Wikivoyage talk:Travel Tracker

You are invited to the discussion at Wikivoyage:Travellers'_pub#"My_Travel_Map"_is_a_privacy_nightmare. Cheers, Sdkb ^talk 23:37, 27 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Swept in from the pub

IRL procrastination, a random shower thought for better user retention, and 100 or so Gemini prompts (i.e. AI/vibecoding): the results of that led me to create Wikivoyage:Travel Tracker. It's a personal tool that any logged in user can use to track which countries they've visited. No scripts that need to be installed, just go to Special:MyPage/Visited and check it out for yourself.

Why? Part of what got me hooked into Jetpunk was exactly their country tracker. Many people use online sites to track their travels nowadays. The idea is so that casual users – users that occasionally edit Wikivoyage but only ever so often, perhaps choose to use this travel tracker, then are immediately incentivised to update their travel maps after visiting somewhere new, hopefully also updating some actual articles in the process.

The tool still has many teething issues, some that will take time to fix, but it's usable for the most part. Alongside Andree's trip planner, I hope this too can be added to the topbar. I'm also planning on perhaps creating a similar tool for US/Indian/Mexican/Brazilian states, depending on how things go. Any feedback/fixes appreciated and welcome. :)

//shb (t | c | m) 11:43, 9 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

This works well for me at first glance! (I found one glitch, "Bosnia and Herzegovina" isn't shading for me.) It would be fun to have a way to note regions and cities as well, then I'd probably use it as a "Places I've visited"/"Articles I've worked on" section on my User Page. Gerode (talk) 16:28, 9 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

The glitch is unfortunately a long-standing property of kartographer - it here are too many regions, it may not display all of them. Also, sometimes the OSM data import breaks. E.g. Thailand shape is quite broken currently, too. -- andree 19:07, 9 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Yeah for the first I've found usually just a hard cache solves that issue. OSM data import breaks yeah I have no idea how to fix that (similar issue with Singapore too). //shb (t | c | m) 22:47, 9 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Created phab:T422902 for the Thailand/Singapore issue – seems to be a pretty widespread problem across WMF projects so I def think it's worth this getting looked into by more technical people than us. //shb (t | c | m) 03:59, 10 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Also have given the tracker a little bit of a revamp in terms of style + few finishing touches (like a numerical counter). //shb (t | c | m) 05:05, 10 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

For some reason Q38 (Italy) was added twice for me, using purely the editor. Otherwise, nice work :-) -- andree 19:05, 9 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Ah, I see the issue (Estonia mistakenly had the Wikidata item of Italy) – fixed! :) //shb (t | c | m) 22:51, 9 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

It's a fun tool. To make it more interesting, you could also provide an option to break it down by region (state, province, etc.) for the top ten countries by population or area. Gizza ^(roam) 03:23, 10 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

I've added this tool to the topbar – should work in both vector 2010 and vector 2022, but not skins older than that. //shb (t | c | m) 08:51, 12 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Wow, that feature works, on Temporary Accounts too. ~2026-69216-3 (talk) 12:36, 12 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Since temporary accounts only lasts for 90 days from initial creation, @~2026-69216-3 you may want to create an account soon because your current temporary account will expire by the end of this month. As for the tool itself, I noticed that your shaded countries don't show up on my end. On the broader picture, I propose that we limit this tool to registered accounts. Otherwise we will potentially have tonnes of abandoned Temporary Account map pages that people can't access after 3 months. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 04:45, 13 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

I'd go further and say that I don't think temporary accounts should be able to create userspace pages at all for the same reason you mention. Maybe I'll start a separate discussion for that sometime later. But yeah @~2026-69216-3 in your case, would recommend doing that (and then perhaps moving your map to your userspace under a registered account). //shb (t | c | m) 06:17, 13 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

If they can't create a User: space page, then they'll have a harder time telling us some things that we want to know (ordinary user page content, like languages spoken), and they won't be able to create a sandbox for testing, which could lead to making more mistakes in the mainspace.

Also, at the moment, this is not a big problem. Almost none are being created, and only 14 exist in total.

When we reach the point of having, say, 100 or 500 or some other large number of such pages, I think we could have a generous deletion policy for User: pages, but I don't think we need a wholesale ban. By "generous", I mean that if it's more than, say, a year old and just test edits (or actually problematic in some way), then any admin should feel free to delete it. I do not mean that an admin marks their calendar to search and delete all User: pages because it just annoys the admin's sense of tidiness that those contributors were allowed to create pages in the User: space. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:41, 13 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hmm that's true, you do have a point especially because "Draft:" isn't a namespace here. I'll try to think of how else we could solve that issue. //shb (t | c | m) 21:52, 13 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

That is okay to me. ~2026-69216-3 (talk) 00:40, 14 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Still any particular reason why you haven't just created an account btw? //shb (t | c | m) 00:42, 14 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

For me, I have a preference. I would rather edit as temporary user, other than creating the registered or named account. I do not plan to stick around as much in the future. ~2026-69216-3 (talk) 20:32, 14 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

I didn't propose to restrict Temporary Accounts from creating any "User:" pages. I am only proposing restriction on TAs creating the "/visited" pages because they can't stick around past 90 days. From a technical standpoint, is there a way to display a message only to TAs that "hey, you can use this tool locally but if you want to truly save it or show it to friends, you need to register an account"? OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 15:06, 14 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

I went to see if I could embed this on my main User page. Could you add an easy way to suppress the checkboxes, maybe by a flag on the VisitedMap template? Not only would that make this map embeddable, it would make it harder for me to check boxes on other people's pages! Gerode (talk) 21:14, 12 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Gerode: You should be able to now embed this on your userpage (just by transcluding {{User:Gerode/Visited}}). Suppressing the checkboxes I've got planned, probably using the abuse filter (since there are some cases where I think it's okay and I'd rather a warn system over a complete disallow). //shb (t | c | m) 23:36, 12 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Is there a limit to how many countries the tracker can show? On my map, a bunch of random countries (the UK, France, Spain, Philippines, Laos) are not showing up even though they're selected. Asamboi (talk) 03:12, 13 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Usually it's a cache issue – Special:Purge should do the trick (they appear for me on your map). //shb (t | c | m) 03:39, 13 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

I would recommend adding a "refresh" button which functions like it's a purge, with a line telling user to click on the refresh button if the map doesn't update or have countries missing. We can't expect new users to know a special page. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 13:49, 15 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

I like this idea (have always thought about it). It also pairs well with the world editing challenge. But at first save Australia and New Zealand weren't shaded until I refresh the page. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 04:35, 13 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Echoing other comments, this is a nice little gadget, I tried it out the other day. An idea for how to develop it further would be an additional layer for countries the user would like to visit (maybe in green or red?). In addition to Singapore which was mentioned above, also the main part of Morocco does not want to show up. --Ypsilon (talk) 16:26, 13 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

So far I've fixed Thailand and HK on OSM. Singapore should be easy to fix, and I'll have to look into what's causing the issue for Serbia and Morocco. //shb (t | c | m) 21:51, 13 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

SG now also fixed. //shb (t | c | m) 02:05, 14 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Uganda is not shown. --RolandUnger (talk) 05:39, 14 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

It seems to show for me – you might need to clear your cache or give it a refresh. //shb (t | c | m) 05:45, 14 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Serbia's mapping to Kosovo. Let's not start the next world war shall we? :) OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 17:20, 14 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

I tried to fix it last night – ig a waiting game to see how long it'll take for this change to be mirrored here. :P //shb (t | c | m) 04:13, 15 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

And Morocco. //shb (t | c | m) 12:32, 15 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

@OhanaUnited: Both Serbia and Morocco now fixed. //shb (t | c | m) 02:43, 16 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

mexico, belize, panama, costa rica, Brazil, Argentina, Tunisia, Spain, Portugal (and probably a few more I have missed are not working for me). Is there a limit to how many you can add? Jdlrobson (talk) 03:10, 18 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

@SHB2000 @Andree.sk I debugged this some more and I am seeing a call to https://maps.wikimedia.org/geoshape?getgeojson for every single country in the map. So for 195 countries, the browser tries to open 195 concurrent or sequential connections.

This architecture doesn't scale with our traffic and is currently triggering 429 requests which is likely why many of the countries are not showing for people. This also increases the risk that this feature could interfere with tools and other features on that site that may in future get rate limited.

Can we look to get this fixed sometime next week, given this risk here? I suggest we use a single request with a pipe-separated or comma-separated list of Q-ids if that's possible or at minimum batch the queries with setTimeout and caching using mw.storage for subsequent requests. Jdlrobson (talk) 19:35, 19 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

If it's possible to fix this, that would be appreciated (I'm not entirely sure how to make it such – I'm also a bit preoccupied this week and life irl has been quite hazy, but I'll give it a shot). //shb (t | c | m) 22:08, 19 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

I've tried batching Module:VisitedMap – does that perhaps solve some of the issues? //shb (t | c | m) 04:14, 20 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Yes! That seems to have done the trick! Thank you for the speedy fix! Jdlrobson (talk) 04:20, 20 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Awesome! Glad to know that works. :) //shb (t | c | m) 04:24, 20 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Do you know the reason why the link to the travel map doesn't appear on Traveller's pub page? It shows up on all other pages (Wikivoyage namespace, mainspace, user page space, etc.) OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 17:02, 11 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

I can see it in the 'usual spot' (under the user icon), but only when you scroll all the way up. When the icons transform into the 'top bar', the submenu doesn't contain the entry. -- andree 19:30, 11 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

This is on vector 2022 I take it? //shb (t | c | m) 22:40, 11 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

New bug I've noticed, once again with the Kartographer extension: for some reason, Germany and the Netherlands don't show up for anyone, but it works perfectly fine using {{mapshape}}. I took a cursory look and there was nothing I could really pinpoint that was causing this issue, so maybe a phabricator task is needed? //shb (t | c | m) 11:57, 31 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Interesting, the issue seems to have fixed itself overnight. Kartographer is weird man... //shb (t | c | m) 00:27, 1 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Swept in from the pub

It looks like we introduced Wikivoyage:Travel Tracker in April, which appears via "My Travel Map" in the user menu at top right. I clicked and tried it out, only to realize too late that it logs a public edit with my choices. Given how some countries have been known to ban travelers who have visited other countries with which they have disputes, this seems like exceptionally bad information to be making public. And it's far worse when there is no warning whatsoever to users that the information is going to be logged publicly (in contrast to what they might expect for a similar feature on any other site).

Sorry to be going on a rampage through all the Wikivoyage gadgets recently, but given the Wikimedia movement's focus on privacy, I think we ought to disable the gadget as a default unless this can be fixed. There needs to at minimum be a prominent warning, but even with that some users may gloss over it or not fully realize the privacy implications. Sdkb ^talk 23:33, 27 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

In much smaller issues, my other suggestions from having tried the feature:

• There should be a link to the documentation/feedback page; the only way I found Wikivoyage:Travel Tracker was by noticing the edit history, and it took a bit.
• The outlines around the countries include the countries' water territory, which makes many look like blobs. I would use the land territory only.

Cheers, Sdkb ^talk 23:35, 27 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

IMO, I don't think it's an unreasonable assumption, if you're editing a wiki, that if you're going to hit the publish changes button, it probably will be published on-wiki. Though I see xaos has fixed this in Special:Diff/216812 and probably agree it could do with a better warning (which I'll do once I have my second factor with me).

On the other hand, regarding "some countries have been known to ban travelers who have visited other countries with which they have disputes" – how many countries still do this nowadays for this to be a concern? The only one I'm aware of is several MENA countries (mainly Lebanon and Syria) banning people with Israeli stamps or visas, but that's really hard to enforce nowadays. Serbia only annuals Kosovo stamps (but they don't outright prohibit you), and Azerbaijan only does so if you have Artsakh stamps (which are no longer a thing since the country doesn't exist anymore). //shb (t | c | m) 00:31, 28 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

I wouldn't recommend trying to get into the U.S., nowadays, with stamps from Iran, North Korea, etc. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:37, 28 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Iran and NK thankfully don't give passport stamps anymore (though iirc visiting there does invalidate your visa waiver eligibility?). //shb (t | c | m) 00:50, 28 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

American here: I can't in good conscience recommend that anyone come to the United States now, until we decide that we just don't like fascism that much. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:18, 28 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

I don't think it's an unreasonable assumption, if you're editing a wiki, that if you're going to hit the publish changes button, it probably will be published on-wiki This is a reasonable assumption for people who know how wikis work, so you could argue that I should have known better. But non-editors expect our site to work the same as other sites on the internet, in which a feature like that would be private. They likely don't realize that interacting with the gadget and saving their map results in an edit at all, let alone that the edit would be public.

Doing some spot checks, many of the users of the gadget have <30 edits. In addition to whatever we decide here, we owe all of them a talk page message explaining that their map is public and how to oversight it if they don't want it to be. Sdkb ^talk 03:15, 28 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

"But non-editors expect our site to work the same as other sites on the internet, in which a feature like that would be private. They likely don't realize that interacting with the gadget and saving their map results in an edit at all" – this feature being public isn't unique to Wikivoyage either. Both Jetpunk and this feature from cmoreira (the two most prominent web country trackers on the web that I've seen people actually use widespread), also have this public. This is really not something unique to Wikivoyage. And quite frankly the privacy concerns are massively overblown – where you've visited doesn't tell all that much (and isn't PII by any means to warrant OS). //shb (t | c | m) 04:09, 28 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

I haven't looked at Jetpunk, but for cmoreira, it looks like it's public only in the sense that it generates a URL you can share. But there's no realistic way to access a URL unless you share it, and it's not tied to an account that might be under your name/have other edits, which makes it a totally different situation. In general, on the internet, features where you just "save" something (as opposed to "posting") are assumed to be private. Sdkb ^talk 04:15, 28 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Just because the internet normalises something doesn't necessarily mean it's a privacy issue on a venue where things work differently (especially on public wikis where almost everything is public and visible). Do we then ban userpages because someone someone might think it's private? What makes this different from quite frankly any userspace page? //shb (t | c | m) 04:19, 28 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Can we change the button from "Save changes" to "Publish changes"?

If you save your map, there isn't the caution that appears next normal text edits: "By clicking the "Publish changes" button, you agree to the Terms of use, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC-BY-SA 4.0 License. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license." This should probably also be added. AlasdairW (talk) 09:50, 28 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Done (though we use 3.0, not 4.0). //shb (t | c | m) 10:05, 28 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks.

I think we have an inconsistency in our license text - the bottom of a page says 3.0, but the warning when you edit says 4.0. When I have more time I will investigate further. AlasdairW (talk) 11:39, 28 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

I agree that there's privacy concern, but it's vastly overblown. We have the Commons app which reveals an editor's precise date, time and location in metadata whenever they upload a photo. That is far more precise than an editor self-selecting the list of countries on the travel map which may or may not be accurate, and the travel occurred at some unspecified time in the past. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 14:39, 7 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

I think that's more an inditement of the privacy issues with Commons than it is a defense of My Travel Map — I distinctly recall realizing that I had accidentally revealed my then-home address through a Commons upload and having to have it OSed. But the key difference to me is that, by uploading a file to Commons, there is a clear understanding that a user is publishing information publicly, whereas for My Travel Map there was no indication of that.

The By clicking the "Publish changes" button, you agree to the Terms of use, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License. text that Xaosflux added doesn't really help much — it's legalese that already appeared in the grey box, now just copied and made larger/italicized. I'd prefer to see a more plain-language disclaimer along the lines of Your edits to your map are public and will be permanently associated with your account. That might scare off some users, but, well, it ought to. Sdkb ^talk 19:57, 7 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Sdkb I'm pretty sure I went through the workflow that allowed creating a revision without ever getting the terms of use before. Are you sure this is redundant? Xaosflux (talk) 20:20, 7 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hmm, this does seem redundant now - let me check, I certainly did NOT try to make it redundant. Xaosflux (talk) 20:22, 7 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

OK, it seems that someone else added the "redundant" version, see here. It certainly does not need the TOS/Copyright twice. Xaosflux (talk) 20:24, 7 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Ah, sorry I flipped the timeline. Using small text/gray for the legal notice seems preferable, so I'd be inclined to change the spot where you added to the text I proposed above. Thoughts on that? Sdkb ^talk 16:34, 8 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Xaosflux (or @WhatamIdoing, as you propose a similar thing below), seeing no objections, could you implement? Sdkb ^talk 14:58, 12 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Sdkb I removed the duplicate disclaimer, and updated the remaining one to match CC-BY-SA-4 as used on the rest of the site. Xaosflux (talk) 12:43, 13 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Would it make sense to add the extension https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:DeleteUserPages here, so that users could remove their pages (I guess including history)? I would welcome this... -- andree 08:44, 3 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

I've not been a fan of that extension for two reasons: a) user talk pages are almost never deleted on Wikivoyage, not even on user request (unless it has OS material), and having this extension prevents someone actually familiar with policies double checking; b) this allows banned or blocked users to delete their own userpages with nothing stopping them. //shb (t | c | m) 10:07, 3 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

It would solve the current topic - plus I don't see why we should force users to keep their userpages around. I would expect the admins can still access the content? -- andree 12:31, 3 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Here is a draft of a MassMessage that could be sent to the 151 affected users:

Heading: Your privacy and use of the Travel Tracker

Message: In April, Wikivoyage introduced the Travel Tracker (also known as "My Travel Map") in the user menu at top right. It has recently come to our attention that the initial version of the tool did not make clear that maps created through it are public and are associated with your account. You are among the users who used the tool and published a map. If you wish to have your map deleted, you may do so by emailing a request for oversight. We apologize for this matter.

How does that sound? Sdkb ^talk 20:20, 7 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

I oppose a massmessage – this is an overblown concern for something that was pretty obvious for a wiki. And once again, I fail to see how this constitutes as PII. //shb (t | c | m) 22:08, 7 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

A massmessage is ok as the initial version of the tool was misleading, but I don't think that oversight is required. "If you wish to have your map deleted, use the Edit tab on the map page and add {{speedy}} ." AlasdairW (talk) 22:50, 7 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

This quite frankly isn't an appropriate use of massmessage and I would argue a massmessage like this needs broader discussion and consensus. I still fail to see how the tool was misleading (this is a wiki – anyone should know that almost nothing is "private" on a wiki) or even how this is a privacy concern beyond the very obvious fearmongering for concerns that are almost non-existent in today's world. //shb (t | c | m) 22:57, 7 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

The point is that not everything you do is publicly logged. We don't publicly log the pages you visit, for one. Some tools save their data on the user's computer, and this could very well have worked that way. I don't buy that privacy isn't a concern because this is a wiki. Rather the opposite – the WMF sites respect privacy much more than most other sites, which raises expectations. And the map really is problematic if you didn't intend to do that info public. –LPfi (talk) 23:06, 7 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

None of this answered any of my points of how this is a privacy concern. //shb (t | c | m) 23:41, 7 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

anyone should know that almost nothing is "private" on a wiki I think you vastly overestimate how informed most internet users are — if you asked the average person on the street what a wiki is, I think you'd get answers like "a shorthand for Wikipedia". New users on Wikipedia quite often do not realize that their contribution history is logged.

And there's a difference between knowing that most edits on a wiki are public and realizing that this particular feature that might be private on a typical website is public plus connecting that mentally to a privacy concern. Remember, I didn't start this thread because of a hypothetical; I initially failed to make that last connection myself. If you'd asked me before I used the tool whether it would make a public edit, I'd probably have guessed yes, but without that prompt I tried out the feature before I realized "oh, that probably made an edit publishing personal info." If that's my experience as someone with 80,000 edits, I don't think it's at all safe to assume that a user with 10 edits will think better. Sdkb ^talk 00:47, 8 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Okay but you still haven’t answered how this is a legitimate privacy concern. //shb (t | c | m) 03:14, 8 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

It's rare that any one piece of information alone creates a privacy risk, but when you combine a list of countries someone has traveled to with other info they might have disclosed on-wiki (voluntarily or accidentally), there are risks. I don't want to get too detailed per w:WP:BEANS. Also, different users have different thresholds for how much they're willing to disclose. It's better to be safe than sorry, so we should err on the side of informing the affected users so that they can decide for themselves whether to leave their map up or not. Sdkb ^talk 03:50, 8 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

One thing is telling about one's visits to 'suspect' countries to border authorities of countries like the US (that was the original worry above), another that a travel map may tell the real identity of an anonymous account to those knowing them IRL. I assume there are more.

The message in itself has the issue that telling that there is a possible privacy issue makes exploiting the breach more likely. Somebody else may notice the message before the user themself does, somebody who might not have known about it formerly.

–LPfi (talk) 06:14, 8 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

If you've been to certain suspect countries that the US lists, that invalidates your ESTA, meaning you'd need to notify US authorities before getting a visa anyway. Openly listing where you've been doesn't really change that. //shb (t | c | m) 07:43, 8 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Sdkb: "I don't want to get too detailed per w:WP:BEANS" – unless you actually explain what it is, I really don't buy your concerns. If you disclose personal info about yourself on-wiki, that's really on you; there's only so much babysitting the community can do (for things you disclosed yourself). And even then, where in the world does such a map even create a privacy and/or security risk? //shb (t | c | m) 07:46, 8 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

It does not appear that you are going to be persuaded (and I should note for anyone unaware that you are the gadget's author, if I'm reading the history correctly). It appears that the prevailing consensus in this subthread is supportive of a message, although I'd like to hear from a few more editors to make it clearer. Sdkb ^talk 16:37, 8 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

A consensus is when a general opinion has been reached. Whether I'm the gadget's author or not is irrelevant. Every time I ask you what the specific "security" risk is, you either deflect the point completely (with some fearmongering and info that no longer holds true), or completely refuse to answer. Until that has actually been properly answered, that is not a consensus. //shb (t | c | m) 22:23, 8 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

SHB, I'd say that "If you knowingly disclose personal info about yourself on-wiki, that's really on you". If you disclose it because you didn't understand that it would be public, then that's really on the people who created a tool that doesn't adequately explain what happens to the data. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:38, 8 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

That statement was regarding "with other info they might have disclosed on-wiki (voluntarily or accidentally)" (emphasis mine), which has nothing to do with the tool – I still stand by that statement, because the responsibility of disclosing info about yourself (in places like userpages and comments) is absolutely on you. //shb (t | c | m) 22:27, 8 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

"Combined with". Of course the tool is relevant, if it adds the missing pieces. If I tell secrets about myself anonymously somewhere and the tool allows connecting them to me, that's a problem, as is if I have disclosed my identity, and the tool discloses the destinations I wish to keep secret.

Our difference of views boils down to whether people using the tool should understand that their usage is public, and whether their possible failure of doing so is none of our business. The former is about how much people actually understand (we think you overestimate that), the latter about one's responsibility when handing over a loaded gun, and is a more ethical question.

–LPfi (talk) 07:45, 9 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

I think you perfectly said it yourself: "if it adds the missing pieces" – the keyword being "if". However, in almost all cases, where you've visited isn't useful info to piece whom your identity is – in the rare instance (which I'd put it at under 1%) half your map is shaded, it might reveal what you do for a living, but in the vast majority of cases it's useless. I would argue that your edit history on-wiki (particularly the destinations you edit) tell much more personally identifiable information than what the travel tracker can ever piece about you. //shb (t | c | m) 08:41, 9 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

I think Sdkb is correct about editors overestimating what the public understands about WMF-hosted wikis. There's an edit button right there on the page, but most people are surprised and distressed when they're told that literally anyone can use that button. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:36, 8 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

• Request to implement: Despite the objections of one editor, there appears to be consensus to send this message, and I think arguing further with that one editor would be a poor use of editorial resources. Admins have the permission to use MassMessage; could someone please do so? Sdkb ^talk 14:56, 12 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

  So far only two users in this thread has agreed explicitly for a massmessage, and this is not what massmessages are used for on this site. That's not consensus on this site (status quo bias applies). //shb (t | c | m) 23:42, 12 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

  I'll add my voice to the consensus: I think a mass message is a good idea. Users should be informed that the tool may have published their information without them realizing it. No opinion on whether to use the oversight functionality. —Granger (talk · contribs) 23:55, 12 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

  One problem is that people reading the user talk but not the Pub get to know that the user has disclosed some information, which may not be obvious. I would recommend not to say 'You are among the users…' – the user probably knows already. Still, direct the message to the affected users. As it may not be clear where the page is, one could link it with a Special:My… construct (showing a redlink to the other person). –LPfi (talk) 06:54, 13 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

  Ignoring that this isn't what massmessages are used for, and that this doesn't constitute PII under the oversight policy (i.e. not a valid use of OS-1). If I may suggest: You are receiving this message as you are [[Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:VisitedMap|one of the users]] who used the [[Wikivoyage:Travel Tracker|Travel Tracker]] prior to July 2026. [line break] Previously, the tool did not make explicitly clear that the map in question will be public and visible to everyone (this has now been rectified). If this is a concern, you may request deletion (button found on the [[Special:MyPage/Visited#bottom|bottom right]]); if this doesn't concern you, you do not need to do anything. --~~~~. //shb (t | c | m) 10:07, 13 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

  Do not include a link to Special:WhatLinksHere. That gives them a list of other users, which is (a) irrelevant to the message and (b) increases the harm done to the (few?) people who are concerned about their information being publicly visible to anyone on the internet. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:35, 15 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

  @LPfi, I consider that a friendly amendment. Feel free to adjust and send it out. Sdkb ^talk 18:23, 13 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

  @LPfi, sending out the Special:MassMessage requires admin rights. Would you be able to handle doing so, based on the consensus in this discussion? Sdkb ^talk 00:02, 17 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

  Sdkb, regarding your revert: per Wikivoyage talk:Travellers' pub, "If you see an old conversation in the pub (i.e. a month dormant) that could be moved to a talk page, please do so, and add "{{swept}}" there, to note that it has been swept in from the pub". Discussions are not swept based on whether they're resolved (very common for pub discussions), but whether a discussion is dormant or not. Don't revert a pub sweep like that against policy like that again. //shb (t | c | m) 00:09, 17 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

  I concur with the sweep. Sdkb please familiarize yourself with local Wikivoyage norms and practices. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 15:53, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

  I have no strong view on sweeping practice. But harping on that rather than implementing the consensus to send out the MassMessage is not helpful. Sdkb ^talk 17:34, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

  Swept doesn't mean archived – swept discussions can still continue on the talk page if needed. //shb (t | c | m) 21:20, 18 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Since this is something Sdkb has repeatedly dodged or refused to answer, I'm creating a separate subthread for this: what are the privacy and/or security concerns behind publishing a map of where you've been on-wiki?

So far, nobody in this thread, and I mean absolutely nobody, has managed to find a legitimate concern that still applies in 2026. This needs to be answered for, without blatant fearmongering (saying "I won't answer because BEANS" also counts as such); otherwise, the proposed mass message has no bearing. //shb (t | c | m) 23:49, 8 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Several editors have already discussed this with you above. Just since you have chosen not to listen does not change that. Sdkb ^talk 01:23, 9 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

And all of them are things are not concerns in 2026. You are the one who once again has repeatedly failed to answer my question. //shb (t | c | m) 01:25, 9 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

So you mean that everything is public anyway, so disclosure is just disclosure of non-secrets? That might be true to some extent, but I don't think there is any general consensus on our already living in 1984. To the extent the issue is relevant, you should specify what info you think cannot be kept secret. Also, from whom you cannot keep it secret matters, and whether those parties actually already know it or just have the ability to figure it out. –LPfi (talk) 07:54, 9 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Shb, I'd like you to think about this from a different POV, namely that your personal information should be controlled by you. You should have the freedom to disclose it, and the freedom to not disclose it. Exercising that freedom requires knowing what happens to your information in the gadget. It should be your choice. If you think it's private but it's actually public, then that's not your choice; that's the creator's/designer's choice.

For example, when ChatGPT made people's chatbot discussions public without them understanding what was happening,[1][2] that was a privacy problem that wasn't their choice.

We don't want something similar happening here. It doesn't matter if, e.g., some country is checking people's social media accounts and using that information to deny visas. What matters is that people should be able to make their choice freely. And that means clearly informing them that it will be public to the whole world.

The solution is simple enough: Change the line that says "Select the countries/territories you have visited below to generate your personalised map. Make sure to hit the "publish changes" button to generate and publish your map." and add something like "This will be posted publicly so anyone can see it." We can talk about the best wording, but all it needs is a sentence to warn people.

(Additionally, the "By clicking the "Publish changes" button, you agree to the Terms of use" sentence appears twice, and it's supposed to have links to the TOU page and to the CC-BY-SA license.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:42, 10 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

@WhatamIdoing: btw Done your solution – both the ToU and CC-BY-SA are also linked. I've also added a "request deletion" button at the bottom, which solves the first sentence of yours. I think that solves the issues you mention. //shb (t | c | m) 06:36, 12 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. That's a big improvement. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:09, 12 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

(also just as a side note, the example for the US DS-160 forms you mention very thankfully don't include Wikimedia platforms...which I guess does prove my point earlier that no country actually forbids you from visiting just based on a map of where you've visited) //shb (t | c | m) 23:48, 12 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

I entirely missed the discussion above, but had I seen it, I would have agreed with @shb: this is a silly overreaction. Everything you publish on Wikivoyage is public, not just by default, but as the only option. Sure, some people will not understand this, but I don't see how the map is different to any other edit you'd make here. Asamboi (talk) 04:51, 26 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Do you remember when the big blue button changed from "Save" to "Publish"? It was happening because people didn't understand that "Everything you publish on Wikivoyage is public", and both WMF Legal and the Oversighters were unhappy about the resulting confusion. (Enwiki's Teahouse was less happy, as they had a string of newbies asking "Where did the 'Save' button go? I'm working in my sandbox, and the content is not ready to be public yet!") WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:46, 27 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Kenya doesn't seem to be shaded even though my map is checked off. For sanity check, Doc Jame's map also doesn't colour in Kenya even though it was ticked. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 05:29, 29 August 2026 (UTC)Reply