text:
Wikivoyage talk:Cooperating with Hospitality Club

Cooperating
"Cooperating" means a reciprocal relationship where people work together for a common goal. I don't feel like that's the case with Hospitality Club and Wikivoyage.

 * This definition of cooperations seems a bit narrow to me. Cooperations can be between projects that have totally different aims, but still can help one another. I still feel that your mission (create a free travel guide) and ours (create a network of free accommodation and friendly people to meet) go naturally hand in hand. But if you feel otherwise...well, nothing I can do.

My main experience so far with Hospitality Club has been the addition of multiple links to different parts of hospitalityclub.org on Wikivoyage pages. These additions don't fit in with our Manual of style guideline for external links. I'm trying my darnedest to AssumeGoodFaith, but it just doesn't feel like sharing knowledge to me; it feels like WikiSpam.

 * The piece of knowledge we CAN share, is that you can get free accommodation and meet friendly people when you travel using a hospitality exchange network. I agree that this is NOT something that can/has to be explained in long sentences - many people just don't know the idea. For them, a simple link or a short hint is enough. And be sure that this little piece of info is more valuable to most travelers than long intros on history or trains or whatever, which can be found in any other travel guide online or offline. You are an internet project, so again, I don't understand all the fuzz about links.

I realize that it's important to HC to get more members and more visibility. The project is great, and I think it's a good goal. However, I don't think that it's OK to subvert our goals and non-goals to do that.

We're trying to make a travel guide, here. We're not trying to promote any particular travel service, Web site, business or destination. So, I don't think dumping tons of HC links into all our pages is the best way for our two projects to cooperate. --(WT-en) Evan 14:20, 9 Jun 2004 (EDT)

 * See above. You dont have to promote anything. But hospitality exchanges are relevant info.(WT-en) Veit 17:24, 9 Jun 2004 (EDT)

 * This gets a big "ditto" from me. There's no reason why Hospitality Club should be treated any differently then, say, Wikipedia, or Bootsnall. If people would like to mention their membership, they can do it on their user pages. (WT-en) Majnoona 14:37, 9 Jun 2004 (EDT)

 * Sorry, but I didnt understand this. First: what gets the ditto?? I didnt read any comments about the Membership page in Evan's note, maybe we should discuss that over there. Also, what means "treated any differently" - I dont get that. How do you "treat" other sites/projects?? Why would you "treat" (really, what does that mean? Mention? Link? Allow to edit????) totally different projects as WP, BnA or the HC the same way? I really dont get it.(WT-en) Veit 17:24, 9 Jun 2004 (EDT)

 * That's quite in interesting discussion... I really like both projects and think you both should highly recommand each other and become partner projects. You both have common target groups but different sources of input (Wikivoyage is closer to WikiPedia etc., HospitalityClub has its own members and friends), why not just promoting each other and overtaking contents without any restrictions in both ways? Later on you still could think about putting both on one platform if you want to. -- (WT-en) Tim

 * Thanks, Tim :-) I thought the same thing. I wouldnt have any problems sending our members over to Wikivoyage. That's why I tested the waters adding (in my opinion) non-spammy, relevant info and links. But all my input was rigorously moved around, deleted, so now I don't feel so confident anymore that I really wanna send people here. We might just let our members build a relevant travel guide within the HC and take content from Wikivoyage where appropriate. sigh. (WT-en) Veit 01:26, 13 Jun 2004 (EDT)

 * I did not see what you added here but if you posted loads of links all leading to HC I can understand Wikivoyage. I wouldn't accept that neither (which does not mean I'd erase all .), my intention were rather to add a link and own section for the other service in the Special Pages sections of both sites. I think the people from Wikivoyage don't realize how many people already use HC. And what about your licence? Contents here stay in public, they can't be stolen, so why do you want to oblige them to always announce links to the original pages? -- (WT-en) Tim

 * Dont worrie. Veit have problem with many persons. You can watch text here but http://www.bevolunteer.org/wiki/index.php/History_of_BeVolunteer

Content Sharing
This article says:
 * Feel free to integrate content from the HC into Wikivoyage, as long as you follow our requirement to add a link

Please correct me if I'm wrong... but that's nonsensical, isn't it? We have a specific license on the content of this site which allows for no such restriction. (Our license doesn't require folks to keep any links when copying material from WikiTravel). Therefore, HC content cannot be used on WikiTravel unless HC changes their terms to allow the link to be removed (which we will do, of course). -- (WT-en) Colin 02:21, 10 Jun 2004 (EDT)

 * What's nonsensical about that? I thought Wikipedia's license also requires just that - link back to the original page?? We didnt build up a license but implemented a clear, rough and dirty solution (ok, guess it might not hold in courts, but hey, I am not a lawyer). We ask people who wanna use our content to link back to the HC. This way our content can be used to spread our main mission: the idea of hospitality exchange. BTW, I thought Wikivoyage also requires a link back when you copy content? Can someone clear that up?(WT-en) Veit 01:27, 13 Jun 2004 (EDT)

 * Wikivoyage does not require linkbacks. Wikivoyage asks that you linkback so that your users can make improvements to the content, but it is not required.  See Project:How to re-use Wikivoyage guides for further details.

 * So what's nonsensical? If HC's content requires a linkback, it cannot be incorporated into Wikivoyage because only stuff that is compatible with our license can be incorporated.  Since Wikivoyage does not require that linkbacks be preserved, we would be violating your license if we incorporated your text by trying to relicense it under our license.

 * So while your offer of sharing is appreciated, it is not possible unless either you or we change our license. -- (WT-en) Colin 01:52, 13 Jun 2004 (EDT)

Veit's original message:
I removed this from the content of the page, since it uses first person stuff, but not in reference to Wikivoyage. On Wikivoyage: pages, we normally speak from the point of view of this project, not the POV of another organization. --(WT-en) Evan 11:16, 10 Jun 2004 (EDT)

 * Here we are :-)

 * From our side we need one thing most: new members. People need to learn about the idea, many havent even heard of it. But would love to use it when they travel. So one good thing might be to include a standard reference to hospitality exchange in the Sleep category on the country/region/city pages. Also, I think it makes sense to include a link to the relevant HC country/region/city page at the end of articles where we DO have a large number of members or good travel info on our pages, as this is a really useful reference for many travelers.

 * Feel free to integrate content from the HC into Wikivoyage, as long as you follow our requirement to add a link (eg., give credit). We didnt worry much about licenses when putting that note in there, but now I see that it is almost the identical requirement of GNU or CC. We WANT people to use our content as long as it helps to spread the idea of hospitality exchange around the globe!

Hi, That's interesting. The two projects have one thing in common. There are about traveling. But I don't understand why HC need more than Hospitality exchange. (WT-en) Yann 13:33, 10 Jun 2004 (EDT)

 * Well, I feel really amazed that even on a page talking about a possible cooperation of our two projects you have to delete my stuff. I dont feel comfortable anymore talking about cooperations on your "turf", where you even delete input by me. I dont have time to play around that much and watch out that my words meet all of your language requirements, especially on a Cooperation page (I just added all contributions you deleted to my personal page). Maybe you should think about your communication with interested projects. AGAIN: I was very interested in Wikivoyage and thought we could cooperate happily and a lot, but being edited out like this I feel like a little kiddy that is taught by his daddy how to behave - and sorry, that ain't my way of doing fun and useful cooperations.(WT-en) Veit 01:26, 13 Jun 2004 (EDT)

 * Well, I'm sorry that that's been your experience. I think you came to Wikivoyage with some different expectations. I hope you still find ways to contribute to the project. --(WT-en) Evan 11:14, 13 Jun 2004 (EDT)

What's happening here?
Might have to do with the harshness of written text? Wiki and email-list communications sometimes lead to pointless and unneeded frictions. It might be good if there were a kind of IRC discussion possible to straighten things up. Any prefered channel, time? Although it's probably not necessary to have all the actors there at once :) IRL would be even better, but that seems unrealistic... (WT-en) Guaka 19:30, 14 Jun 2004 (EDT)

Wikivoyagers in Hospitality Club
Where can I object the deletion of Project:Wikivoyagers in Hospitality Club? I don't really understand why it was necessary to do so... It was a very good way to know more about fellow Wikivoyagers, and also to have more cooperation between the HC and the Wikivoyage project... I really wonder why the things that happened happened... (WT-en) Guaka 12:50, 21 Jun 2004 (EDT)

 * I have no idea how to restart a discussion about a deleted page. You can find the discussion surrounding the issue in the Page History of Project:Votes for deletion.  That said, I have mixed feelings about bringing up the issue again.  On the one hand, you seem to have missed the discussion and it would have been nice to have your participation.  On the other hand, in general, re-opening contraversial issues is a worrisome concept. -- (WT-en) Colin 13:37, 21 Jun 2004 (EDT)

 * So, there are three things you're asking: the first, I think, is to get an explanation for the arguments as to why to delete that particular article. I think that Veit copied the arguments out of the history pages to his user page (see User:(WT-en) Veit), and there's some more discussion at Project:Wikivoyagers in Hospitality Club (although I'm going to list that on v.f.d. now, since I found it. Not much use having a talk page for a page that's been deleted!). Note that the page was deleted according to the Project:Deletion policy -- it was listed on Project:votes for deletion for more than 7 days.

 * The second question I'm hearing is how to object to a deletion after it's happened. I'm guessing you didn't get a chance to do that before, or that you didn't notice it. If you wanted to just post a general objection, I'd guess that here in the pub is a good place, or maybe on Project:votes for deletion.

 * I think the final implied question is, how do you go about getting that page back? We haven't done that before, and we don't have a process for it. If you wanted to start a discussion about that, Project:deletion policy would be a good place to put it.

 * As a personal note, I'd ask that you help with Project:Cooperating with Hospitality Club. You have been a longtime Wikivoyager, and it seems to me that you've got some experience with the Club, so you'd probably be a really good person to give input on that page. I'd like to see some creative ways to make that relationship work -- especially ways that HC can help Wikivoyage achieve our goal of making a free, complete, up-to-date and reliable world-wide travel guide with a neutral point of view. --(WT-en) Evan 14:36, 21 Jun 2004 (EDT)

 * Ok. I left some text here and there. I think the deletion policy needs some work. (WT-en) Guaka 08:22, 22 Jun 2004 (EDT)

 * There's now a Project:Deletion policy, based mostly on your request and input. --(WT-en) Evan 14:08, 8 Jul 2004 (EDT)

Am I Stunned by the Silence??
or did I miss a link? Surprising that it went quiet allofasudden.

I can appreciate both sides of the argument, repetitive links in either would be tiresome. Hospitality exchange (HE) sounds a great idea, I was fortunate to get one evening of hospitality on a 6 week trip and it was a godsend. What is needed is some way of advertising the existence of the other "product" -- ideally travellers would be savvy to each concept and go find in the 'other' site for themselves without crosslinking. How to make them aware? Ideally of course it would be one page somewhere at the top of the stack i.e. Hospitality exchange, but we all know it will only get read by a minority. Rather than a jump-to-it link, what about a flag (indicator), probably on a Region or City page or however the HE sites agree appropriate to their structure? The flag (a nice but discreet graphic?) would be present if the location was relevant to a HE site but would only itself be linked to Hospitality exchange where they can use the links to get to the various search or homepages. Even though the specific HE site that has members there would not be specified, there is only so much one can do, lead the horse to water seems appropriate here.

Profuse apologies if I have opened an old wound (:makes mental note to look for anti-septic powder:). I vote for my own deletion if necessary. -- (WT-en) Richard 2005 Jan 17 01:20 (GMT)

...maybe it can work from another site: http://www.couchsurfing.com/group_read.html?gid=2454&post=49360 (WT-en) Guaka 12:59, 12 April 2006 (EDT)


text:
Wikivoyage talk:Cooperating with OpenGuides

Moved from page by (WT-en) Evan

 * I disagree - We should have the type of information "in" wikivoyage.... -- (WT-en) Nils 01:18, 23 Jul 2004 (EDT)

Where you can stick it (TM)
Linking to OpenGuides says: "There are OpenGuides for quite a few cities; Wikivoyage should link to the appropriate OpenGuide on each city guide."

Is this still the case (and if so, where in the Wikivoyage article should the link to the appropriate OpenGuide page be placed)? ~ 125.24.0.177 11:01, 5 August 2006 (EDT)

 * I think we were looking for ways to cooperate with OpenGuides, but an actual linking policy was never developed. We should probably revisit this. I'm going to remove the text about linking until we have a clearer guideline. (WT-en) Maj 11:40, 5 August 2006 (EDT)

Hello from an OpenGuides person!
Hello Wikivoyagers; I'm one of the OpenGuides team, and I run a couple of OpenGuides as well. I believe Evan got in touch with one of us a while back, but there doesn't seem to have been much more communication. Anyway, I just stumbled across you again and I wondered if any of you had any questions I could answer and/or pass on to the rest of the OpenGuiders.

I was also wondering if it's possible to link to more than one OpenGuide from a Wikivoyage page; London and Oxford both have two (the Open Guide to London and the Randomness Guide to London, and The Oxford Guide and the Vegan Guide to Oxford) and it would be good to be able to link to both of them.

Regarding the mission and orientation of OpenGuides mentioned on the project page — those are both entirely up to the admin of each guide; the software is neutral on this point. I believe (though don't quote me!) that with the Open Guide to London, Earle is trying to be tourist-friendly as well as resident-friendly, whereas on the Randomness Guide to London we're aiming at a specific audience of residents (or savvy travellers who're happy to go elsewhere to learn about the basics) who're interested in good food and good beer.

--(WT-en) Kake Pugh 06:10, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

Linking to OpenGuides not approved?
This page has instructions for linking to OpenGuides, but this is not approved by the External links policy, which does not include OpenGuides as a special case. Does this page need to be amended? Nurg (talk) 10:10, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

 * The openguides: prefix is not in the interwiki map nor in 'wmgRelatedSitesPrefixes' in Wikimedia's config files. The instructions as written therefore do not work either to make an interwiki: link or to move that link to the sidebar. It might not be practical to add interwikis as this appears to be not one wiki but a separate project in each city. The project itself looks like it may be a useful resource for ten towns in the UK, but doesn't extend much beyond that. The only way to link to this would be as an external link (not an interwiki:). K7L (talk) 06:28, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

 * Since the advice on this page is out-of-date and the site in question may be of limited use outside of the UK, and objection to flagging this page as historical and move it out of Category:Wikivoyage policies? -- Ryan • (talk) • 17:02, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Wikivoyage talk:Cooperating with Wikevent

Is this site kaput? Nothing seems to work except the main page. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 17:35, 2 October 2010 (EDT)


text:
Wikivoyage talk:Cooperating with Wikibooks

Any objections to the setting up of a Project:Cooperating with Wikibooks page?

Please see also Project:Phrasebook template & MediaWiki talk:Sidebar. ~ 203.144.143.8 00:09, 25 January 2008 (EST)