Hello HerrGutmannsWiki! Welcome to Wikivoyage.

To help get you started contributing, we've created a tips for new contributors page, full of helpful links about policies and guidelines and style, as well as some important information on copyleft and basic stuff like how to edit a page.

If you are a Wikipedian, then you may notice some differences in policies and the style of our articles. These include:

• NPOV → be fair (not quite the same thing!) - PAY ATTENTION TO THIS PART PLEASE!
• be bold → plunge forward
• Village pump → travellers' pub
• External links → We do not use a separate external links section, but incorporate primary links only into the text itself.
• sandbox → graffiti wall
• stub tagging → article status

It may also be very useful for you to check out Wikivoyage:Welcome, Wikipedians. If you need help, take a look at Wikivoyage:Help, or else post a message in the Wikivoyage:Travellers' pub, as a reply below or on my talk page. Thanks for contributing!

Please have a look at this edit summary. No offense in saying your remarks weren't very well phrased, as I salute you for doing as well as you did in what is probably not your first language. But more importantly, if you think these kinds of detailed criticisms of our phrasebooks need to be stated on a list article, I suggest you start a discussion on that article's talk page.

Best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:18, 13 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Re: this edit: That's not an English expression I know as a native English speaker. Do you mean "Make way"? Also, don't edit war. Instead, start a thread at Talk:China, so as to get to a consensus. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:49, 19 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sorry! I may have made a mistake. I tried to make a better English translation for the Chinglish sign. I thought "keep way" was a good expression, as my native language is not English. The Chinese written on the sign briefly means to tell the people do not go into the water to stay safe. Than what is the better way? HerrGutmannsWiki (talk) 10:02, 19 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

In addition, I would like to tell you,

1. I have just a few contributions on English wikis.
2. I am from China, thus I can contribute more around the articles of China.
3. Are you a special bureaucrat for me, inasmuch you also pay attention on me?

HerrGutmannsWiki (talk) 10:08, 19 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

No, there's no such thing as a "special bureaucrat". I just monitor recent changes often. Anyway, it sounds like the meaning of that sign is something like "Danger! Stay out of the water." Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:33, 19 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I trust you on these edits, but you should really type a brief edit summary when you make non-obvious edits like that. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:19, 8 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

I think this should be noted for the record, lest someone decides to prematurely make HerrGutmannsWiki an autopatroller. As a one-time action, it's far from an unforgivable sin or something, but don't do it again, and thanks. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:47, 17 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

• Likewise, they shouldn't go erasing other people's work without discussing it first. It will be reverted every time. Ibaman (talk) 17:33, 18 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

  Especially don't when your only reasoning is citing policies we do not use on Wikivoyage such as NPOV (afaik only a thing on Wikipedia, Wikibooks, Wiktionary and Wikinews). //shb (t | c | m) 03:26, 19 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Ibaman @Ikan Kekek,

dear Sir/Madam,

I understand that I may always violate the rules in Wikivoyage, thus I apologise for the ignorance on rules. But I have to confirm that the use of undo is used too much.

I intend to disclaim that I will never put any contents which I think it is obviously wrong or unsuitable.

Postscript: I saw that one of my contribution is reverted in 2 minutes of @Ibaman. This is absolutely very strange. HerrGutmannsWiki (talk) 20:53, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

please acquaint yourself with WV:Policies, WV:MoS, consensus, wycsi, WV:Be fair, WV:Tone. Ibaman (talk) 21:14, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Or to use prose without these valuable links, which you absolutely should go to and read: if you want to make an edit that's likely to be controversial, which is particularly likely if you delete an entire section or several substantive paragraphs from an article, start a discussion on the article's talk page first, or at least do so if you are reverted. Definitely never edit war, because that just wastes everyone's time and would get you blocked if you continued.

In terms of a section on etiquette, it doesn't seem like a good idea to just delete the whole thing, but pointing out the errors you see in it and suggesting an edited version could be really valuable, and I encourage you to do that, in this case on Talk:Driving in Germany. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:46, 20 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

We cannot ignore that on Wikivoyage much information are too old or even false. We should do more on solving those problems.

I will not make a big deletion but if I affirm the description is fake, not suitable, violating the regulation or even be against to ethics, I will do this. HerrGutmannsWiki (talk) 21:55, 22 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

No-one is ignoring that. We just want you to specify what is wrong and suggest an edited version of the section. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:52, 22 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Dear @Ikan Kekek,

I am sorry to @ you again. Is this account a account which has made some serious problem? It looks like someone is monitoring it because a revert is made in 1 minute.

In addition, I invite you to prove why this is suitable to exist in the UNESCO list article, [sic]

The process of delisting a site is a lengthy political endeavor. Mere continued existence of a UNESCO listing should not be taken as evidence the underlying site (or its landmark heritage) still exists. UNESCO's World Heritage Committee updates a list of endangered sites annually (see List of World Heritage in Danger on Wikipedia) as a political tool to pressure individual countries to take specific conservation measures or to refrain from certain actions that are seen as endangering the world heritage site. Sites such as Hatra in Iraq and Palmyra in Syria remain listed as UNESCO World Heritage (and as World Heritage in Danger) in 2017, even though warring belligerents have largely obliterated anything of historic value. Conversely, Taiwan is denied UN recognition on entirely political grounds and has no UNESCO world heritage listings, despite the existence of eleven sites which would otherwise be suitable candidates.

In some cases, a UNESCO listing has irrevocably harmed a site. The term UNESCO-cide, coined by Italian writer Marco d'Eramo, describes a pattern where listing a tiny fishing village or historic community to protect the buildings from developers creates an unsustainable influx of travellers. As gentrification and hyper-commercialisation price the original people and their subsistence fishery out of the community, existing structures are repurposed as travel lodging or tacky souvenir shops. UNESCO pays lip service to sustainable travel, but tends to underestimate its own impact on tiny, vulnerable communities. Conversely, some listings of UNESCO sites as "in danger" are arguably political responses to actions or non-actions of local authorities which are hardly capable of destroying or seriously endangering the site. The United States and Israel left UNESCO in protest after their recognition of Palestine, and are thus not eligible to propose new sites for the list; however, the United States rejoined in 2023. HerrGutmannsWiki (talk) 16:35, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Wikivoyage has a Wikivoyage:Recent changes patrol that makes it easy to see what the most recent edits on the site are, and is a routine thing here and has analogues on other wikis.

I can't answer for an edit I didn't make, but I would suggest starting a thread on the relevant article's talk page so that the pros and cons of including this section can be considered. Don't be reluctant to start such discussion threads. Individual admins don't decide what content there is on this site, which instead works by consensus. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:06, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

I do not intend to join a discussion on this. Using your knowledge and experience on the regulation, could you explain to me if the text above violates it? HerrGutmannsWiki (talk) 17:09, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

I'm not an expert on UNESCO, so if there's something wrong in that passage, I wouldn't know what it was. It reads well to me. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:37, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

I actually don't know the user who rolled back your edit. It's precisely in cases like this, in order to avoid edit warring, that discussions should be started on the relevant article's talk pages, but I would say their rollback without comment was out of order. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:59, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

I looked at the article history more. The reason your edit was rolled back is that you have been persistently edit warring. Irrespective of whether you are right or wrong, you have to stop edit warring and start a discussion on the relevant talk page or you absolutely will be blocked for wasting everyone's time. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:04, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

The text that @HerrGutmannsWiki wants to remove contains some information that is relevant to Responsible travel. I am copying it there under "Cultural Impact". Hope nobody has a problem with that.... Mrkstvns (talk) 18:48, 27 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

It very much is related to responsible travel and sustainable travel. //shb (t | c | m) 04:26, 28 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

I disagree. I think this information is not suitable to be in Wikivoyage while it can be put in the Wikipedia article. HerrGutmannsWiki (talk) 17:50, 1 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Ikan Kekek, please do an explanation, if someone is professional and sees something which is seriously incorrect while this person is professional in the area. Can that person delete it? HerrGutmannsWiki (talk) 17:56, 1 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

It's been explained to you numerous times how Wikivoyage operates based on discussion and consensus. Either your English comprehension is way worse than it seems or you've chosen to waste everyone's time by ignoring the information and advice you've been given and instead continue to edit war and try to make this a personal discussion instead of a thread on the relevant article's talk page. I won't be replying again to similar queries by you. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:06, 1 March 2025 (UTC)Reply

Let's be perfectly clear here: WV:UTP applies to all talk pages, including yours. The first bullet under etiquette quite clearly states: "The rule is to never change or delete someone else's posts on a talk page, even to correct spelling or grammar - unless it is to remove comments that violate Wikivoyage or Wikimedia policies."

Herr Gutmann, I would insist that you either familiarise yourself with the workings of Wikivoyage, or just don't edit here. Whatever you assume the policy is, or whatever you want it to be, does not matter. Your rules, and your reading of the rules, do not outrank those of Wikivoyage. Edit warring over them is a pointless endeavour.
― Wauteurz (talk) 16:56, 3 March 2025 (UTC)Reply