage:Categories (note: it's not up to date). Nelson Ricardo (talk) 23:48, 24 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

So I need to edit and change the templates? Correct? And how a add the phabricator task? Thanks, --Felipe da Fonseca (talk) 23:55, 24 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

w:Wikipedia:Bug reports and feature requests Nelson Ricardo (talk) 00:00, 25 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Nelson Ricardo 2500 It seems that the categories are not being added by default, so I copied the whole page to my test area and they are gone: see here.--Felipe da Fonseca (talk) 00:13, 25 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I looked at the code for "Predefinição:Cidade guia" (even though I'm no expert). It looks like categories are added in the Main namespace, so they won't appear on "Utilizador:" pages. Nelson Ricardo (talk) 00:24, 25 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

They are claiming that the problem with the categories is on this page. here--Felipe da Fonseca (talk) 08:31, 26 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Felipe, Dario, Ricardo, I renew my suggestion to implement the script in my pt:voy sandbox, into the Mediawiki config file, and afterwards, to apply the translation into Portuguese. Stop using the old unmaintained script, will facilitate to get support outside pt:voy. --Andyrom75 (talk) 10:55, 27 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

here? Just answer there, thanks. Andyrom75.--Felipe da Fonseca (talk) 11:09, 27 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Felipe, Andyrom75, Ricardo ... there is a colleague who is currently solving some of the problems there, he has a lot of knowledge of the technical part. DARIO SEVERI (talk) 12:57, 27 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

DARIO SEVERI who? --Felipe da Fonseca (talk) 13:07, 27 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

He is Edu, he is one of the administrators at Wikinews. DARIO SEVERI (talk) 13:10, 27 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

For those interested this discussion continued here.--Felipe da Fonseca (talk) 18:34, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Admins with technical knowledge (plus any global admins or stewards who might be reading), please have a look at Abuse Filter 39, to discuss how we might combat one vandal more effectively. To the rest of the readership: I think you can understand why we can't share technical details of things we're doing to try to improve your reading experience in this way. However if you have technical expertise, let us know. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:28, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Ikan Kekek - I'm not sure about the context in the linked discussion, but you need anything specific in this area I have enough technical knowledge to try and help. Andrewssi2 (talk) 21:11, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Ikan Kekek: I know something about abuse filters, depends on the context. I cannot edit the filter however. Leaderboard (talk) 21:14, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

The context is provided in my last edit of the comments about the filter at the link, and I would prefer not to go into specifics here if it's not essential to do so. Leaderboard, are you able to read the comments and reply to them at the link? Let us know if you need any more permissions. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:37, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Ikan Kekek: I can read the comments, but not reply to them at the filter 39 link. Leaderboard (talk) 21:41, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

What permissions would you need to be able to reply? Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:47, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Is there a way that we can give all global sysops the right to edit comments on abuse filter threads, and perhaps to edit the filters themselves? Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:08, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I don't know if there is a technical solution, but perhaps we could have an "emergency temporary sysop" as a workaround. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:25, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I guess we'd need a steward to create such an option? It's not available to me. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:06, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Ikan Kekek: I could look into seeing if I can get meta:abuse filter maintainer, or otherwise you need to get consensus and file a phabricator task for an equivalent local role. Also, I'm not a global sysop - global sysops can edit abuse filters (which I can't). Or I can simply run for sysop here if you want. Leaderboard (talk) 06:34, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Not a bad idea. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:45, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Given that this is not the first time I've been asked to help with filters elsewhere, I've asked for the abuse filter maintainer right at Meta. Let's see how that goes first - I don't want to have to request sysop for such a narrow (and temporary) purpose if possible. Leaderboard (talk) 07:03, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

OK, great. Please keep us updated. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:24, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

For the original question, I now edited the filter. –LPfi (talk) 09:47, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thank you! Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:03, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Ikan Kekek: Not looking positive (as of writing 3/3 support/oppose) - a former Wikivoyage admin has opposed my candidature citing one mistake where I was unintentionally rude to a user (in July 2020, which I freely accepted as a mistake), and others have opposed me as a result. Assuming failure, I am not exactly sure how else I can assist other than running here for sysop (which I'm reluctant for various reasons like being hit with hat-collecting and so on). One option would be to communicate by email or a mailing list or IRC, all of which I'm OK to manage if my AFM proposal does not pass. Leaderboard (talk) 17:47, 19 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I kept accidentally triggering the filter earlier, and it kept disallowing my edits. Is there any way to avoid being caught by this filter? Thanks, 82.3.185.12 17:56, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I cannot ping an IP address, but the answer would simply exclude this IP address. I cannot do this; a GS, AFM or a local sysop will need to do this change for you. Leaderboard (talk) 18:52, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I cannot see the filter, so more than admin rights is needed. The edits seemed innocent – nothing I'd imagine would trigger false positives, at least not in all of them – does the filter act on something that was on the talk page from before? That is usually a less good idea. –LPfi (talk) 20:38, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@LPfi: Ah I can because I have meta:AFH. In that case you'll usually need a Meta sysop to fix this - I've asked them to fix it. But IP address, I strongly urge you to create an account, as it's difficult to work around this issue all the time, since a lot of abuse comes from IP addresses. Leaderboard (talk) 07:51, 18 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I agree that it'd be nice if 82.3.185.12 registered, but on the other hand it is good that false positives hit an established user, who complains instead of just giving up. Otherwise we might never know. I'd like to be able to edit classified as less privileged to see what I would be caught by, thus being able to review some deficiencies of the filters – but without tweaks in the software it is more trouble than it's worth for me. –LPfi (talk) 08:32, 18 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

comment I don't think that it is necessary to edit the global abuse filter for this false positive. It happens. That said when I see the edit "I have moved your old userpage to this one, feel free to revert. ~~~~" by an IP address, I would be wanting that to be triggering filters IMO. Billinghurst (talk) 08:36, 18 May 2021 (UTC)