text:
Talk:Travel news

This is a good idea, but surely newer news should come first, and older stuff is then moved into the archives later? Compare WikiPedia:Current events.

Also, should we adopt Wikipedia's style and have daily headings, or keep 'threads' together? The daily heading style has the major advantage of being easier to maintain, but it's a little harder to follow (esp. without links into full articles). (WT-en) Jpatokal 09:18, 3 Jan 2005 (EST)

China celebrates 60th anniversary of "Communism"?
On the main page, this isn't quite true. They are not celebrating the 60th anniversary of Communism, but rather the 60th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China. First, it is the country/republic that is being celebrated, and second, Communism was not founded 60 years ago. 18.62.16.50 13:49, 21 October 2009 (EDT)

Wikinews?
Please check Wikinews for international news stories; and contribute ones you don't see there. Content on Wikinews is currently all public domain. (WT-en) Sj 14:49, 11 Feb 2005 (EST)

Venezuela riots
The Venezual didn't actually censor RCTV. It is not closed down. It can still broadcast on other ways (cable, internet). Its licence to transmit over the air has just not been renewed because it didn't fill its contract (and broke a few laws, participated in the coup against Chavez, used subliminal images, etc...). Not renew a licence has already been done in countries said to be democratic in European Union for instance, and no one claimed it was censorship. Anyway the whole thing is quite political, it does not have to be argued here. However, replacing "censor" by "not renew the license" would be much more neutral.

I don't know if this information is even useful. I don't live there and I don't have any idea wether there actually is any risk. See the comment below about French riots exagerated in the medias (they were completely overstated, that's true). It's likely that the private medias in Venezuela export a lot of images of protests, for their own benefits. However I would avoid being caught in such a protest. Not only because I disagree with the reason, but during the coup against Chavez, the opposition had sharpshooter killing a few protesters to blame it on the government. Anyway any riot is dangerous, but appart from very edgy situations, like the coup d'état, they can easily be avoided, like the french so-called riots for instance.

Is this a slippery slope?
I'm wondering -- is publishing daily travel news really part of our goals? I don't know if it's really helping us create a travel guide. Could someone put me straight? --(WT-en) Evan 18:46, 11 Feb 2005 (EST)

 * I don't think it does any harm... cf. also LP's Travel Ticker. But I think the news here should be kept short, with links to Google News or Wikinews or whatever for the full scoop. (WT-en) Jpatokal 21:17, 11 Feb 2005 (EST)

 * The sort of news that I see as going here seem to be news items that would affect travel and tourism directly or be of significant interest to travelers, but isn't covered by Wikivoyage in other ways. Natural and man-made events that cause unexpected travel disruptions could be candidates as well as stories that affect the traveler's experience. What is there so far is probably the range of things that should be covered.
 * Although I wouldn't expect a daily news story. I would also like to see positive or good news stories like Tourists Wanted:Thailand tourist industry has recovered from Tsunami and other such news that says the disaster in the other month's news has been overcome and travel is not disrupted any more. These sorts of we're baaaack stories are not carried by other news outlets. -- (WT-en) Huttite 22:37, 11 Feb 2005 (EST)

France riots overstated in English Language press
Hey, I see that news of the riots in French public housing have been added to our travel news section, as it should be. I think though that we would be doing a service to travellers to point out that the impact on travellers is pretty much nil, and that the reports on English language media have been vastly overstated. I was in Paris the nights of the very worst riots, and saw nothing. And I was on a terrace in the 11th, which is in the quarter of the city toward the suburbs where the riots were.

I'm having trouble figuring out a tone for expressing this in the necessarily tiny main page blurb though. How's this: "State of Emergency in France over youth riots in remote public housing sites. Eng.-lang press goes berserk." -- (WT-en) Mark 06:46, 9 Nov 2005 (EST)

 * "Travellers not affected" for the last bit would be more informative, no? (WT-en) Jpatokal 07:51, 9 Nov 2005 (EST)

OK, so let's either do this or not
I've just updated the Travel News with a couple of stories today which were not huge gigantic headline stories and covered ad infinitum everywhere else. I would like to suggest that tomorrow somebody follow in my footsteps. It's easy: use the google news search to find stories of general travel interest. Read some of them. If it seems fairly important put it on the travel page.

I think that this could be an interesting and useful feature, but it absolutely needs to be updated more often.

If in a couple of days the stories I've just posted are still the most recent stories then I will yank the Travel News section off of the main page simply because there is nothing worse for a website than out-of-date "news".

So travel news supporters: get busy. -- (WT-en) Mark 10:35, 1 Dec 2005 (EST)

 * I've suggested this before, but it has to be made easier to update the news somehow, the code is a horrible mess and you need to be quite the Wiki-guru to manage it. Only problem is that templating it will be tough because of the three-column format... (WT-en) Jpatokal 11:40, 1 Dec 2005 (EST)

 * Another option would be to re-use Wikinews content... but alas, they've recently switched from PD to CC by-sa 2.5. Sigh.  Of course, it might not be that bad to have the travel news under a mildly different license, because they're highly unlikely to be included in actual printed guides. (WT-en) Jpatokal 11:49, 1 Dec 2005 (EST)

 * I have to say I took a short-lived stab at adding news everyday, needless to say after breaking the main page 3 or 4 times I actually gave up. I'm happy to keep adding stuff to the travel news page if someone else adds it to the main page (and bumps the old). I dont think getting / writing the news is the problem at all, just the adding to the main page. I'll have another go at it... (WT-en) Majnoona 14:17, 1 Dec 2005 (EST)

 * I've added stuff here, but I am scared to add it to the main page. Bad things happened to me the last time I tried. --(WT-en) Ravikiran 12:44, 4 Dec 2005 (EST)

 * I've updated some more, but if others aren't interested, I think we are better off yanking it. It is not a good idea to rely on the sporadic enthusiasm of 1 or 2 people. At least, we should de-emphasise it on the main page. Just link to the headlines or something. --(WT-en) Ravikiran 13:05, 7 Dec 2005 (EST)

 * I really think the key is making the news easier to update -- but it would need a bot of some sort to automatically rotate out the older stuff, and this really isn't very high on my list of priorities right now.

 * As a first step, I've outsourced the hairy table formatting stuff into Template:News{left,mid,right}divider, which makes the Main Page a little more user-friendly. And as a second step I just wrote Project:How to add travel news. (WT-en) Jpatokal 21:29, 7 Dec 2005 (EST)

Templates and one bug
So I've now changed the Main Page to use the templated news item form for consistency, please let me know if you want to change something, find the instructions unclear or difficult, etc.

One odd bug: hitting [edit] for a Template:Newsitem-item results in editing the template, not the section. I'm not sure if this is a bug in MediaWiki or somehow done intentionally. Edit buttons for higher-level headers like "December 2005" still work OK. (WT-en) Jpatokal
 * Another bug . The presence of an external link seems to break the news. I don't know why the other items aren't giving this problem though. --(WT-en) Ravikiran 06:37, 12 Dec 2005 (EST)

Could my Web site qualify as travel news?
swept in from User talk:(WT-en) Evan by (WT-en) Evan

Some high school friends and I have created a travel networking site at www.travbuddy.com Could I write a news article about the site, its growth, and our goals? Or would that be considered a form of advertising?

Please advise derek AT travbuddy.com or write back here... if thats how this works :)

Thanks!

 * I think this sounds fine. Any comments on this idea? --(WT-en) Evan 22:52, 26 Jan 2006 (EST)

 * I think this sounds like a dangerously slippery slope, it's free advertising for an unrelated site . (WT-en) Jpatokal 03:26, 27 Jan 2006 (EST)

 * Like SAS ? -- (WT-en) Mark 05:16, 27 Jan 2006 (EST)

 * I'm not sure wildcat strikes are the kind of publicity SAS wants... and yeah, I was thinking of  a way to qualify my earlier statement, but there's a difference between an actual(tm) travel service provider like an airline and some random Website like, well, Wikivoyage. (WT-en) Jpatokal 06:32, 27 Jan 2006 (EST)

 * Maybe, but still it is travel related information, and so there should be someplace for it. What better than to put it in Travel News where it will get cycled through eventually?  -- (WT-en) Mark 07:20, 27 Jan 2006 (EST)

 * I've since looked at their web site, and think that there is no reason why it should not be mentioned on the travel news page. Surely, our fundemental aim is to provide a service that helps travelers. We don't allow links to other travel sites, not out of a competitive mind set, but because it would weaken the quality of the Witravel site if the information were not concentrated here, but instead scattered across many web sites - i.e. it would not, in the long term, be in the travelers interest. However, I don't believe that mentioning a new travel guide coming into existance will delute the information on the Wikivoyage articles in any way. To the contrary, I think that by offering information that may prove useful to readers will actually be more in accordance with our basic principle: 'traveler first' - just my humble opinion. (WT-en) WindHorse 27 Jan 06

 * I think this is a slippery slope we ought not decend. Let's restrain Travel News to news of the world that affects travellers. -- (WT-en) Colin 10:31, 27 Jan 2006 (EST)

 * It seems that the main objection to giving this site space on Wikivoyage is less to do with its specific value to travelers, but more to do with the possibility of getting overwhelmed by similar requests, which in many cases may be little more than blogs or advertisements. In that case, each request would need to be reviewed and a criteria established on what is acceptable and what is not. I guess (WT-en) Jpatokal and (WT-en) Colin feel this would be overwhelming. Am I correct? I like the idea of informing contributors/readers of the existance of another site that may be helpful in their travels, but I also agree that Jpatokal and Cjensen have a good point. (WT-en) WindHorse 27 Jan 06

 * Hey guys.. thanks for the input.. although it seems pretty split. I am going to go ahead and write a sort of "seed" article for the news section. If anyone wants to go in and make it more of a third-party "review" I would actually welcome that. Perhaps that would ease some of the concerns. I think TravBuddy is a pretty cool resource for travellers.. and I hope you will agree. -Derek

 * Me, I welcome any writing for the travel news section as long as it still exists. I hate it when the newest thing is more than 2 weeks old, sometimes 3 weeks.  If people want to use it to promote their travels sites great!  Newspapers do that sort of thing all the time.  At least we'll have something more current. -- (WT-en) Mark 15:24, 27 Jan 2006 (EST)

 * Posted the news item (WT-en) Dlazzaro 19:50, 27 Jan 2006 (EST)

Taiwan High Speed Train
Removed headline because the inauguration of this service has been delayed until late Spring. See article dated Oct 25: High Speed Train

Deutschebahn strike?
Deutschebahn train drivers going on strike

Deutschebahn train drivers have already gone on strike Friday(I was affected by it) and may resume the strike as early as tomorrow, which could cancel many local trains in Germany, and possibly even some long distance ones. Would this count as news? I would suggest that anyone planning to catch a flight in Germany next week check the news and try to make alternate arrangements to get to the airport if possible....

The Szechuan Earthquake
Apologies for failure to bring this up early enough, but shouldn't the earthquake be featured as a news item too? It has quite a bit of impact on tourism too (the restoration works plus its proximity to Tibet) and most likely to linger on for quite a while before things get back to normal again. I think it would be good to have it updated and featured irregardless of it happening a weeks back.

Holidays
Swept in from the pub:

So I discovered how to go about adding travel news today and I was going to ask if we could include large national holidays as news. Anyways, I am reminded of how Wikipedia has an "On this day..." section. While it would certainly be too much of a hassle to update something like that on a daily basis, I was thinking that maybe we could add a section on the main page with the current month's worth of holidays (well, major holidays at least). Wikipedia articles for the months list holidays, so the hard work has been done for us! We could list the holidays on the main page, with a separate page listing both the holiday and description (just a few sentences, as seen below). So for instance:

July Holidays Of course, we needn't list every holiday, but at least the major ones in which there are events/festivities of note for travelers. So for the US (which, being an American, is what I can relate to), we wouldn't need to list "Presidents Day" or "Flag Day", but the culture surrounding the 4th of July or Thanksgiving(and maybe even Black Friday) would be of interest to travelers. If a holiday spans more than 1 country (mostly religious holidays, like Christmas or Ramadan) or is specific to one but also celebrated in places worldwide (Chinese New Year, St.Patrick's Day) listing would look like: So the point is that 2 things would need to be mentioned in a holiday's description: what the holiday celebrates(ie. the independence of [country] on [date]), what happens on the holiday/how is it celebrated(ie. picnics, fireworks, parades, etc), and what are its implications to the traveler(ie. on Christmas, most businesses are closed throughout predominately Christian nations, however airfare is considerably cheaper than surrounding days in the US). I think this would be a great idea for Wikivoyage as a means to celebrate culture and guide Wikivoyageers. Of course, there are potential problems and policies would need to be created regarding: 1) establishing a line between holidays and festivals (to keep the clutter down), 2) keeping up with refreshing holidays on he main page, 3) do we list by date or by region then date, and 3)the line between which holidays should be included and which should be excluded (every nation celebrates its independence day, but is that day in every nation notable for travelers?). The holidays could be kept as separate articles (ie June holidays, July holidays, etc) so that they would only need to be updated every year for holidays with various start-dates. I don't know how to make a template for holiday listings, nor how to rework the main page...but I would certainly be willing to work on the articles (with what I know, with Wikipedia's help) So what's everyone's opinion? Feedback? (WT-en) AHeneen 10:30, 26 November 2008 (EST)
 * July 1 Canada Day, Canada. Canada Day is marked by...blah blah.
 * July 1 Hong Kong SAR Establishment Day, Hong Kong. Establishment day is marked by...blah blah.
 * July 4 Independence Day, United States. In the United States, Independence Day (or also the "Forth of July") is a national holiday on which most workers receive a day off. Many Americans celebrate the day with picnics, grilling foods (such as hamburgers, hot dogs, ribs), heading to the beach/shore, and casual events with friends and families. From major cities to towns of 10,000, many municipalities in the United States host a parade and the vast majority host a fireworks display after dusk. The day is filled with patriotic music and images and flags are certainly not in short supply. If the holiday lies on a weekend, many workers will take the adjacent day off to create a long weekend. For travelers renting a vehicle, expect inter-city highways to be crowded on the days surrounding July 4th and for police vehicles to be blatant and numerous along roads. Additionally, hotels in coastal cities may charge higher-than-normal rates around this day and may have few, if any, vacancies. Nevertheless, the Forth of July is a great day for travelers to experience the patriotic spirit and enjoy free festivities no matter where in the US you may be.
 * July 6-14 San Fermín, Spain. Most notable for the running of the bulls, this festival...blah blah.
 * July 10 Independence Day, Bahamas. In the Bahamas, Independence Day is celebrated by...blah blah.
 * July 12 Battle of the Boyne, Ireland & Northern Ireland. The Battle of the Boyne is remembered on this day by...blah blah.
 * July 13-16 Bon Festival, Japan (dates vary by region). Bon Festival is celebrated in Japan by...blah blah.
 * July 14 Bastille Day, France. Also known as Le quatorze juillet, this holiday marks...
 * etcetera
 * December 25 Christmas, Christians/others. Note that Armenians celebrate Christmas on Jan 6, Orthodox Christians (mostly in Eastern Europe & the Middle East) on Jan 7. Christmas is celebrated with varying customs by region. This is a day spent mostly in the home with family, and as a result is the least busy day (commercially) of the year. In western nations, many non-Christians celebrate the day as a secular, cultural festival...leading to even higher numbers of people celebrating the holiday (96% in the US for instance). For the tourist, the fact that Christmas day is celebrated by so many means that the day will be spent inactive, as nearly all businesses and tourist attractions will be closed.
 * August 22-Sep 20 Ramadan(dates vary annually), Muslims. The month of Ramadan in the Muslim world is marked by dawn to dusk fasting. Visitors to predominately Muslim countries should note that, while not expected to fast themselves, restaurants open during daylight are almost nonexistent. However, in many cities, this month lends to bustling restaurant/nightlife scene for a few hours after dusk...blah blah.
 * March 17 St.Patrick's Day, Ireland & Irish communities worldwide. St.Patrick's Day is celebrated in Ireland by...blah blah. Outside of Ireland, festivities may include...blah blah.
 * I think you might be on to a neat idea, but why focus solely on the big holidays most people have heard of? It might be more interesting to feature a selection of random interesting things from whatever location that people might not have heard of. Then it could be different every year too. (WT-en) Texugo 07:32, 28 November 2008 (EST)
 * Maybe we could do the same thing as destinations, and divide holidays into major ones(like DotM) and minor ones worth noting(like OtBP).(WT-en) AHeneen 22:41, 28 November 2008 (EST)
 * Personally, I don't see any reason to remind everyone of the obvious big ones like Christmas, Easter, New Year's.. Unless.... Well, thinking about it more, perhaps the items featured should not be the holidays themselves but, rather, a particular destination's celebration of a given holiday. So rather than featuring US Independence day as a whole (which is more wikipedia-like), we select a city that has a unique or pronounced way of celebrating it; i.e. what is there for a traveller to do and see on Independence day in, say, New York City? (daytime events in Central Park, massive fireworks display at the Statue of Liberty, etc.). What would a tourist not want to miss seeing in Bangkok during Songkram? What about Carnaval in Olinda? Obon in Kyoto? Easter in Rome? What do you think? (WT-en) Texugo 02:31, 29 November 2008 (EST)

In my belief: Overall, I believe some info on holidays would be really useful; great to find out I'm not alone here :-) --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 17:11, 20 December 2008 (EST)
 * most holiday info should be destination-centric (i.e. traveler first chooses a destination, and for it he finds out what's special about how the specific holiday is celebrated in the destination chosen). An example I have is New Year holidays in Hungary (pitifully the most important part "Local traditions" is still empty)
 * at the same time, some holiday-centric info can make sense; I have early drafts on New Year travel in general, see Talk:Travel topics and User:(WT-en) DenisYurkin/New Year Travel as the first steps to implement the idea.

Is there a spam filter for links?
It seems that every third or fourth time I insert a link in the body of a newsitem (which I always try to do), it turns out as. Usually this happens when I try to insert 2 links in one newsitem, but sometimes (like tonight) it does that when I insert just 1. What is this? Today when inserting the article about the new Canadian citizenship, I tried to insert the link to a corny YouTube clip and a WSJ article at the end. Whether inserting both or just one of those, it returns as. It's very random with this error and it really pisses me off. (WT-en) AHeneen 01:36, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
 * It's not a spam filter.  is a reference used in templates to refer to the third passed parameter.  Looks like a quirk in the template code, but a quick look didn't reveal any obvious errors.  Might want to drop a note to User:(WT-en) JYolkowski about it; I think he played with it last.  (WT-en) LtPowers 11:23, 18 April 2009 (EDT)

Havana Misinformation in RSS Feed?
RSS feed entry (4th from the top) contains following line under "Discover: Havana"

For an "authentic" experience in getting around Havana via public transportation, try El Camello, a split-level bus pulled by a semi-truck, and resembling a 2-humped camel.

I don't know how long it's been since the person who wrote that have been to Havana, but El Camello were discontinued years ago. Havana is served by modern buses from China and school buses that were donated to Cuba by Canadian government (often carrying Canadian labels still). El Camellos are hard to stumble across nowadays. Last time I saw one it was in Manicaragua, small town across the mountain from Trinidad on the way to Santa Clara. One will definitely not take a ride on one in Havana.

Read more about it here --> http://www.cubatourism.ca/havana-guide/havana-transport-options/

Figure Skating Movie
I don't normally follow the travel news page very closely, but this edit about a figure skating movie seems like a subject for reversion since it doesn't have any relevance to travel that I can see. If anyone else agrees please revert, although I'm hesitant to do so personally since I'm not 100% clear on what is considered appropriate content for this page. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 21:04, 2 January 2011 (EST)

 * People travel far from home all the time to go to events, and this isn't all too different. After all, it says so precisely that this is a one-time event and that it will be available in only a few select locations. On the other hand, if this were to be a nationwide release shown in every single theater in the country for weeks, then it wouldn't be worthy of inclusion. That's just my opinion. :) (WT-en) Jonathan 784 20:37, 3 January 2011 (EST)

 * We don't usually put things on the news feed that are merely events someone might want to travel to. We only put events that actually have some relation to travel (and I don't think a documentary about a plane crash is enough to qualify).  (WT-en) LtPowers 21:19, 3 January 2011 (EST)

Should we?
Any plans to start again travel news project? I would try to contribute to this section on regular basis. --Saqib (talk) 21:53, 25 October 2012 (CEST)
 * I too noted a few minutes ago that this section was "missing" on the Main page. At least I think it would be useful to put urgent travel alerts in a box on the Main page, maybe even with a stop hand or triangle. Ypsilon (talk) 16:07, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Proposal 1
The problem with Travel News had been that there were too few news/events to feature. As a result, some of the things listed were 6-12 months old and no longer relevant. Have a look at the last Main Page revision before the move. A part of the problem was that the section was formatted so that there were an equal number of travel alerts & upcoming events. If the travel news section is to be re-added to the main page here, then perhaps editor discretion should be allowed as to which items remain and how many items remain in each section (with a limit of, say, 2-10). The sections could be split so that, for styling purposes, it looks good whether there are 2 travel alerts & 6 upcoming events or 4 of each.

We could also re-style the Travel News page so that it is easier for less-experienced users to add a blurb about news/events and for those of us updating the content on the Main Page to discern which news events should be featured when. This can be accomplished by more detailed instructions for how to add to travel news (for less-experienced users) and a better template for items listed in travel news. The best example would be the Destination of the month candidates page, where there are clear instructions/guidelines at the top for nominating (which for travel news would be "adding items", with no upcoming/schedule needed) and a template to aid those updating the main page. For travel news, the template would be more simple...the headline, date, blurb, image (if applicable/available), preferably a good reference/external site (a news article, official announcement/press release, relevant official website, Wikinews, or Wikipedia), and length of time or to feature. The time to feature would be general, such as a range of months before a festival/events or something like "1 week or more" for travel alerts about natural disasters (varies for cyclones/hurricanes/typhoons, earthquakes, winter storms, heat waves/cold snaps, volcanic eruptions, etc.) and maybe 1-2 days for events like transport/general strikes. Tags could be added (optionally) to allow a search feature sometime in the future (if travel news becomes active, hopefully!) or add to destinations as a sidebar link ("Travel news") or in understand or at the bottom ("Wikivoyage has travel news for South Africa"). An explanation/example would be:

Another change to make TN more organized/visually appealing would be to add content to a new-created page by year, for example "2013 Travel news", rather than all on the Travel news page. This would also make archiving simple (no real need, maybe just add a disclaimerbox at top to not add anything more) and also make it easy to insert inter-wiki links for news items into pages (since link would remain same when archiving isn't done). For example: Travel times around the country have been greatly reduced since the opening of the New City-Wikiland high-speed rail line in late 2011. The "Year Travel news" page would function as our repository of travel news and events. If the need arises in the future, this can be changed to separate Travel alerts & Upcoming events. To update what's listed on the main page, we would have a page called "Template:MPTN" (for Main Page Travel news), not editable by new users, which would be a list of travel news selected from the "Year Travel news" page to be viewed from the main page. Sound complicated? This is very similar to how we handle DotM/OtBP/FTT on the main page: nominees (or for TN, items) are already in templates on one page (for TN, items in "Year Travel news") along with instructions for updating (for TN, on the separate "WV:Travel news" page), with a "Template:dotm/otbp/ftt" page (for TN, "Template:MPTN", not editable by new users) that controls what is displayed on the main page. After the list of items, it would read "Read more 2012 and 2013 travel news and upcoming events." with 2012/13 being links to "2012 Travel news" and "2013 Travel news".

To sum things up : Travel news is moved to "Wikivoyage:Travel news" and becomes a project page on the scope of Travel news, how to add new items, and criteria/instructions for featuring news items on the Main Page. "Template:MPTN" (for Main Page Travel news) is a page that is updated with a list of travel news items that gets featured on the Main Page (the MP would just have the mptn template inserted, not be constantly edited with new items). "Year Travel news" functions as the repository for items, since Main Page real estate is limited, and has instructions on how to add new items using a travelnews template (which will now include a time to feature plus optional images & tags). Not all items on this page would be featured on the main page, so the Main Page would have a link to the current year's travel news and either the preceding (Jan-Jun) or upcoming (Jul-Dec) year's news. AHeneen (talk) 23:09, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

 * Sorry, I'm far too busy to read what is probably a great proposal, but if we were considering working with Wikinews (which I think is the way to go), we'd have to get the Wikinews Importer Bot which I requested weeks ago here to no response. Someone else might want to give that user a nudge. JamesA  >talk 06:54, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * James, As Ypsilon said much of WN stuff not that relevant for travelers, so the importer bot is not that necessary right now. Let's kick start this section as soon as possible. --Saqib (talk) 18:34, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Travel news


text:
Talk:Travel photography

Funny translation
My words: "In the U.S. even taking photographs of sculptures in the vicinity of a federal building will afford you a hassle from a Barney Fife secuirty guard, trying over protect the homeland."

TVerBeek's translation: "this can get you unwelcome attention – or worse – from anxious security personnel."

I thought this was particularlly funny, because I'm still a little upset with the Federal Reserve Bank security guard in Cincinnati, so I refer to him as Barney Fife, since he tracked me down and actually tried to harass me about taking a photo of this rotating sculpture like thing in front of a building adjacent to the FOB and Reserve Bank. TVerBeek's translation is pretty accurate, and I found it quite funny. - (WT-en) Sapphire 17:35, 7 May 2006 (EDT)

Digital vs film
I'm a digital fundamentalist myself, but it'll be some time until digital catches up to large-format film. An 5x7" LF image translates to a sharp 12000x17000 pixel (204 megapixel) image, which is way beyond any digital camera out there today. (WT-en) Jpatokal 23:18, 22 August 2006 (EDT)

 * I like the idea of tourists toting an LF camera for a snap in front of Big Ben. :-)

 * More seriously: at the very top end that may be true, but as of 2010 a DSLR probably has as much resolution and sensitivity as a film SLR. The article probably needs to be updated to reflect that today, the advantages of film are: no need to recharge batteries, good cheap 2nd hand equipment is available, hipster cred. (WT-en) Sourcefrog 02:03, 18 January 2010 (EST)

 * I have now moved most discussion of film to a subpage, Travel photography/Film. Comment or contributions there are solicited. Pashley (talk) 18:57, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Film
Film, even 35mm, has a quality level of roughly 20 to 25 megapixels. The variable quality of mass printing done by the photofinishing lab is the one bane of print film.

 * Where are you getting that figure from? Most estimates  seems to put the figure in the 4-8 MP range for consumer 35mm film and maybe 10-20 for pro slide film.  I've made 18"x12" (S12R) enlargements from my 6MP Nikon D70 and I dare you to tell it apart from a film print. (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:26, 19 October 2006 (EDT)

 * This shows data from magazine tests of lenses for 35 mm SLRs. They give resolution in lines per mm ranging from 30 to 90 or so, with higher numbers only in the center and with the lense stopped down. Film is 24 by 36 mm so 864 mm2. Take 100 lines/mm over the whole frame as an upper bound; that gives 8.64 megapixels. Medium format with its 60 by 60 mm negatives is another story, of course, with roughly four times the resolution of 35 mm. (WT-en) Pashley 09:25, 20 October 2006 (EDT)

 * You need two pixels per line to distiguish lines. Unless the 30-90 figure counts the spaces between the black as a line. -- (WT-en) Colin 20:41, 20 October 2006 (EDT)

 * Right. I should have thought of that. So 50 lines/mm (typical lens wide open) is 8.5 Megapixels and 70 (good lens at F 5.6) is about double that. (WT-en) Pashley 03:19, 21 October 2006 (EDT)

Digital has its place, certainly, but there is no film/digital quality debate (except for printing), especially if you consider as well the even higher quality of medium and large format film. Digital is convenient for the masses, and the ability to control printing is nice. Film has quality and saturation qualities that will keep it around for a long time to come.

Luckily, we can use either or both.

What, not how
This article has a lot about batteries and film, and not much about what photos to take, or how to take them... (WT-en) Sourcefrog 02:04, 18 January 2010 (EST)

 * Wiki articles contain what it's contributors have felt important, if you have some interresting advice on how to take good travel pictures, please plunge forward :) --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 08:22, 18 January 2010 (EST)

Current state
This article has more than doubled in size in the last six months. Is it now too large or too detailed? Where should it go next?

I already asked one user this sort of question User_talk:Jpatokal, but have not had a response. Pashley (talk) 15:33, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

 * You've certainly done a terrific job of expanding it to the point where I sadly miss a functional table of contents that, with tertiary and quaternary headings, would make navigation easier for someone not wishing to read the whole lot. --W. Frankemailtalk 15:57, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

 * The article is fantastic as far as content is concerned. As for being easily digestible, the article is really long. I don't have the time right now to give a lot of comments/suggestions, but a few suggestions I can give after looking at it for a few minutes:
 * Separate an article about camera systems that would cover most of the "lenses" and "building a system" info. This article could then provide an overview of the various types of cameras available, techniques, and travel tips related to cameras/photography.
 * Cluster the sections about techniques together & use sub-headers. Move photo tours & photo sharing to top where it talks about photography options. Merge accessories & pack.
 * More photos? Especially examples of techniques.
 * AHeneen (talk) 20:03, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

 * I have started a simplifying process, creating two subpages so far, Travel photography/Full systems and Travel photography/Film. Pashley (talk) 13:17, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

 * It is already rated Guide & I'd like to see it at Destination_of_the_month_candidates.

 * However, I do not think it is quite ready for that and I've done all I can for now. Any volunteers to improve it from here? Pashley (talk) 23:23, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Banner?

User:Danapit recently changed the banner. Both are good, but I prefer the old one. Other opinions? Pashley (talk) 13:03, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

 * Right. I thought the new one was somewhat "cooler". I decided to change the banner because I disliked the collision of the photographer in old banner with the title, which could also be avoided by flipping the banner horizontally, so that we get the person to the right side. Would that be acceptable? I mean in an illustrative picture like this not related to any specific locality it should be ok. Danapit (talk) 13:14, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I like the concept behind the new one, but I think it misses the mark ever-so-slightly. It's very close.  LtPowers (talk) 15:48, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

 * No objections? I did it. --Danapit (talk) 07:44, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

 * I used the other one at Travel photography/Full systems. Pashley (talk) 13:15, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

 * Can anyone find something suitable for Travel photography/Film? Pashley (talk) 18:42, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

 * Here are some that might be adaptable to banner format: File:Film strip.jpg, File:Analog Photographic film - 1980's-1990's years.jpg, File:135 fuji film macro.jpg -- LtPowers (talk) 01:49, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

 * The flipped one looks fine except the left-right reversal leaves the photographer with his hands in an odd position. He does not have a finger near the usual position of a shutter, top right of camera seen from the back. Does that matter? Pashley (talk) 02:17, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

 * May be he is left handed and had his camera custom made? :-) Would that hinder using a photo of him? --LPfi (talk) 08:53, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Options for electronics-hostile environments
I think it would be useful to have a guide on photography in environments that can damage ordinary cameras, such as by/in the sea, skiing, desert etc, and what options one has to remedy it, such as underwater housings and buying a disposable camera just for that purpose. Cmglee (talk) 19:11, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

 * Yes, either a short section in the main article or a whole separate article on that would be good. Pashley (talk) 13:10, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Move to photography?
As an artifact from The Other Site, the word "travel" is excessively used in titles. Would Photography be a better title than travel photography for this page? /Yvwv (talk) 15:53, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

 * The same issue was discussed at Talk:Travel activities; the longer title is better for those seeing it in search results at Google & al, and it is not overly long. I see no need for a change and in fact prefer the present title. --LPfi (talk) 19:55, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

ACLU guide to legalities
Know Your Rights: Photographers - What To Do If You Are Stopped Or Detained For Taking Photographs. Only for US law, but maybe useful. Pashley (talk) 18:18, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Storage size
The article now says:
 * "Even with a 24 Mpixel camera and two bytes per pixel, you get about 20 shots per Gbyte so a 256 GB card handles over 5,000 photos".

20·2 B/px·24 Mpx = 960 MB ≈ 1 GB. So this is mathematically correct, but who uses 16 bit/px nowadays? And is assuming no compression really realistic? If the 50 MB/image with a 24 Mpx camera sounds normal, then we are perhaps talking about 1:2 compression with 32 b/px (4 B), although I'd suppose you can get much better even lossless compression, unless you have a very busy image.

Or is this sentence meant to mean 2 B/px after compression? The per px figure is hardly relevant and quite misleading when the compression is done on 16px·16px blocks (jpeg) or on some other units – and compression probably gets better with more pixels for the same information, which often is the case with some shaking and less than perfect optics.

--LPfi (talk) 14:27, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Brands
User:The dog2 just added:
 * For photography enthusiasts, Canon and Nikon are generally regarded to be the leading manufacturers of high-end cameras, though if you're looking for something more casual, the market tends to be a lot more competitive.

I want to revert. Yes, those are leading brands, but I do not think we should advertise them. Sony have also been considered a major competitor for some years now, L-mount is becoming one, etc. Pashley (talk) 21:23, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I was under the impression that Sony is mainly known for the small cameras you can fit in your pocket, which is convenient for travel if you just want casual photos, but if you are an enthusiast looking for a DSLR, Canon and Nikon are the brands you should stick do. The dog2 (talk) 21:26, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * No, Sony have full-frame cameras, technically not DSLRs but functionally equivalent. Market share statistics show Canon 45%, Sony 20%, Nikon 18%, others all below 5%. Of course most of that for all companies is low or mid-range cameras.
 * If you actually want a DSLR, arguably Pentax are the way to go. (I shoot Pentax.) All the others are concentrating on their new mirrorless lines, leaving their DSLRs as orphans. Also, P have in-body image stabilisation; N & C do that (I'd say they finally get it right!) in some of their new mirrorless cameras, but not in DSLRs.
 * In mirrorless, I'd say Sony & Panasonic are the established leaders, N & C latecomers who may or may not succeed. Pashley (talk) 23:36, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I see, in that case, feel free to re-write or remove as you see fit. The dog2 (talk) 23:42, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

 * ✅ Reverted.
 * We might consider whether to expand Travel_photography/Full_systems with more brand information. My first thought is "no", but it could stand more consideration. Pashley (talk) 00:39, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I think it may be a good idea to mention some good camera brands for people who are looking to take up photography as a hobby. Of course, we need to cover them in a fair way and avoid touting. From my work, I know that Olympus, Nikon, Zeiss and Leica are the go-to brands if you want to take images through a microscope, but aside from Nikon, I'm not sure if these other brands still produce cameras for the consumer market. The dog2 (talk) 04:53, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

 * Leica still sell rangefinder cameras & lenses at stratospheric prices. Olympus & Panasonic are the main players in micro 4/3, but there are Leica lenses. Zeiss have lenses for Sony. L-mount was developed by Leica but there's now an alliance, L, Panasonic & Sigma. Pashley (talk) 06:59, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

 * I added text at Travel_photography/Full_systems. Too long? Too much of my biases? Review certainly needed. Pashley (talk) 09:47, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * It looks good for me. Back when I was in high school, my friends who are photography enthusiasts said that Canon and Nikon are the only brands you should consider, so that's consistent with my experience. Let's see what other uses day, but it gives aspiring photography enthusiasts a good overview of the brands available without being overly tout-y. The dog2 (talk) 15:57, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Places of worship
I am curious about how widely the newly added advice on not carrying your camera into places of worship applies. Here, in Lutheran churches, I think one mostly shouldn't take photos during services or other events, not to disturb, and flashes and tripods may be disallowed as in art museums (though I haven't noticed that). Carrying a camera or mobile phone is no problem as long as they keep silent.

I think that for the advice to be useful, we should somehow pinpoint the "certain places of worship" where the advice applies. Thinking about the sentiment of the locals does not help if you don't know their sentiments. What does the "extra caution" involve? Does our article on Religion and spirituality say something useful? What about country articles?

–LPfi (talk) 17:33, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

 * Oh, the advice is specifically applicable for mosques and Hindu temples, as I come across several of these with such restrictions. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 17:45, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I qualified the sentence and expanded somewhat on the topic. Please check that I didn't remove anything essential, and whether something more should be said. –LPfi (talk) 10:59, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Travel photography


text:
Talk:Travel planning

I'm really lost as to the point of this page. It doesn't seem to have much to do with travel planning at all. Is the point to list all the reasons someone could want to travel, along with places that would satisfy that requirement? --(WT-en) Evan 00:46, 6 Aug 2004 (EDT)

 * I admit that 'Travel Planning' is a poor name. It probably should be changed to something better.  Maybe "Sights of the World", although it is not all "sights". Hmmm...

 * It is really intended as an interesting way to browse through Wikivoyage and could give people ideas to check out destinations that they might not otherwise have thought about. To browse the Geographical hierarchy you really need to have a specific destination in mind.  If you just want to see a specific type of destination you have to know where in the world that occurs.  Whereas if you just want to browse through Wikivoyage without a specific destination in mind it is much more interesting to have some pointers that tell you about destinations based on what makes them worth visiting.  It is of course impossible to list all of the reasons travellers could want to travel, or all of the locations that would satisfy any requirement (Obviously there are a lot of spectacular waterfalls that are not included on the list).  However I think most of the lists are of at least of passing interest or curiosity to most travellers.  I think most would agree that those items on the list are amongst the most spectacular or interesting in the world for those catagories.  (Volcanoes was probably a bad example to start with, as it probably is not really of general enough interest -- personally I am interested in volcanoes, but maybe that isn't really general enough interest that it should be included on this page)

 * I think that the nature of hypertext makes it perfect for allowing alternate ways of browsing the content. By limiting the browsing to a geographical hierarchy we are really limiting the browsability of it.  This was intended just as a start for another way of seeing travel destinations.   Similar to the Fields of pursuit idea mentioned on Project:Other ways of seeing travel, but of things that are of more general interest.  -- (WT-en) Webgeer 03:08, Aug 6, 2004 (EDT)

 * So, I understand your point, and it's a laudable goal. Here's what I suggest: first, we merge this page's contents under Travel topics. Second, we make individual articles about each of the sections on this page. For example, a Volcanoes page could discuss types of volcanoes, volcano visiting safety, as well as listing some places to visit volcanoes.

 * I think having individual articles for each group will make this easier to work with. --(WT-en) Evan 10:29, 6 Aug 2004 (EDT)

 * So I've pretty much followed this suggestion, because I'd love to see each of these expanded into a full practical article. (Volcanoes for vicarious travel!) I'm not sure what to do with the article itself now. -- (WT-en) Hypatia 07:09, 3 Nov 2004 (EST)

 * My suggestion would be to change it into an article about "Travel Planning" or to delete it. I don't think that it is really a very good name for what my original intention was, and I'm not opposed to the idea of making my original sections as pages in the Travel topics -- I still think it should be arranged in a nice heirarchichal way, but that is probably something to worry about when we start getting a lot of these kind of articles.  -- (WT-en) Webgeer 16:43, Nov 3, 2004 (EST)

 * Thanks. There probably is a need for a good article on general travel planning, I'll see if I can draft something. If I can't, I'll put it up for deletion. -- (WT-en) Hypatia 20:02, 3 Nov 2004 (EST)

-- Hmmm, I'm going to have to second Evan's earlier concerns. I'm just not sure if this is headed in the right direction. I think some of the content deserves it's own Travel topics (ie Travel Insurance), but the rest of it seems a little unfocused. I'm open to any suggestions about what to do with it (ie an index of articles re planning?) otherwise it's going to get my vfd. (WT-en) Majnoona 19:58, 8 Feb 2006 (EST)

 * It appears to me that the article was entirely rewritten by Huttite after the above discussion. (See here for the mess it was before).  I'm not fond of this article, but the current article bears no resemblance to the one discussed above. -- (WT-en) Colin 20:41, 8 Feb 2006 (EST)

title: Talk:Travel planning


text:
Talk:Travel safety

Goal
This article is a first pass at creating a catch-all article for travel topics that correspond to the "Stay safe" article heading (as discussed on Talk:Travel topics). The idea is that topics about travel safety should be listed on this article first, and only when the information becomes "large and complex" (per the Project:What is an article? standard) should a separate article be considered. I've copied information from some of the stub articles such as Drugs back to this article and made the existing articles into redirects to emphasize the point that only when we have enough information to warrant a separate article should one be created. -- (WT-en) Ryan 19:10, 11 August 2006 (EDT)

 * Yeah, this is a good thing. I went looking for this topic when considering the last edit on Boston which gives tips for walking around the city at night safely. Would be much better to state that you can consider walking and then reference this article or a section of it. (WT-en) OldPine 07:35, 17 August 2006 (EDT)

title: Talk:Travel safety


text:
Talk:Travel topics index

Travel topics broken on mobile
We must think "mobile first", because most Internet users (and certainly most travelers) are on mobile.

Unfortunately, Travel topics is broken on mobile, each line is a bit longer than the "card" it is in, so for instance if you want to read the first paragraph you have to scroll left/right/left/right every 10 words.

The "sub-cards" also look weird because they do not start at the same height (when you are on mobile you can not see that it is the result of vertically aligning pairs of sub-cards).

Communication looks a bit better, but it is not responsive design or anything close. The paragraphs are so narrow that each line only contains 1 to 3 words.

I know wikicode does not make responsive design easy to implement, but I want to bring this positive criticism here in order to make Wikivoyage's experience for mobile users. Cheers! Syced (talk) 11:27, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

 * I second this comment. The pages are attractively formatted on desktop, but on mobile they don't look great. I think a good solution would be to make it so that on mobile, the pages are displayed as just one column rather than two. I have no idea how to implement this, though. —Granger (talk · contribs) 14:28, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I have brought up the topic here before about mobile functionality. Totally agree should be thinking mobile first. Also have no idea how this is defined and who knows anything about the subject. Who do we ask about this subject? --Traveler100 (talk) 17:19, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
 * User:WhatamIdoing might be able to help, or if not maybe someone at the WMF who can help with optimizing for mobile devices. —Granger (talk · contribs) 18:59, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Syced, Granger, Traveler100:

It looks like Travel topics is built from Template:Topicbox, which means that each item is a small table, and all the small tables are placed inside a big table.

It would look better on mobile if at least the main table were converted to div tags. Maybe something like the responsive system that's used in some of the English Wikipedia's column templates would work. (Please ping me.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:43, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Admit I had not tested this on mobile. Will take a look but will be a few days before I will have the time. --Traveler100 (talk) 00:29, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

 * Hi Traveler100, just a reminder in case you've forgotten about this. Travel topics and other pages with two-column formatting like Boat travel still look bad on mobile. —Granger (talk · contribs) 00:26, 19 September 2018 (UTC) —Granger (talk · contribs) 00:26, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
 * A single topic area looks better on mobile (Travel topics/sandbox) but not so good on desktop. --Traveler100 (talk) 08:11, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
 * It would be ideal to come up with something that looks good on both desktop and mobile. Going off of User:WhatamIdoing's suggestion, maybe we could copy some code from the English Wikipedia. Would it work to just copy and use w:Template:Column-width? —Granger (talk · contribs) 11:31, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I've created Template:Column-width and used it to implement mobile-friendly formatting in Travel topics, Boat travel, General transportation subjects, and Communication. I couldn't find other articles with the same problem, but if there are others, their formatting should be adjusted too. —Granger (talk · contribs) 13:45, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Stop the breadcrumbs?
As I see it, breadcrumbs for travel topics were introduced without consensus, ignoring some completely sensible objections. The most recent discussion in archives is Wikivoyage_talk:Travel_topics_index/Archive_2004-2013; see above that for some of the earlier stuff. There are now many uses of the PartOfTopic template & people are still adding them. The one that brought this to my attention was a change by User:Traveler100 at D-Day beaches.

Since there was no consensus, I would feel justified in reverting all such additions, but I thought I'd ask for comment here first. Pashley (talk) 16:44, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The PartOfTopic template guarantees that the article is on the index page and provides a good method of bot clean up processes as well as providing some structure for readers to move to other articles if come to a topic page first. I think it is way past time we did the same for Itineraries. --Traveler100 (talk) 16:49, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes I agree on adding breadcrumbs to itineraries. I'm surprised they weren't already used. There's enough of them now that breadcrumbs will help improve navigating among them. Gizza ( roam ) 23:05, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

 * I have no objection to breadcrumbs wherever there is an actual hierarchical relation between articles, for example having crumbs that link dive sites in South Africa to Diving in South Africa. If we have itineraries A->B, B->C->D and D->E trips, then giving them crumbs to an overall; A->E itinerary is natural.
 * However, as I see it, using breadcrumbs elsewhere causes more problems than it solves; if the relationships are not naturally hierarchical then imposing a hierarchy is just a rather stupid mistake. As I see it, adding crumbs in all topics or all itineraries is exactly that. Pashley (talk) 01:39, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

 * I think it's fine to have breadcrumbs in travel topics. They're part of the Travel topic template, and they're now so widespread that it would be hard to remove all of them or even a large portion of them. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk | contributions ) 23:49, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Subject area topics...
Currently we have travel topics, itenaries and destinations... A few of the ideas I've suggested or started tend to be interest area articles, like Botnaical Tourism, Aviation history, Castles (thanks for starting it BTW), and so on that don't necessarily sit clearly on the boundary between destinations and travel topics, (or don't fit into the destination structure like British Coast.)

So do we need a category for 'thematic interest' articles?

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:02, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
 * The examples you give sound like perfect Travel Topics, not sure why another classification is needed. In fact I would like to propose scrapping Itineraries and just make all travel topics but index by region as well as topic. --Traveler100 (talk) 18:13, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
 * These are all well and good, and I am always happy to see more content being created, but I'll point out that as a travel guide we still have so very many destination articles that lack content. People looking for ways to contribute might consider helping us fill out or update or clean up our destination articles. Ground Zero (talk) 18:19, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

New travel topics
I have some ideas for some new travel topics. Libertarianmoderate (talk) 13:06, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Star Trek tourism
 * Spanish-American War historical travel
 * Mission Trip survival guide
 * Druze religion travel

 * I suppose at least some of those could be written, but I very much prefer one good travel topic article to a dozen outlines. If you are going to write those yourself, plunge forward, but start with the one you are best at and try to make it reasonably complete before starting the next one. I do not understand what the survival guide is about. If it is about how to survive as a missionary, I suppose it is hard to write sensibly, and easy to fill with prejudices. And I know nothing about Druze religion travel. --LPfi (talk) 14:57, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

 * While I appreciate your enthusiasm, I think limiting yourself to a few things at a time rather than getting bogged down in myriads of outlines is the better course of action. At any rate, you can also try out ideas that may or may not be fit for mainspace in your user space. Just take the URL of your userpage and add /whateveritisyouwantthearticletobe and then click on "create page". So for example https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/User:Libertarianmoderate/example Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:15, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Subject interest travel topics...
Prompted by the scoping concerns in relation to a user draft, I felt it wise to open a discussion to settle the wider concern about travel topics that focus on a particular interest area, as opposed to travel practicalites. I'm not sure if given the drafting problems some of them are easy to scope, or if they would be better implemented in an itinerary form. I am not expecting there to be any consensus, and so would welcome as many views as possible. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:24, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I think as long as the author of a travel topic can prove that the travel topic is related to travel, we should allow it. The problem I see with your user draft, as a start, is how it overlaps with History of justice. --Comment by Selfie City  (talk about my contributions ) 13:43, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Travel topics
Recently some issues have come up over various travel topics and their relevance to this wiki. It's to do with a broad sweep of travel topics that were mostly created around 2015 that have been expanded but, apparently, are not considered anymore to be very travel relevant.

A lot of them are historical, but not all of them. See Wildlife photography, Ancient Egypt, Music, Seven Wonders of the Ancient World, etc. They have grown at various amounts, depending on whether editors tried to turn them into quality articles, just salvage them from being stubs, or left them alone completely.

I'd rather see most of these be kept and allowed, but I think the most important thing is that we make an ultimate decision on whether or not we keep these; otherwise, there's a lot of work going into these articles that gets wasted. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 00:30, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

 * The four articles you've listed are very different from each other; I don't think we need a one-size-fits-all decision for what to do with them. Better to evaluate each on its own merits. —Granger (talk · contribs) 00:45, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

 * But they're all travel topics, right? --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 00:55, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

 * Yes. If the question here is, "Should Wikivoyage continue to have travel topic articles?", my answer is a firm "yes". —Granger (talk · contribs) 01:12, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * (ec) I don't recall discussion about any of these. The discussion was about one individual article, created today, not in 2015, over at Talk:Ancient Israel.
 * Although I see there was also some discussion about Ancient Egypt, over at User talk:Mx. Granger.
 * Either way, it's not relevant here. None of these topics have anything in common. What I see here is a disingenous attempt to drown out legitimate complaints about bad, travel-irrelevant articles by associating them with actually-good articles, rather than arguing an article's merits to find the best solution for the site. No one suggested a global travel topic policy, and no one mentioned those articles.
 * This was not done in good faith and it's leaving a bad taste in my mouth, frankly. I hope I'm badly mistaken. ARR8 (User talk:ARR8 | Special:Contributions/ARR8) 01:14, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, you are. Further explanation coming shortly. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 01:56, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't support merging Ancient Egypt with Egypt. The borders don't correspond, like many historical regions, civilisations and empires. I imagine it's the same with Israel. Gizza ( roam ) 03:11, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * It is the same with Israel. Some Jewish tribes had land on the East Bank (at least, that is the tradition - I don't know how much history or archeology is behind it), and there certainly are important Jewish sites in the West Bank, for instance. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:20, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Since I created the mentioned articles (except Seven Wonders of the Ancient World) I feel obliged to reply. Wikivoyage is (and The Other Site was) overall an experimental project without precedent. It is difficult to know which projects will be useful. Some travel topics (such as historical travel and music) might be useful as portals for more elaborate travel topics. /Yvwv (talk) 19:43, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Also, many of the travel topics in categories such as historical travel and fiction tourism are well-developed; some have been featured. The four examples above are not representative. /Yvwv (talk) 15:54, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Barabar Caves

 * hi guys,
 * i am new to wiki voyage we are doing project on Barabar Caves - Wikipedia so anybody please guide me how to create travel guide on the wikivoyage.as we less time as project group i need someone assistance.
 * Thank You,
 * Regards
 * Abhishek Singh Abhisal2408 (talk) 08:56, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Abhishek: I have posted some information on your talk page. Ground Zero (talk) 09:08, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

I have a question about Bus Route
I have a question about Bus Route, can whether create an bus route of topic guide? Because of the site or place name of the bus, there will be local tourist attractions, and some governments will have sightseeing buses, so I want to ask this question.

There are a lot of bus routes articles on the Chinese Wikipedia that are moved to the Resource page of the Chinese Wikivoyage, I want to know how can formally become the Wikivoyage as an articles.--✈ IGOR ／ ✉ TALK?!  ．WIKIVOYAGER ! 16:20, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

 * Sure. A bus route can be a travel topic if it's interesting enough and would have enough content. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:10, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

 * A bus route can also be an Itinerary. There aren't many examples, but look at: Western Isles Overland Route, which a bus and ferry route and Alexandria to Cape Town by train and bus. We have several train itineraries including The Canadian 4466 km long, West Highland Line 264 km. An important point is that the article should be about the bus route from a traveller's viewpoint describing what you see on the way; there should only be basic information on route history, bus types, passenger numbers etc. AlasdairW (talk) 22:04, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

 * I meant an itinerary, not a travel topic. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:34, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

 * Thanks, I will tried it.--✈ IGOR ／ ✉ TALK?!  ．WIKIVOYAGER ! 15:33, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

 * A few years ago, there were some discussions about bus route articles that might have been moved from WP in Wikivoyage_talk:What_is_an_article%3F/Archive_2014-2015, which concluded that those particular articles didn't belong here. AlasdairW (talk) 22:35, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Passport stamp collecting
Hey everyone. A considerable part of the travel community are interested in collecting passport stamps. They don't travel just to get a passport stamp but they would go out of their way to get one, and there's a whole facebook group dedicated to that. In the same way that there is a postage stamp travel topic, I think it would be interesting to have one that provides hints to travelers on how to get a stamp (since not all countries offer stamps and some countries only provide that at some and not all borders of entry). For example, in Kulusuk, Greenland there is no immigration to stamp your passport-- even though I arrived via Iceland. However, talking to the souvenir shop employee, there is a legit stamp at that same shop that one could use (this is a legit EU-looking stamp). Anyhow, thoughts? For some insight check out Wikipedia's Gallery of passport stamps by country or territory. Marathonian (talk) 00:04, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

 * I agree that this consideration is within our scope. I'm not sure that a travel topic article makes sense, but it might work. In general we include this information in individual destination articles—see San Marino and Machu Picchu for examples. It would be great if you could add advice about this to the Kulusuk article. Relatedly, we also have advice about avoiding getting a passport stamp; see Visa trouble. —Granger (talk · contribs) 05:21, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

 * Yes, ideally it would be best to include that in the relevant destination article but many of them only talk about entry requirements. I guess from now on I can just add that information to the specific destination's page.

Planned cities
These might make a decent travel topic. There are quite a few around the world & a variety of types: medieval ones like Palmanova and Fatehpur Sikri, planned capitals like Brasilia or Chandigarh, suburban ones like Milton Keynes or Kanata, ... Pashley (talk) 02:30, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

 * Yes, it seems like an excellent travel topic. I'm sure there are many people interested in urban planning. I suggest including other capitals such as Abuja, Canberra, and Washington, D.C. Speaking of suburbs, the various Levittowns may be of interest, but I don't think any of them have articles. Nelson Ricardo (talk) 03:02, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Concur this would be a great topic. Might collab on it -- it's of a bit of interest to me. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 03:58, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

 * Paris is also planned, since the 19th century, and how does the Manhattan grid fit into this? Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:06, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

 * We have a short section at Architecture. Initially, perhaps just expand that? Pashley (talk) 04:24, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's a good idea to start there. If it grows enough, then we can spin it off into a separate article. Nelson Ricardo (talk) 04:36, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Perth is also a planned city too, mostly world notable for not having proper public transport. I think we could include the ups and downs of all the major world's planned cities (e.g Brasilia, Canberra, Paris, Perth, Palmanova), as well as general information about them. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 08:04, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a great idea.-- Vulp here  10:23, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
 * All cities are planned and all cities have to contend with local geography to some extent. The term "planned city" is thus either tautological or a misnomer. Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:53, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
 * That's not true. Some cities exist merely as the accumulation of buildings – one farmer builds a house next to another, and a third farmer builds next to the first two, and eventually you accumulate enough people and buildings that it's called a "city" instead of a collection of people and buildings.   A planned city is akin to a planned economy.  Imagine the word centrally attached before each of those. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:42, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Agreed. To quote from our sister site, "A planned community, planned city, or planned town is any community that was carefully planned from its inception and is typically constructed on previously undeveloped land. This contrasts with settlements that evolve in a more ad hoc and organic fashion." --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 16:18, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

A city, by definition, is not a collection of agricultural houses. A first order definition of "city" could be "place of high population density where most inhabitants are at least one step removed from agriculture". Which means that cities needed agricultural surplus and a society complex enough to administrate and deliver it. And such a society by necessity also has rules and contingencies on who can build what where - at least in cities. For example, tanners had to be outside city walls and downwind from the cities. Roman cities (except, ironically, Rome itself) always had a Cardo and Decumanus intersecting at right angles, and so on. It is also often observable that "planned cities" sensu stricto sooner or later deviate from the "grand master plan" as inhabitants and the next generation of rulers find the plan not fitting their interests. So while "planned city" implicitly claims to sit at one extreme of a spectrum and by implication claims all other cities to sit at the absolute opposite end, the truth of the matter is that all cities are somewhere along the line. Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:17, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Another planned city I can think of would be Ottawa I think. Much like Canberra in Australia, which was built from scratch as a compromise between Sydney and Melbourne, I think Ottawa was a compromise picked by Queen Victoria to end the dispute between Toronto and Montreal. The dog2 (talk) 15:38, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
 * @Hobbitschuster, Americans (and perhaps others) use the word city to mean a wide variety of things. There are human settlements in the US that are legally considered cities, whose economies are dominated by agriculture, and whose population is less than a hundred people.  I remember passing through one-street towns on driving trips when I was a kid, where the official road signs that said "Welcome to City X" and "Now Leaving City X" were merely a short walk apart.
 * Even if that weren't true, there is nothing in my original comment ("eventually you accumulate enough people and buildings") that says "eventually" the place will accumulate only farmers and agricultural buildings. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:58, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Ottawa was not a planned city. Bytown, a scruffy lumbertown, was chosen to be the capital (and renamed) as it was on the border of Ontario and Quebec and wouldn't alienate business elites in Montreal and Toronto. But as a capital, it grew organically, and doesn't show very much planning.
 * Of interest to language fans, the commonly used English term "planned city" is similar to the Spanish "ciudad planificada" and the German "Planstadt", while the French generally use "nouvelle ville" and the Italians use "città di fondazione". Ground Zero (talk) 16:54, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Is there any way to distinguish a "planned city" from whatever the counterpart is? Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:52, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily in any sensible absolute way. But a city that was first built according to a plan, which can still be recognised in some way, can work as an interesting example. Saint Petersburg and Helsinki were built to be capitals of/in the Russian Empire, although the geography probably hindered a regular layout. Turku was built as a mostly regular grid after the Great Fire. Kostomuksha was built from scratch as a mining town. Hamina was built more or less as a fortress. The original plan can easily be recognised in some features of these towns, and how the town has deteriorated from the original plan can be as interesting as the plan itself. Towns where the original planning cannot be seen any more, and where new plans have been adapted to the existing structure to a degree that there aren't any visible grand ideas are not planned towns in any sense of that designation. –LPfi (talk) 20:17, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I guess this term is somewhat vague, but Adelaide was certainly planned out, or at least the CBD, North Adelaide and the surrounding parks were planned by Colonel William Light, and the CBD is laid out in a very orderly grid, much like Melbourne's CBD.

 * Singapore does not have an orderly grid system, and initially grew organically, but on Raffles' second visit to Singapore, he drew up a town plan, with Kampong Glam for the Malays, Chinatown for the Chinese, Kampong Chulia for the Indians, European Town for the Europeans, and Commerical Square (today's Raffles Place) as the main square for trading. However, modern Singapore no longer adheres closely to Raffles' town plan; Kampong Chulia no longer exists, so if you want to experience Indian culture in Singapore, you go to Little India, which is in a different location from the former Kampong Chulia. Kampong Glam still exists but is largely a tourist area with some historical sities, and if you want a more authentic experience of day-to-day Malay life, you go to Geylang Serai. And European Town also no longer exists, and the white community in Singapore is very small as most of them left after Singapore became independent. So this is another ambiguous case. The dog2 (talk) 20:29, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
 * While the CBD is planned, the southern, eastern and south eastern weren't planned. They naturally grew. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 02:09, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * The way to distinguish a planned town from the normal kind is that for planned towns, you can point to a specific founding date and the specific plan, created by a specific person/group.
 * I imagine that for most people, the main points of interest will be related to the 20th-century New towns movement, with the occasional well-preserved older example (e.g., a "planned town" that was really a palace). Something like tiny German villages and railroad towns in the 19th-century American West (both of which tend to have their two oldest streets meet in a T-shape), isn't going to be as interesting as a Levittown. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:47, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

 * as for my home ground Brasília, it was built from scratch literally, from 1956, according to Lúcio Costa's master urban plan of two intersecting axises, like an airplane, I'd say it would be the perfect textbook example of a Planned City, but that would be, you know, too bairristic. Chandigarh (substitute Le Corbusier for Lúcio Costa) and Washington DC (Pierre Charles L'Enfant) are better leads, I guess. Ibaman (talk) 22:56, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 * Perhaps a more general article on urban planning? Pashley (talk) 00:02, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Erlangen does not have a founding date (the anniversary is celebrated per German convention based on the first mention of the place in an official document). However, parts of the historical downtown are very much laid out on a grid and built in a short period of time with a defined goal and purpose (namely to house newly arriving Huguenots). The old town burned down some years later and was consequently rebuilt in the Huguenot town style. The "Housing Area" was built for the American barracks and also follows a (separate) master plan. Is Erlangen a "planned city"? Hobbitschuster (talk) 10:16, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I've edited Architecture moderately extensively. The main thing I know is missing is a list of planned capitals; some are given by Ibaman above. No doubt other things could be added as well & some of my text improved. Pashley (talk) 02:15, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * another valued debate on this matter is whether Oklahoma City, which started to exist on 22 April 1889, would qualify. I'm not familiar with its urban plan and cannot have an opinion.Ibaman (talk) 11:17, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not an expert in urban planning, so I would defer to other sources, like Wikipedia, which says "A planned community, planned city, or planned town is any community that was carefully planned from its inception and is typically constructed on previously undeveloped land." Like a lot of terminology, the definition is not precise and is open to interpretation. That article includes lists of cities that meet the definition, though. We don't have to reinvent the wheel. We are dealing with an accepted term used in several languages. Erlangen and Oklahoma City are not on Wikipedia's list. If you think they should be, you can make your case on that article's talk page.
 * A starting point for this article, or an alternative to it, would be to focus on purpose-built national capitals, which is a more focused topic, and might be easier to start with. Ground Zero (talk) 12:52, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Erlangen likely meets the usual definitions (because there were detailed plans for the 'new' city, and then similar detailed plans to replace the 'old' city when it burned down) and Oklahoma City likely does not (because merely laying out a street grid or drawing property lines isn't usually enough to be a 'planned city').
 * However, trying to find the One True™ Classification is not our task. Our task is to decide whether a person interested in this subject would be interested in visiting this or that place.  It doesn't actually matter if it "is" a planned city; it only matters whether it's an interesting place to visit if you wanted to explore this subject. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:06, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Listings in travel topic articles
I noted that some listings in Public transportation include phone numbers, opening hours or other details that are prone to change, and none of them link to the listing in the relevant destination article. All instead link to the venue's web site. This means that readers might miss the description in the primary listing and that any updates have to be done in two places or one will be outdated, probably this one.

I think we have kind of consensus that listings should foremost be in the destination article, and a listing elsewhere "would probably just duplicate content that should instead be placed in the main [destination] articles". Should something be written into some guideline, such as (the yet to be created) Travel topics?

A listing in an article can be linked using the name of the venue as given in the listing: Brooklyn/Downtown will take you to the listing as long as the name parameter isn't changed. Using the Wikidata ID as in Brooklyn/Downtown is more reliable as Wikidata IDs don't change, but less obvious (and the listing may still be moved to another page).

Should we start linking the primary listings in secondary listings, such as in travel topic articles: " name=New York Transit Museum " (or "name=...#New York Transit Museum|...")? I think listings in the travel topic articles should contain just the information needed for the reader to decide whether they are interested in the place listed. If the URL of the place(which often is very relevant to that decision) isn't shown, two clicks would be needed to reach the site, but I think that is less of an issue than that you might have a listing with a dead link, updated in an article you perhaps cannot easily find.

In some articles the link to the main listing is in the directions parameter, leading to the article where the listing is assumed to be. Consistently linking the listing would more or less ensure that editors find the article which really contains the listing, and have them create the listing there if not already present.

(Links in itineraries should probably be discussed separately, as their listings aren't always relevant in other contexts.)

–LPfi (talk) 07:51, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

 * I would support writing this into the guidelines if it isn't already.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 08:22, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I would mostly support this. The only exceptions should be if a travel topic covers a listing that does not have a city or park article, or if it's listed in a topic article but would fail WV:WORSHIP. SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 08:32, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Support. I think the guideline should be: only provide the name of the attraction, tell why it would be interesting to the readers of the topic article in question and give an internal link (could be in various forms; I don't have a specific preference and usually copy the style the previous editors of an article overwhelmingly used) to the destination article, the lowest in the geographical hierarchy possible, where it is (or is expected to be, if not already) listed or otherwise mentioned (e.g. the region articles), and leave the further details to that article. As an aside, I've found the topic articles to be very helpful in catching what listings are missing in the linked destination articles. Vidimian (talk) 10:16, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Though before we proceed to rounds of edits removing the extra details discussed here from the topic articles, I'd recommend checking the destination articles to see if they are already provided there, and if not, moving them, so we don't get rid of valuable information once and for all from anywhere at Wikivoyage. Vidimian (talk) 10:21, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I'd hesitate to try to require users to use Wikidata links. There's a learning curve and a hassle factor to finding them. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:37, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * No, we shouldn't. I think we should either just recommend copying the name from the listing (and checking that the link works) or additionally point out the Wikidata option, to be used at editors' discretion when the name might be unstable. –LPfi (talk) 19:20, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Generally I support adding this to the guidelines. In most cases I think it is sufficient to just link to the city article without linking to the individual listing - in some cases a topic may have one listing and the city article has two or more (e.g. some cities linked from Art Deco architecture). Many listings don't have Wikidata values and we shouldn't suggest that these need to be created. There are very few cases where a listing belongs in a topic, and so a specialist reader might make an international journey to see it, and yet not in the city article for a general reader who is walking past; an exception might be for very local travel topics.
 * I prefer to keep the URL in the topic article, as this can point to a topic relevant part of the site for complex attractions and for ease of tracking things as an editor - if I edit the topic, it gets added to my watchlist and then I know if a bot flags the link as dead, but I am probably not watching the city article. AlasdairW (talk) 22:21, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The listing template was updated some time ago, and the new version does not show the external link (from the url parameter) if the name is an internal link. Does the dead link bot check URLs that aren't shown? Otherwise either link needs to be outside the template for you to be notified. We should perhaps tweak guidelines or the template. Anyway, I tried to document what consensus we reached in Listings (diff) and Travel topic article template (diff). –LPfi (talk) 14:49, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

I have made a proposal to clarify our advice on this issue at Wikivoyage talk:Travel topic article template. Ground Zero (talk) 03:28, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Categorization of travel topic destinations?
Travel topics, especially those in historical travel, tend to have destinations in different categories, often Listing and See. In some articles, such as World War II in Europe, there seems to be no system for the category used; in others the Listing is used for cities, provinces and other generalized places which are not specific locations. Stockholm history tour is an attempt to use the Listing category for landmarks visible in the distance, which are not waypoints. Shall we try to use a more generalized system? /Yvwv (talk) 11:51, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

 * We could use a system that lists landmarks, provinces, cities, and other places in a way that is organised and easy to understand. It would also make it easier to compare different destinations and find out more information about them.
 * How would you go about it? Roovinn (talk) 04:04, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I think I'd prefer the status quo and treat this on a case-by-case basis. SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 11:14, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

superlatives
Is there a place for collecting these? Arlo Barnes (talk) 09:27, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
 * https://osm.org/search?query=world's%20biggest
 * https://osm.org/search?query=world's%20tallest
 * etc.

 * At the moment, no, but I could see that being a kind of valid travel topic. Something like extreme travel or even just "superlative travel", maybe. I'm open to others' thoughts as well. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:37, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

 * Here are some related pages: Geographical records, Developmental records, Architecture, Weather records, Australia's big things. —Granger (talk · contribs) 15:00, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

 * Ooh, 'big things' seems like it may be a handy colloquial term. Arlo Barnes (talk) 18:07, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
 * It's a handy but popular term in Australia to describe, well, giant sculptures. SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 21:39, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

FYI: a few travel tip articles

 * The 10 most underrated beach towns in America: https://www.timeout.com/usa/travel/most-underrated-beach-towns-in-america
 * 5 US Sleeper Train Routes for the Ultimate Slow Travel Journey: https://www.cntraveler.com/story/us-sleeper-train-routes
 * 10 Common Travel Scams — and How to Avoid Them: https://getpocket.com/explore/item/10-common-travel-scams-and-how-to-avoid-them
 * —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:15, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
 * @Koavf Can we somehow incorporate those article to Wikivoyage? With heavy copyediting, of course. Veracious (talk) 02:56, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
 * For sure. We already have scams, e.g. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:52, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Travel topics index


text:
Talk:Transportation

Goal
The purpose for this article is to be an incubator/index for any travel topic information that would be relevant in a "Get in" or "Get around" section of a geographic article. Thus, if someone is interested in writing about general considerations related to taxis, the information could be added to this article, and should it ever grow to the point where a separate article was warranted then (and only then) would that article be created. The headings and organization of this article aren't as good as they could be, so improvements are welcome. -- (WT-en) Ryan 23:30, 7 August 2006 (EDT)

Redundant title?
"Travel" and "transportation" are synonyms. I would never use the two words right after each other, and consider this an awkward, redundant expression. Are there any objections to moving the article to "Transportation"? Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:42, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree - transportation sounds much better. --Nick (talk) 09:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Nobody objected and you supported, so I moved the article. Thanks for your input. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:46, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Do we need to move this page as well? --Nick (talk) 22:56, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Just moving a sub-index page is just a partial job done. All the other articles referencing it should also be edited. --Traveler100 (talk) 04:16, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Is there an easy way to find out which articles reference an article? Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:12, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
 * For links to the page on the left of the page under Toolbox the option What links here. To see what breadcrumb trail leads there, in your preferences switch on hidden categories, can then click down the trail.--Traveler100 (talk) 06:38, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Quite a lot of pages, actually. But it doesn't seem urgent, because whatever links to the redirect will come here, anyway. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:53, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

rename article to "get around"
I think the average wikivoyage user is more or less familiar with the section headings in articles and would rather search for "get around" than for "Transportation", therefore to make this page more useful for travellers we should rename it "get around" as we also have articles on talk and sleep and at least a redirect from drinkHobbitschuster (talk) 18:39, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
 * So this article has been renamed from the noun Transportation to the verb Transport. Only some of the sub-articles have been changed and the title page not. Do others agree with the change? Should the other articles' breadcrumbs be changed too or this change reverted or is there an intention for new structure and the task is simply not yet finished? --Traveler100 (talk) 04:38, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * "Transport" is also a noun in British English, but not in American English. However, "transportation" is also recognized in Britain. No, I don't agree with the change. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:47, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Moved articles and categories that were set to Transport back with the other that are at Transportation. --Traveler100 (talk) 13:28, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Order of topics
Driving with private cars and car camping are now the first topics mentioned in this article (after the restructuring), and private cars are said to be the most common means of transportation. I doubt that is true, at least when it comes to international travel, which I suppose is the primary subject of the project.

Choosing your vehicle, which formerly was the first section has disappeared (to where?). I think that issue deserves its former visible position (It might have been moved to an even better place, I have not checked other articles).

I suppose the order used in the guide templates would be logical. I'd also change the texts, where bus, bike and motorcycle tips are for those who "wish to" use that kind of transportation. I understand it for bike and motorcycle, but wouldn't it be as suiting for cars? Buses, on the other hand, are nearly unavoidable for those not going by own or rented car or extensively using taxis.

--LPfi (talk) 12:19, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

 * The article was reverted to the old version. The comments above apply if the new version is to be reintroduced. --LPfi (talk) 10:38, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

We need to talk
I think it is too radical to work over a high-level travel topic like this one withoug previous discussion on the talk page. Lots of material has been deleted without previous discussion. In my opinion, the transportation page should be reverted before any talk has been going on. /Yvwv (talk) 17:26, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I second the motion. The new thing looks somewhat infantilizing and there was a lot of information cut without discussion. Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:50, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Transportation


text:
Talk:Traverse City

Regarding island ferries, I had put them under "get in" under the assumption that some people might go to the islands first, then go to TC... but if that's silly, then taking them off is fine :) -- (WT-en) Haem85 20:49, 17 July 2006 (EDT)

 * I don't think anyone's going to find themselves on South Manitou and wonder how to get to the mainland. They either got there on their own boat, or they bought a round-trip ticket in Leland from Manitou Island Transit (so they know where Leland is, and probably drove through TC to get there).  Beaver Island's not as cut-and-dried (you could take a plane there, and a ferry back), but it's still a there-and-back side trip from Charlevoix, not a real way-point en route to TC.  I don't think we can anticipate every possible "Get in" scenario... just tell people what highways to look for, or which planes/boats/trains offer direct service.  By the way: Any particular reason for the indented bullets (:*) instead of regular ones (*)? -(WT-en) Todd VerBeek

 * Yeah, that logic makes perfect sense. I'm with ya. As for the indented bullets: improved readability. :) -- (WT-en) Haem85 13:44, 18 July 2006 (EDT)

Snowmobile link to Adventure Rentals is a dead link- Adventure is out of business. There are only 2 companies offering snowmobile rentals in Traverse City: Blue Sky Rentals (http://www.bluesky-tvc.com/indexWinter.htm) and Snowblitz (http://www.snowblitz.com).

Dill's Olde Towne Saloon should also be removed- they closed long ago. Blue Tractor Cook Shop (http://www.bluetractorcookshop.com/) is now located there.

 * You are more than welcome to plunge forward and make those changes. This wiki is open to all --(WT-en) Nick 08:06, 19 April 2008 (EDT)

title: Talk:Traverse City


text:
Talk:Trekking in Nepal

vfd discussion

 * Delete. This one is yet another created by the Traveler. It's linked to from several locations, but the info is already covered in Nepal, which seems a more obvious place for it. -- (WT-en) Ryan 14:30, 31 March 2006 (EST)
 * Delete. I think he was doing Maj a favor... because she must have linked it someplace. He/she did me a similar favor with Rees-Dart Track from my talk page. -- (WT-en) Ilkirk 14:35, 31 March 2006 (EST)
 * Hummmm Maj it is on your todo list User:(WT-en) Maj/Todo..... keep or delete? -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 15:47, 31 March 2006 (EST)
 * I'd like to keep it please. I promise to get to it ASAP. There's a ton of info specific to Trekking in Nepal (where to go, what to bring, what you can by, "teahouse trekking", porters, etc...). If subjects like OHV Riding in Oregon get their own pages, than this should too... (WT-en) Majnoona 11:19, 5 April 2006 (EDT)
 * Keep. A valid travel topic, makes a lot of sense to keep it. --(WT-en) Evan 10:04, 6 April 2006 (EDT)

Links policy
I presume that more than one trekking agency can be hired to guide each of these treks, so should any listed trek have links to trekking agencies? Conversely, should any be linked to a blog post? As I understand External links, we normally wouldn't link to a blog, but we link to trekking agencies' sites only when listing them in particular or mentioning some small number (5 or fewer, perhaps, or maybe 7 or fewer) of reputable agencies that guide a particular trek. So what do you think we should do with listings that are linked to URLs in this article? Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:28, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

 * So? Any feedback from anyone? Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:12, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

 * I deleted the link of Langtang & Helambu to a tour agency site, but my question remains open. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:37, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Alternative banner for this article?
I have previously created an alternative banner for this article (which was initially created for the parallel article at the Hebrew Wikivoyage, but I decided to suggest we'll use it here at the English Wikivoyage article as well). Which banner do you prefer that we'll use on the top of this article? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 13:31, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * While the new banner has a stronger connection to the subject matter, the current banner is more eye-catching. Ground Zero (talk) 18:12, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I have to favor the current banner, which is the reason you're trekking in Nepal, rather than the "trekking through rubble" view. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:13, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I also prefer the current banner. Gizza ( roam ) 02:22, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Trekking in Nepal


text:
Talk:Trentino-Alto Adige

Is Trentino-Alto Adige called Alto Adige, Trentino, both or is this a different place? I am confused as the current introduction makes me want to move this article to Alto Adige but I do not know if this would be correct or the most common name. See Project:Article naming conventions. -- (WT-en) Huttite 18:13, 23 Jan 2005 (EST)

RE: Trentino-Alto Adige
Trentino-Alto Adige is the umbrella term for the autonomous region consisting of the two provinces 1. Alto Adige (capital Bolzano) and 2. Trentino (capital Trento)

South Tyrol & Trentino are different
Hi! South Tyrol (Alto Adige/Südtirol) and Trentino are two different regions in an administrative regional entity of Italy. Touristically they are different things. I'd propose to edit two different pages: one for South Tyrol and one for Trentino. The information in this page are all about South Tyrol's (history, talk, see and the first three links) and only the two towns of Trentino are things of this region. If you are agree I'm going to change. (WT-en) Strudl 16:50, 8 Jul 2005 (EDT)

!!! Please DON'T confuse "Alto Adige" and "South Tyrol"
Trentino and Alto Adige are the 2 different provinces.

South Tyrol (Sudtirol) is the "german" name of Alto Adige.

title: Talk:Trentino-Alto Adige


text:
Talk:Triberg Im Schwarzwald

Please feel free to expand and correct any information on this page. I visited Triberg once and this is were I got my information from.

title: Talk:Triberg Im Schwarzwald


text:
Talk:Triângulo Mineiro

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:37, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Vista parcial de Uberaba (MG).jpg

title: Talk:Triângulo Mineiro


text:
Talk:Trieste

A lot of the text being added by 212.63.102.163 appears to be copy vio. Some of the text is being copied from http://www.ts.camcom.it/english/laprovincia/provincia.htm

 * dang, that's too bad. I was happy to see someone working on this city... Maybe I can give it a rewrite... (WT-en) Majnoona 15:52, 21 Feb 2006 (EST)
 * Crappo, that's a lot of text. I'm going to add the copy vio message... we might just need to remove/rollback... (WT-en) Majnoona 15:53, 21 Feb 2006 (EST)
 * Ah! Didn't know there was a copy vio message... Learn something new every day. The Wikivoyageer has added some good stuff too, so maybe we can edit out the copy vio and leave the good stuff. -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 15:57, 21 Feb 2006 (EST)

I am leaving in the morning for a few days in Treiste so I hope to make a few updates.

Pagebanner

Hello fellas, why in the code of the main page appears the photo of trieste but in the code says default pagebanner?

Traveller of the cantabric sea Viajero del cantábrico (talk) 19:09, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Trieste


text:
Talk:Trikora

Lobo
is the Lobo obsession in this article just a tout? --(WT-en) inas 22:43, 18 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Doubt it. Lobo runs the Shady Shack and the mentions date back from the first edits of this article. (WT-en) Jpatokal 01:24, 19 June 2009 (EDT)

title: Talk:Trikora