text:
Wikivoyage talk:Docents

Why "docent"?
When Maj first came up with this idea, we bounced around a couple of names for the relationship. The obvious one is "guide", like a tour guide, but since we call our travel guides "travel guides" it seemed kind of confusing. Also rejected was "host", since we thought there might be some misunderstanding that there was some kind of hospitality exchange going on and that readers could expect to stay at the hosts' homes.

Although I lobbied hard for "cicerone", which I think is a cool word, Maj settled on "docent", which is (usually) what volunteer guides at a museum or a tourist information center are called. A knowledgeable, friendly person who's willing to answer questions is exactly the kind of relationship we were shooting for, so I think it's a good name. --(WT-en) Evan 14:49, 19 Feb 2006 (EST)

 * This is a really great idea, but how are people to know that an article has a docent? I'm in the process of adding myself as a docent for a few things in New Mexico, and at least as of today, there doesn't seem to be anything new in the article text (say a box at the end) to indicate that the capability has been added.  Is that one of those not-implemented-yet features that we'll see in the next few days? -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 15:01, 19 Feb 2006 (EST)

 * It's in the left column, under the search box. Of course this means I have to rework my JavaScript again for the new skin, but that's fine, since it will be more flexible when I'm done.  I got at least some work on the Santa Fe map done today by the way. -- (WT-en) Mark 15:38, 19 Feb 2006 (EST)

I think the word 'docent' is a bit too obscure; in Europe it means a lecturer in college, not a tour guide! "Maintainer"? "Groundskeeper"? "Pathfinder"? Just plain old "expert"? (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:05, 19 Feb 2006 (EST)

 * Seems to me that just about any word chosen will have some cultural overtones. All of those do.  "Guru"?  Nah...  I'd just as soon leave this alone. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 22:24, 19 Feb 2006 (EST)

 * Hmm, I did consider "Pathfinder" but Maintainer and Groundskeeper have too much to do with the article and what we want to suggest is a connection to the place. I'd hate to have people start to think of it as some sort of control/ownership of the guide (ie "I shouldn't edit this, it's someone else's page" or "not my problem, the maintainer will deal with it"). I'm not against considering other terms (like Evan said, we changed our mind a few times already) but so far I haven't heard anything that works better. ("Lecturer" isn't too far off the mark in my mind...) (WT-en) Majnoona 23:15, 19 Feb 2006 (EST)

 * How about savant? (WT-en) WindHorse 20 Feb 06

 * If it really must be changed, "Sage," maybe? -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 00:03, 20 Feb 2006 (EST)

 * Works in French too. That said I'd like to resurrect cicerone which is a really cool word.  Since what we're talking about doing here is pretty seriously novel I think importing a new word into English is exactly the right thing to do.  I guess the only problem is that there's a travel guide publisher in Britain using that name. -- (WT-en) Mark 03:55, 20 Feb 2006 (EST)

How about Cabbie
Isn't the person who normally fulfills this duty called a "cab driver" or "cabbie" ? -- (WT-en) Mark 03:56, 20 Feb 2006 (EST)

 * Err... no.  Here's a neutrally radical idea: "Local"? Or "native", "inhabitant", ... (WT-en) Jpatokal 04:04, 20 Feb 2006 (EST)

 * The meaning is exactly right, but I think most people associate the word with a cab driver - at least I do. (WT-en) WindHorse 20 Feb 06

 * Yes, exactly. -- (WT-en) Mark 06:57, 20 Feb 2006 (EST)

 * The docent by no means has to be an inhabitant, local, or native. I think that a majority of docents will not be. --(WT-en) Evan 10:36, 20 Feb 2006 (EST)

other language versions
Hi! Does it work in the other language versions? I added the RDF-Code to an article on German Wikivoyage. It didn't work. -- (WT-en) DerFussi 10:05, 23 February 2006 (EST)

 * You were using "User" rather than "Benutzer", and you were also putting things in curly-brackets, which is only necessary for template parameters. I've changed your code, and it works, and I've also added a de:Template:hasDocent, which also seems to work. You'll probably want to move that to a more reasonable name in German. --(WT-en) Evan 11:27, 23 February 2006 (EST)

 * Thanks a lot. What a simple error but a big effect. I am going to suggest 'Insider' it's very common in German to describe a person who knows a lot about a place. -- (WT-en) DerFussi 11:43, 23 February 2006 (EST)
 * One note about "insider" it's already used by Bootsnall, but maybe it's not a big issue, since they dont currently have a German version! (WT-en) Majnoona

Please add to the guide, how I can add my user of another locale as a docent. Example: I lived 6 months in the city of Karlskrona, so someone missing an information in the page may ask me. I've a user in German Wikivoyage project. I tried hasDocent|de:Username but that redirects to URL .../en/User:de:Username -- but it shall be ...de/Benutzer:Username. Are cross-locale Docents only possible by adding myself as a user in ALL langages and having those pages redirecting to my 'main' user page?! --85.216.10.138 06:40, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

List of docents
Hi there, we have so many list, but I think one with all docents might be useful. If I was looking for a docent in a particular city or region, I could easily contact him/her. Cheers, (WV-en) Felix - 19/May/2006, 17:42 GMT

 * I'd support this. It would also help to track growth of the project. - (WT-en) Andrew Haggard (Sapphire) 04:41, 11 June 2006 (EDT)

 * "Bump" Hear hear. Would this best be done as a category, to be added to the docent template? --(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald Talk 10:45, 1 May 2007 (EDT)

 * Yes here too! Pretty please?! Seems like Peter has the right idea but how to do it I'm not sure. (WT-en) Jordan 17:42, 1 August 2007 (EDT)

 * Well, a half-year went by with no objections, so I've done this. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 15:45, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Still on Docents
Moved from Project:Travellers' pub I'm not being able to set myself as a docent on the Sao Paulo page. Could it be anything wrong on the server side or am I screwing it up somehow? :) Cheers! (WT-en) Mattalves 18:28, 13 May 2006 (EDT)

 * The HasDocent template apparently doesn't work properly if you go to an article by way of a redirect (such as São Paulo or Sao Paulo (city) instead of Sao Paulo). These bits of code are somewhat delicate. :)  It might be worthwhile to follow Special:Whatlinkshere/Sao_Paulo to find out which pages are linking to it through redirects, and change them to São Paulo, so they link directly. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 19:55, 13 May 2006 (EDT)

 * Thanks for the help and the corrections, Todd! Works fine now :) (WT-en) Mattalves 12:27, 14 May 2006 (EDT)

Idea
How about having docents for a destination arrange discounts for Wikivoyagers that consult the docent for that destination? I think it would be extremely useful, but there are some cons to the idea also. Here is a short list of pros and cons that I could think of. Feel free to edit the list.

Pros
 * Increases Wikivoyage's visibility
 * Helps the traveller

Cons
 * May not be compatible with IB's advertisement plans
 * The idea may suspectible to abuse i.e. someone taking a kickback - (WT-en) Andrew Haggard (Sapphire) 15:30, 11 June 2006 (EDT)
 * It would discourage people from becoming docents. I'm happy to answer questions for people, but don't ask me to start acting as a travel agent for anyone. Even if I'm not obligated to, I don't want anyone to think that maybe I'll also do stuff for them. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 19:00, 11 June 2006 (EDT)
 * Very good point. I don't think it would be feasible anyway, so I withdraw the idea. - (WT-en) Andrew Haggard (Sapphire) 19:04, 11 June 2006 (EDT)

Country/region oversight
Swept in from the Pub:

Does Wikivoyage have general overseers for the world's various geographic regions (e.g. an overseeing mod for Western Europe, or Brazil)? It might be useful to copy Wikipedia's example of nominating uber-mods who have the final say on matters pertaining to a specific subject. This would ensure that there was a long-term editor watching over a set of articles who had proper perspective on how they were set out.

For example, an overseer for all article about France would be the ideal candidate for making sure that all France articles conform to Wikivoyage standard formats, could be a responsible figure to turn to for consultation when major changes to that set of articles were proposed, could flag articles which need bringing up to par with the best France articles, could coordinate other mods interested in France, could coordinate efforts to remove systemic bias/failings (e.g. the UK article has problems with semi-humorous regional and class conflicts emerging in the article), and could be the final arbiter on matters to do with France articles. Most of those jobs are already performed by editors working en masse, but haphazardly and in pieces. Appointing someone with a little more power and responsibility to deal with major groups of articles might make the editing of those articles more efficient.

I hope I haven't missed this feature's existence! (WT-en) Polocrunch 17:48, 11 May 2006 (EDT)

 * We have a system of Project:Docents, where the docent can answer questions about a destination from readers who have questions.

 * I don't think that travel has the same kind of specialization requirements that deep coverage of a scientific or technical topic requires. I mean, is any particular resident or visitor to Minot really so super-qualified that they should have exclusive and final say over what goes in and what doesn't? That just doesn't seem very reasonable. Things have worked very well so far where people contribute proportionally to their knowledge, dedication to the subject, and free time. A more rigid hierarchy doesn't seem healthy for Wikivoyage at this stage of the game.

 * Do you have some links on that Wikipedia program? I've never seen it. --(WT-en) Evan 20:07, 11 May 2006 (EDT)

Is this working?
I'm a docent for College Park, among other places, and I haven't gotten any questions. Can anyone share any docent success stories? -- (WT-en) Jonboy 16:32, 27 October 2006 (EDT)
 * I haven't gotten anything either. I'm curious if there's a correlation between which guides have docents and the number of guides with docent's that have great coverage.  I've noticed that for a lot of stubs and outlines and even usable guides most of those guides don't have docents and a user will come along and ask a question about the destination on the talk page, but there are almost no questions about Berlin, Warsaw, Cincinnati, Montreal, Chicago, Paris all of which have docents.  -- (WT-en) Andrew H. (Sapphire) 16:54, 27 October 2006 (EDT)
 * I've gotten a couple of emails, so some questions are making it to docents... I think the difference between outlines vs guide articles is that all of the general questions are answered in the guide-level articles. So maybe users would rather direct their specific questions ("I'm travelling with a dog and cat, are there good pet stores in New York?") to a docent. On the outline and usable articles, the more general questions ("Anyone know how long the bus ride is?") end up on the talk page (and their answers should end up in the articles of course).
 * On a related note, a section under the Docent page for 'success stories' might be a good idea! (WT-en) Maj 13:30, 29 October 2006 (EST)

I wonder whether the whole this feature was promoted around Wikivoyage, and newcomers encouraged to leave nominations/considering to be a docent themselves? Another thought is having a list somewhere in sight where all pages having at least one docent/having none are listed--inviting people to fill gaps and stuff. --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 17:24, 25 November 2006 (EST)

Another thought is that the "destination docents" box is hardly visible on the article page at all--people rarely look to the sidebar for information, and a fact that article has docents is not visible on printed edition at all. What about having some infobox instead, promoting docents? If we don't want to have it printed, we can make that section web-only using in the templates, for example. --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 00:09, 29 November 2006 (EST)
 * I'd be for it. KEep smiling, (WT-en) ee  talk 17:34, 9 November 2008 (EST).

Docents should create a Docent section on their user page
Let's recommend docents to link back to a page describing the concept of Docent (should the link refer to Project:Docents)? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 17:22, 25 November 2006 (EST)

 * I plunged forward with this. --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 23:58, 28 November 2006 (EST)

 * Shouldn't this link be to Project:What is a docent? instead of Project:Docents? The first page is for people using docents, the second is mechanics for becoming a docent and being one. Currently, under "becoming a docent", this project page says to link from userpage to Docents, while "Rights and responsibilities" says to link from userpage to What is a docent. --(WT-en) Bill in STL 19:11, 20 August 2010 (EDT)

 * Yes, I added Project:What is a docent? last year but obviously, I didn't catch every change that should be made accordingly. Feel free to fix.  (WT-en) LtPowers 21:15, 20 August 2010 (EDT)

 * Done. (WT-en) Bill in STL 22:05, 20 August 2010 (EDT)

noDocentsYet template?
Any objections if I create a Template:noDocentsYet template that will invite visitors to sign in as Docents for specific articles? We can invoke such template in the bottom of article (and probably make it unprintable). --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 18:13, 29 November 2006 (EST)
 * I'd find it a little odd if the lack of docents was noted more prominently than their presence. Maybe this would be more appropriate for the talk page?  Actually, would a nice banner at the top of the talk page noting the docent be a way of making the docent more prominent?  -- (WT-en) Jonboy 21:14, 29 November 2006 (EST)
 * I suggested above to make existing docents box more prominent, but found no support there so far. I can start with placing a box on Talk page just to move idea forward a bit--although it's a bit inconvenient when is used (and looked for when placing  ) on the article page, while  is proposed to appear on Talk pages. Besides, I agree that on the top of Talk page people will hardly see it at all. --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 07:21, 30 November 2006 (EST)

is a blank template!
I just added myself to a guide, only to find out I was adding a blank template. Maybe this idea has been cancel, in which case this page should be updated...or someone should create the template! -- (WT-en) Padraic 17:00, 17 February 2007 (EST)

 * The template adds Project:RDF to a page. An article with this template included in it will have a new menu that appears in the left navigation that indicates the article has a docent and links to the docent's user page. -- (WT-en) Ryan 17:06, 17 February 2007 (EST)

 * I consider (WT-en) Padraic's comment as another vote for making Docents much more visible on the page--right now, most readers just don't see it--especially non-experts in MediaWiki environment. --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 20:40, 17 February 2007 (EST)

 * Obviously, I agree! I think it appearing at the end of the article -- and crucially, having a sentence explaining what this means without forcing the user to click through to the "Docents" article -- would be far superiour. Also, I really have to disagree with the word choice of "docents" - I had no idea what this meant and had to look it up, and I'm a native English speaker, unlike many people using Wikivoyage. The fact that under the status quo, the docent info is both visually inaccessible, and unexplained, really inhibits the great things this feature could do. -- (WT-en) Padraic 21:18, 17 February 2007 (EST)

In-article docent identifier
I don't really know how to do the code...but how about something roughly like this: I'm sure people could improve this, but just thought I would throw it out there. -- (WT-en) Padraic 22:08, 17 February 2007 (EST)

 * I am voting to have something like this in docented articles. Maybe bit shorter, but otherwise my only question is where to fit it, as in the end of article we already have article status banner, while at the beginning it may grab too much of reader's attention (which is not necessarily a bad thing, but I also have another thing to fit there--huge city reminder on districts). Ideas? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 03:09, 18 February 2007 (EST)

 * Actually there's a docent template which puts an extra navigation box on the left with the docents listed... which is handy, and also keeps the page cleaner. Check out the India page for an example (WT-en) - Cacahuate 06:19, 18 February 2007 (EST)
 * Sorry, I didn't read the previous discussions above before my last reply... so my reply is then: No, I don't like this at all. I think the way that Wikipedia articles look with all of their infoboxes and things starts to get really messy, and I really like the way WT is so simple and clean. There's no reason why people can't start to learn to look at the left nav bar for docents, just like they had to quickly learn everything else they know about this site. It seems we're expanding the usefulness of that nav bar all the time anyway, now with the template, etc... so the nav bar in general I think is becoming more visible. I don't think this is a big enough issue to warrant adding another box to clutter up pages. I don't like the "has no docent" idea suggested above either... if someone has a question they can leave it on the talk page... docents are a great and novel idea and all, but it's not like an article can't survive without one... (WT-en) - Cacahuate 06:33, 18 February 2007 (EST)

 * They're just not visible on the page at all. To repeat from the previous section:
 * >right now, most readers just don't see it--especially non-experts in MediaWiki environment.
 * --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 06:49, 18 February 2007 (EST)

 * And to repeat from the previous section: I really like the way WT is so simple and clean. There's no reason why people can't start to learn to look at the left nav bar for docents, just like they had to quickly learn everything else they know about this site. It seems we're expanding the usefulness of that nav bar all the time anyway, now with the template, etc... so the nav bar in general I think is becoming more visible. I don't think this is a big enough issue to warrant adding another box to clutter up pages. (WT-en) - Cacahuate 08:11, 18 February 2007 (EST)

 * I don't that it's that people "can't" look at the left nav-bar, rather it's that average readers have no reason to look there unless prompted. And again, it seems that there is no agreement what even to call "docents", so under the status quo, you have a well-hidden link with no explanation of what it means. I think an in-article box is required solely on the basis of explaining the concept. As for where to put it in an article, I say at the end, otherwise my inbox is going to be overflowing rather quickly...-- (WT-en) Padraic 10:28, 18 February 2007 (EST)

 * One more thing - if infoboxes are the point of annoyance in this issue, there's no reason that Docent info has to be in a box. I have no problem with simply adding it to the text of the article, I just used a template because that would make it easier. -- (WT-en) Padraic 10:32, 18 February 2007 (EST)

 * Agree here: it can be as modest as
 * ''You can contact to ask any questions which are not addressed in this guide to the following wikivoyagers: UserName1, Username2.
 * or as explicit a article-closing section like this:
 * More information
 * For more information on this article, ask wikivoyage docents on : UserName1, Username2.
 * --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 13:06, 18 February 2007 (EST)

 * I'm going to jump in here with a strong dislike of more boxes in the content. If the left column area isn't eye-catching enough, then that's a design issue and a request should be added to Shared (something I would support). More in-content boxes is a slippery slope that could leave us with articles that are more meta/editorial boxes/content than guide content. (WT-en) Maj 11:20, 18 February 2007 (EST)

 * Why do we need to explain the docent feature in the text of articles? should we also then explain breadcrumb navigation, Wikipedia links, the recent changes page, etc within each guide for users who aren't used to looking at the navigation bars? Perhaps a note to "be sure and check the discussion page" about each article in case something there interests the reader? People will discover the docent feature the same way they've discovered everything else about this site that isn't in the text of the articles. By pure magic. (WT-en) - Cacahuate 16:04, 18 February 2007 (EST)

 * 1. Will more people be interested in docents than wiki features such as recent changes? Yes. 2. Will people who are used to talk pages, and all the other features you name, from other wikis also be familiar with docents? No. 3. Is the meaning of the word "docent" less obvious than "history"? Hell yes! 4. Does the logic you just used make a great justification for making every aspect as obscure as possible because eventually people will "figure it out"? Yes. Some people will figure it out, absolutely, but I think the idea is to make features easier to understand, not harder.... -- (WT-en) Padraic 16:26, 18 February 2007 (EST)

 * 1. not necessarily. 2. good point, but everything about WT is different than other wikis, that's why it isn't those other wikis... docent is one of tons of features that are exclusive to WT. I understand your points, mine is that why is the docent feature so special that it needs in-article descriptions when nothing else does? If the word docent is to unobvious, well maybe then it needs to be changed. I for one knew exactly what it meant and roughly what the feature would be used for from the first time I heard it (when I was very new to WT and wikis in general). I don't find the feature any harder to find or use than many other things around here. (WT-en) - Cacahuate 16:36, 18 February 2007 (EST)

 * why is the docent feature so special that it needs in-article descriptions when nothing else does?
 * In my opinion, the reasons are: a) the feature is much more aimed at novice users than most of others (which are mostly for editors, not for readers); b) the feature is new and (in my opinion) seriously lacks attention of a mass user (only few see it=>usage is really low) and therefore needs to be promoted; c) I think we believe that docents practice gives us an edge compared to any other guidebook, and we have some expectations on value it can bring (don't we?) --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 16:49, 18 February 2007 (EST)

I don't know - I'd just rather see more usable info going into the guides rather than who to contact with questions. I do like the docent idea, but I think it's a good thing if it stays small... if docents were getting hundreds of emails about their destinations then that says that the article for that destination isn't sufficient. I'm not advocating this necessarily, but the talk page is the most likely place someone will head with a question... if we were to put a docent notice anywhere besides the nav bar, I would say it could be at the top of the talk page. But I still don't think that's necessary either. (WT-en) - Cacahuate 17:10, 18 February 2007 (EST)

I'm of the opinion that if we're going to do docents, we should do them right. I'm still looking for one instance of a "success story" of someone contacting a docent. I think there aren't any (or are exceedingly few) because of the invisibility. I think we need to decide on something more visible, or just do away with them. --(WT-en) Jonboy 21:06, 18 February 2007 (EST)

So how we can have some progress on this discussion? Do we need more opinions here? Other alternatives? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 14:04, 19 February 2007 (EST)

Aboutdocentpage needs content
The "hasDocent" template inserts, next to the link to the docent's User page, a link to a page Aboutdocentpage. This page had no content. I plunged forward and put in a redirect to Project:Docents. However, I think that Aboutdocentpage needs content of its own: written for the WT reader rather than editor, explaining what a docent does for travellers and how to take accept their willingness to help. See also Talk:Aboutdocentpage. (WT-en) JimDeLaHunt 14:34, 5 March 2007 (EST)
 * I have created a new page called Project:What is a docent? and redirected Aboutdocentpage to it. (WT-en) LtPowers 18:47, 9 November 2008 (EST)
 * Hmm, I see that the "About Docents" link no longer links to Aboutdocentpage; it goes straight to Project:Docents. Can we have that changed?  (WT-en) LtPowers 18:49, 9 November 2008 (EST)

Pronunciation
How is docent pronounced? "Doe-scent", "Do-kkent"? This should be clarified at the begining of the page because most people will not have encountered this word before! 61.209.194.166 00:33, 7 June 2007 (EDT)

 * It follows the standard rule for English pronunciation: the letter C is pronounced like an S when it comes before the vowel E or I. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 11:00, 7 June 2007 (EDT)

rename Docent to -- ?
Today, I've received an email asking me to be a docent for a traveler who will be visiting Moscow soon--i.e. to work as a personal assistant / guide / whatever, who will help visit some sights for a fee.

So I would vote Docent to be renamed to something that don't have a "paid personal assistant" connotation. Or, at least, to place a visible disclaimer in this article, and offer a template for user pages for personal disclaimers as well.

Unfortunately, my language is not good enough to propose good alternatives to Docents. But I am sure native speakers can help us here ;-) --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 13:12, 31 October 2008 (EDT)

 * "Docent" doesn't infer that at all, it's "A trained volunteer museum guide. A docent is at once a volunteer, a teacher, and a guide". I think it's a pretty good name for what's expected here – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 19:56, 31 October 2008 (EDT)

 * Docent is very much an Americanism, and I don't think many people outside of North America would encounter or understand the word at all. --(WT-en) Inas 17:19, 16 November 2008 (EST)

 * Haha Inas funny you say that though, I live in Canada and before I was on Wikivoyage regularily, I'd have never heard the word. My dad thought it was a Spanish word, ;). Though I do think it should be renamed (maybe) to a clearer, global word, I suppose.  I don't know.  Keep smiling, (WT-en) ee  talk 17:26, 16 November 2008 (EST).

 * I see no reason to rename the docent expedition. Project:What_is_a_docent%3F clearly explains what a docent is and can/will do and each "Docent" section links to that page. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 17:33, 16 November 2008 (EST)

I supose, but the normal non - member wouldn't really flip through that. I don't know, it's just a thougght. Keep smiling, (WT-en) ee talk 17:45, 16 November 2008 (EST).

 * I see no real reason to rename it either. Its has a unique flavor, and I like that.  However, if we pick a word that few people understand that is only explained on a help page, then we can't act surprised when people don't understand it.  If people see a word that they don't know, most will just ignore it, a few will bother to click on it to look it up, and those remaining will proceed with a incomplete or incorrect understanding of it.  Its a choice between being a little quirky and off-beat, and being simple, straightforward and a little dull.  --(WT-en) Inas 18:08, 16 November 2008 (EST)

Cancha have both? Keep smiling, (WT-en) ee talk 18:19, 16 November 2008 (EST).

Sapphire, what do you mean each "Docent" section links to that page? See above. (WT-en) LtPowers 19:07, 16 November 2008 (EST)

 * Hmm.. not sure now that I re-checked it. I tried finding the MW template to change it, but that was to no avail.  I'll see what I can come up with, but, now, as Europe goes to sleep, so must I. -- —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) Sapphire (talk • contribs)

 * I think Peter has taken care if this. BTW, news to me, I didn't realize that it was an Americanism, eeenteresting. A larger question: Has anyone ever been contacted with a question from a user that clearly was asking because you're the docent? I've been a docent for Los Angeles for at least a year or so and never been asked a single thing. Does anyone use this feature really? – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 01:48, 18 November 2008 (EST)
 * The "About Docents" link still goes to Project:Docents. (WT-en) LtPowers 09:14, 18 November 2008 (EST)

 * Ah, I see... I just fixed this (by altering MediaWiki:Aboutdocentpage) – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 12:18, 18 November 2008 (EST)

 * Nice! (WT-en) LtPowers 16:14, 18 November 2008 (EST)

I don't think this is an Americanism, I'm pretty sure it's just a Wikivoyageism—it's not likely apparent to anyone at first glance what we mean by this. As far as I know, no one has ever, in the history of the project, asked a docent a question! I'd make a point of doing so, if only to make this project feel useful, next time I go somewhere that has a docent ;) --(WT-en) Peter Talk 13:45, 18 November 2008 (EST)
 * Well, our use of the term may be a little idiosyncratic (much like our uses of the terms "template" and "star" have slightly different meanings that people might have to learn), but it's a perfectly cromulent word. It's frequently used in a museum context.  Wikipedia says it's not used in British English, but I have seen it used in Canada.  (WT-en) LtPowers 16:13, 18 November 2008 (EST)

Once a great intro Project:What is a docent? is written, my issue is much less critical. --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 12:51, 19 November 2008 (EST)

 * What do you think is missing that should be added? I just had a look and it seems pretty well written, and very explanatory. I already knew what a docent was prior to this project, but if I hadn't, this article would have clued me in quickly – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 01:35, 20 November 2008 (EST)
 * Denis is only en-2; I'm guessing he meant "Since" rather than "Once". (WT-en) LtPowers 10:11, 20 November 2008 (EST)
 * True :-) --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 11:06, 20 November 2008 (EST)

 * LT: How come before WT I never knew what the hell a docent is? I've never heard it really, I'm Canadian. Keep smiling, (WT-en) edmontonenthusiast [ee]  .T.A.L.K. 11:32, 20 November 2008 (EST).
 * You mean you've never been to the National Docent Symposium? --(WT-en) Jonboy 13:10, 20 November 2008 (EST)
 * Furtherst east I've been is Winnipeg, MB. Never been to TO.  In western Canadian culture that word is not used, but it may be in Ontario and Que.  Keep smiling, (WT-en) edmontonenthusiast [ee]  .T.A.L.K. 13:47, 20 November 2008 (EST).
 * I believe you. It was at Casa Loma I saw it used.  (WT-en) LtPowers 16:37, 20 November 2008 (EST)
 * OK, breaking out the Google, it appears that the Edmonton Art Gallery has a docent program. I guess it's just one of those words that you have to be in the right place at the right time to run across.  Being near DC, this area is lousy with docents.  The fact that it's somewhat of an obscure word would be more relevant if this program had proved marginally useful yet.  I asked for success stories over two years ago, and I've been underwhelmed.  --(WT-en) Jonboy 21:21, 20 November 2008 (EST)
 * It's actually called the Art Gallery of Alberta and is undergoing a major expansion (demolition of old building back in 06) and will be completed in 09. I've been to the AGA but I never saw that, eh, maybe it's something you have to look for particularily.  Keep smiling, (WT-en) edmontonenthusiast [ee]  .T.A.L.K. 21:23, 20 November 2008 (EST).

Docent Stuff
swept in from the pub

It seems to me that actually figuring out who is the docent for an article is rather difficult and nonintuitive. Am I misssing something? (WT-en) Rastapopulous 10:14, 5 November 2009 (EST)

 * Never had anyone ask me anything about Copenhagen, but it's useful for wikivoyage work sometimes. In case you missed it, you're listed right under the search bar as the destination docent, though I agree it's probably hard to notice, unless you know what to look for. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 10:31, 5 November 2009 (EST)

 * If my memory is right, this is the last discussion on the problem: Project:Docents (ignore that the section name is from a different story). In a nutshell, we considered several ideas on how to overcome that, but neither gained a consensus. Maybe you could help us to move on. --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 15:57, 5 November 2009 (EST)

 * I liked the idea of a template, although the one shown was a bit too "loud." I personally think a small note in a little template at the bottom might be the best.  (WT-en) Rastapopulous 16:28, 5 November 2009 (EST)

 * I wonder if a larger template at the top of the talk page might not work better. Sometimes people ask questions about the destination on the talk page; maybe if there was a clear "This destination has a docent" box at the top of the talk page, it might direct those people in that direction.  And if it's on the talk page, it isn't cluttering up our travel guides.  (WT-en) LtPowers 19:43, 5 November 2009 (EST)

 * Sounds great--except the hypothesis that those "one-click" visitors mentioned elsewhere don't normally visit Talk page at all. --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 14:58, 6 November 2009 (EST)
 * Yeah, that's the problem. I know some people click on the talk page to ask questions, but I don't know percentages.  (WT-en) LtPowers 22:31, 6 November 2009 (EST)
 * Is there any way to measure these statistics? (WT-en) Rastapopulous 23:02, 6 November 2009 (EST)

 * Mine it from wikimedia access logs, if anyone both have access to them and have enough skill, time and interest to perform such a research. --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 15:27, 23 April 2010 (EDT)

Where to change the aboutdocentpage URL
I'm trying to get Docents set up on pt:. I've gotten the template working there (pt:Predefinição:TemDocente) and I changed MediaWiki:Docentheader and MediaWiki:Aboutdocent so that the box displays properly now, but I don't know how to change the address that the About link points to. Here on en:, this seems to be taken care of with MediaWiki:Aboutdocentpage, but when I created that page on pt: it didn't seem to change anything-- it still points to a non-existent article called "aboutdocentpage". How do I fix this like en:, so that it points directly to pt:Project:O quê é um docente?, the portuguese equivalent of Project:What is an article?. Any rdf/MediaWiki gurus want to help me out? -- (WT-en) texugo 01:05, 20 February 2011 (EST)

 * "What is a docent?" is *not* the same as "What is an article?"

 * I doubt the RDF is currently being used for anything. mw:Extension:Insider is used to put the docent info in the sidebar, according to special:version. That extension takes a parser function and creates a link to user:userName in the sidebar. The "About Docents" link under the user list has a name specified by mediawiki:insider-about and links to a page specified in mediawiki:insider-about-page. From :

 * On pt:Amarillo I currently see Docentes do destino Texugo, Sobre docentes. I've redirected pt:Wikivoyage:O quê é um docente? to pt:Wikivoyage:Docentes and the result looks reasonable. K7L (talk) 20:37, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Docents inherited from WT
All the docent tags from the WT appear to still be out there, pointing to users as caretakers of the respective pages, when in fact many of them may or may not have come to WV with us. Perhaps we should get a script to remove them all and start this whole thing over, with people renewing their commitments? Texugo (talk) 19:47, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd say you're right. LtPowers (talk) 20:41, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Go to special:contributions, see if they've edited since Nov 10, 2012 (the day the wiki moved to WMF)? (First, remove any auto-added (WV-en) or (WT-en) prefixes.) K7L (talk) 20:57, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Inherited Docent tags
I don't think it is safe to assume that all docents from WT have come over to WV with us. All the docent tags are still out there, pointing to users who may not even exist on WV, and at the very least have not expressly renewed any commitment to be a docent here on our new site. I would suggest that some kind reset is necessary, probably a script to go and remove all the existent docent tags and/or message users existing here which correspond to existing docent tags to confirm their commitment. What say ye?Texugo (talk) 20:40, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

 * Hmmm.. Last time we looked at this, we could count on one hand the number of docent questions ever asked.  --Inas (talk) 22:32, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

 * I ask them, but usually by email. No one has ever asked me a thing, though. I thought that someone had already removed all the docent links for old accounts ? --Peter Talk 22:44, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Inactive docents
It's that time again where we have a clear out of inactive docents. I have left a message on the talk page of all docent accounts that have been inactive for between one and three years, asking whether they're still available. Accounts that have been inactive longer than that period (only about two people), I just removed the docent tag without asking.

I've just noticed the line on here: "If a docent has been unreachable for one month, without making note of his or her absence, their name can be removed from the docent list." One month is a long time to be unreachable; if you're asking someone a question about a travel destination, even if they're a volunteer, you expect an answer within a few days, not a whole month. I therefore propose to modify the sentence to "If a docent has been unreachable for one week, without making note..." and will terminate the docent status of the people I contacted today accordingly.

Thoughts? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 19:23, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

 * No thoughts, so I'm just going to do as I said :-) --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:25, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Inactive docents 2022
I have messaged six docents who have been inactive for more than a year. If they don't reply confirming their availability as a docent within a week, I'll remove their docent status.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 12:39, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

title: Wikivoyage talk:Docents


text:
Wikivoyage talk:Don't tout

New Religious Movements
Should no references to new religious movements be allowed, either under any circumstances or except in extraordinary circumstances? -- Apisite (talk) 21:24, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

 * How could any new religious movements be mentioned, if they are to be at all mentioned? --Apisite (talk) 21:25, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

 * Anyone who wants to read the background behind this question should look at User talk:Apisite, and the simple answer is the traveller comes first. This is a travel guide, not a place for any religious movement or members of it to try to promote (tout) that sect or religion. All the rest is self-interested posturing, and I suggest you stop that and do what you suggested: start your own website. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:42, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

 * Could and would the Wikivoyage for and about new religious movements be better off at Gan Jing World rather than anywhere else online? --Apisite (talk) 01:44, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
 * That isn't a question for me to answer. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 02:15, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I have no advice to give you about where or how to launch a site to promote your religion (or similar religions and sects), Apisite. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:38, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

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

title: Wikivoyage talk:Don't tout


text:
Wikivoyage talk:Dual licensing

I'm no layer, either. But in my way of reading a derived work has to be dual-licenced since both licences claim that the derived work has to be under the respective licence. So, you cannot derive a work from a GFDL-licenced original without GFDL-licencing the derivation. Of, course, the same counts for the sa-licence. -- (WT-en) Hansm 05:30, 2003 Nov 4 (PST)

 * No, I'm pretty sure that's not the case. When you do dual licenses, you offer the user either the GFDL, or the by-sa, at their discretion. You're not offering a mash-up of both licenses, but a choice between them. Dual-licensed works have to be under one or the other, not both. Here's the appropriate phrasing from the GFDL, section 4:

 * You may copy and distribute a Modified Version of the Document [...], provided that you release the Modified Version under precisely this License

 * ...and section 9:

 * You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Document except as expressly provided for under this License.

 * In other words, "these are the rules, and these are the only rules." For the by-sa:

 * You may distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or publicly digitally perform a Derivative Work only under the terms of this License

 * I guess you could possibly write your own license text that made an exception to the license that ensures that all derivative works are dual licensed. After all, Linux and other GPL'd software have additional addenda to the GPL -- but if I were you I'd seek a lawyer's help to do that. I'm already out of my league with the one-or-the-other stuff, and I don't think I could help any further with a always-both clause.

 * As a personal note, Hansm, I'd like to say that I really value your contributions to Wikivoyage; I think they've been significant and helful. I want to make sure you feel comfortable continuing to contribute. But when it comes down to it, if you don't want to allow redistribution of your work under the by-sa license -- that is, if you don't agree to the little bit of text under the "Save page" button -- please don't post it on Wikivoyage.

 * I'm curious, by the way: will you still be interested in dual-licensing your work if the by-sa license is changed to allow Derivative Works under the GFDL? In other words, if your Wikivoyage work could be copied to Wikipedia or CapitanCook, would you be satisfied? -- (WT-en) Evan 05:44, 4 Nov 2003 (PST)

 * OK, Evan, I see what the problem with derivations seems to be. But if you are realy right, then dual-licencing doesn't make too much sense since it were in contradiction to collaborative work.

 * There are 2 reasons why I would like to dual-licence. One is, of course, the we live on a kind of island with the sa-licence. Yes, I realy would appreciate if our articles could be shared with other servers like Capitan Cook or Wikipedia. The GFDL is simply much more common and better known. Actualy, this would be a reason to contribute to Capitan Cook instead of Wikivoyage. But there is an other reason against: Their software and structure, which is very much better here. Evan, this is a complement to you, since you realy do a great work on the organisation of Wikivoyage.

 * The other reason is maybe none, but as I told you, I'm no lawyer at all. There was some years ago a realy ugly thing with a server called mathworld, a big collection of mathmatical papers and encyclopadial articals for free (I don't know how exactly the licence was) use. Then, the owner of the server sold a book which was a collection of articles from mathworld to a publisher. After a while, the publisher begun a copyright dispute and the server had to been closed. I don't know if this ever could happen to as-licenced works, but the GFDL seems to be more confident, simply because it's widerly spread and therefore better prooved. -- (WT-en) Hansm 06:56, 2003 Nov 4 (PST)

I see why you are worried about licensing (WT-en) Hansm. However, I have to say that the folks at Creative Commons do seem to have things pretty clearly spelled out. They are properly funded, have a proper website, and do seem to have the proper expertise behind what they have put together. I am in favour of trying new things; if no one ever does, then we can't move forward. Besides, their licenses are starting to appear all over the place for creative works like photos and music. I plan to release several of my photos using a Creative Commons license (once I get my website working again :)

As the Creative Commons site explicitly points out, the GFDL is great for documentation but does not work very well for creations of a more general or artistic nature. I think (WT-en) Evan's choice of a Creative Commons license is a good one for this site. I think it is more user friendly and better meets the needs of a community not necessarily rooted in technical development. I think that once the compatibility kinks get worked out, the licenses developped by Creative Commons will form an important part of the steadily growing "copyleft" idea. (WT-en) CL 00:34, 5 Nov 2003 (PST)

"The by-sa license and the GFDL both require that all derivative works of a Work be made under that license itself. In other words, another contributor cannot make a dual-licensed derived work."
 * I don't think this is correct. If the original creator licenses a work under the GFDL and by-sa, then anyone has permission to license derivatives under the GFDL, and anyone has permission to license derivatives under by-sa.  I see no reason they couldn't do both.  They own the changes, so they can license the changes however they want. 141.150.244.75 14:43, 21 Dec 2003 (PST)

 * You may not see the reason, but it's there. I think your problem is thinking of the changes as a separate work. It's not. The whole page becomes a derivative work under one of the respective licenses. The contributor owns the derivative work in toto, not just the differences.

 * They only have a license to make that derivative work under the terms of the license of the work they derived from. Each of the two licenses we're talking about requires that you license derived works under exactly that license. (The by-sa license may have stipulations to allow licensing under a number of similar works in future versions, but it doesn't now.)

 * If the work they derived from is dual-licensed, they must pick a license. Dual-licensing means one or the other, not both. --(WT-en) Evan 14:56, 21 Dec 2003 (PST)

Hi,

This only make sense for texts. I do use a dual licensing, but only for images. And in this case, I don't see the problem. And this should be cleared in the article. (WT-en) Yann 16:59, 13 Feb 2004 (EST)

 * How are images different? They can and should be modified, just like text. I don't think there's anything text- or image-specific in either license. --(WT-en) Evan 05:09, 15 Feb 2004 (EST)

 * First I am not sure what is the problem. If I put an image under dual licensing (say GFDL and CC-SA), then what is the problem for the user? He can use and modify this image under GFDL and he can also do it (the same use or the same modification) under CC-SA, isn't? So instead of one image with two licenses, he has two images with one license each. Computer images being virtual things, where is the problem? (WT-en) Yann 18:24, 15 Feb 2004 (EST)1
 * May be this is just confusing for the user. So I have an image I want to use both for Wikivoyage and Wikipedia. What should I do? If I upload the image on WIkitravel under CC-SA and then on Wikipedia under GFDL, is this not dual licensing? (WT-en) Yann 18:24, 15 Feb 2004 (EST)

 * That's exactly dual-licensing, and that's a good example. I think that images are less of a problem, since they get edited less often than text. Probably you have a good point. --(WT-en) Evan 11:21, 16 Feb 2004 (EST)

 * Umm..Using images between wikivoyage & wikipedia isn't much of an issue, atleast as far as wikipedia is concerned. The CC-SA for images is considered free. I wonder if the other way round is possible. (WT-en) Pamri 12:47, 6 Nov 2004 (EST)

Please correct the inaccuracies on this page
The page gets the way dual licensing works badly wrong. The GFDL or CC-by-SA licenses are only authorised to offer and require you to accept those licenses but they do not prohibit you from accepting and using other licenses. So the GFDL can require that you, if you are using the GFDL license, use the GFDL license and not some other license you invent, but it can't also stop you from using any other licenses you have. That is, its scope is restricted to limiting the rights this particular license (the GFDL) grants you. That right requires a GFDL release for your derivative works and prohibits you from using the GFDL license as your permission to use any other license. You're misinterpreting the limitations on what the GFDL lets you do on the authority of the GFDL license as a restriction on what you can do if you're authorised by other licenses. Please, if you do not accept this, ask a lawyer who understands copyright law and licensing and get it right. (WT-en) Jamesday 15:54, 1 Dec 2004 (EST)

 * I don't think you're correct. The GFDL says: You may copy and distribute a Modified Version of the Document under the conditions of sections 2 and 3 above, provided that you release the Modified Version under precisely this License. by-sa says, You may distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or publicly digitally perform a Derivative Work only under the terms of this License. "Precisely this License" and "only under the terms of this License" seem extremely clear even to my layman's eye. Of course, if you're using dual-licensed works, you should talk to your lawyer before exercising any of the rights enumerated therein. I can just barely understand content licenses on their own; combining two or more puts my head in a spin. I wouldn't touch a dual-licensed work with a ten-foot pole. --(WT-en) Evan 01:55, 2 Dec 2004 (EST)

 * You're missing the key point, the context: the license only regulates the rights you get under that particular license. In each case, the only way the license authorises you to make derivative works is with exactly that license. That doesn't prevent you from having other licenses and also doing whatever they authorise. You'll also find that the licenses don't prevent you from using your fair use rights or any other rights you may have to make use of the works, even though those uses are distribution and display not in accordance with the license. 24.29.135.164 11:16, 2 Dec 2004 (EST)

 * I don't think you can comply with either license unless you make the derived works available under one or the other licenses exclusively. only and precisely are painfully clear wording. You simply can't comply with the restrictions of both licenses; you have to choose one or the other. It might be worthwhile to contrast the Open Software License or the Mozilla Public License, both of which are dual-licensing friendly copyleft licenses that have wording to allow you to exercise the rights granted in the license if you've made other arrangements with the copyright holder. --(WT-en) Evan 14:10, 2 Dec 2004 (EST)

I'm confused not by the licensing, but what the actual point of contention here is. It's clear, and I think the article states fairly clearly, that the original copyright holder has full control over their work and can license it multiple ways in any way they wish. And it's equally clear that anybody [i]else[/i] using a licensed piece of content must abide by the terms of the license. What's the issue? Jamesday, exactly what part of the article do you object to? (WT-en) Jpatokal 14:48, 2 Dec 2004 (EST)

 * The issue is errors like "In other words, another contributor cannot make a dual-licensed derived work", when in fact that is one of the things dual licensing enables. The page completely misdescribes how multiple licenses work together and attributes the disadvantages of single licensing to multiple licensing and vice-versa. That is: the description fundamentally misrepresents how multiple licensing works. (WT-en) Jamesday 12:28, 9 Apr 2005 (EDT)

 * I think it's really clear that when a person offers a work under more than one license, it's disjoint -- you can use the work under license A, or license B. If either of those licenses allows you to make dual-licensed derivative works, then you can. You can make dual-licensed derivative software under the Mozilla Public license and the GPL, for example. But the Creative Commons ShareAlike element and the GFDL are extremely limiting; neither allows dual-licensed derivative works.

 * You seem to have some other model for multiple licenses. Maybe you should spell it out a little more carefully. --(WT-en) Evan 22:48, 30 Apr 2005 (EDT)

 * The model is just that a multi licensed work is a work under multiple licenses, not a work under a multi-license. Therefore you never make a multi-licensed derivative work. When you make a derived work it is not under any license. Every time you distribute it you have to choose at least one of the licenses that allow that kind of distribution. Licenses do not allow you to make dual-licensed derivative works, because that is a right you already have, and a license cannot take that right away from you. However some licenses informs you of that. MPL and GPL also do not explicitly allow dual licensing.

And for the idea that just on of the licenses must allow multi-licensing, I can create the "You can make multi-licensed derivative works"-license --(WT-en) elgaard 11:47, 1 May 2005 (EDT)

 * I read the licenses the same way as jamesday. Lets take a concrete example: Someone writes article, Foo and releases it under both CC-by-SA and GFDL. I look at it say loudly, "I choose the CC-by-SA". Then I apply my changes and the result is the article FooBar1 which I publish on my home page under CC-by-SA. Then I read article Foo again and say loudly "This time I accept licence GFDL". Then I apply the same changes as before and get the result FooBar2, which I publish on my home page under GFDL. Then I realise that FooBar1 and FooBar2 are identical, replace them with a single FooBar file and update the COPYING files to say the FooBar is both under GFDL and CC-by-SA.
 * For both licenses I have released the derived work under precisely that same license.
 * But if we do not see it the same way I suggest we ask FSF and CC for clarification.
 * Also see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Guide_to_the_CC_dual-license#Why_dual_licenses, which has a jamesday listed :-)

-- (WT-en) elgaard 07:48, 25 Feb 2005 (EST)
 * I agree with Elgaard's explanation above. Evan - would you respond?  While only and precisely do mean what you think they mean, elgaard seems to have pointed out a clear way for someone to publish identical derived works under multiple licenses.  Again, I look forward to your response. wikipedia:User:JesseW 02:35, 21 Mar 2005 (EST)

 * Sure, I'll comment: it sounds dishonest and indefensible. A single author producing the same content twice is not creating two derived works -- it's creating a single derived work. Saying, "I create these two identical works" does not make the two copies somehow two different copyrightable works. In the world of copyright, two identical things are the same thing. --(WT-en) Evan 07:53, 21 Mar 2005 (EST)

 * In the world of copyright two identical works are the same thing. However, in the world of licenses to use copyrighted works, two different licenses are two different things and you can both offer and accept any number of them. There's no problem in copyright law from having multiple license for the same work, some allowing live TV broadcast in New York, others in Boston, some in Los Angeles, others allowing video tape release and others DVD release. The DVD release license will say that it only authorizes DVD release. You can still do that video tape release if you buy a video tape license. It's completely normal license law to have multiple offers and acceptances of licenses, each of which only allows one form of onward distribution but which collectively allow many forms. It's not dishonest and indefensible for a movie maker to offer cinema screening licenses, video tape licenses and DVD licenses, nor is it dishonest and indefensible for you to accept each of those licenses. (WT-en) Jamesday 12:28, 9 Apr 2005 (EDT)

 * To me this is starting to sound like quantum physics and its duality concept. A dual licence is just that, a dual licence. The original article has been released under both licences therefore any edited article accquires both licence conditions simultaneously too because those are the conditions under which you edited it. You cannot choose which licence to abide by, you have to accept both at the same time because those are the conditions under which the original author released their unedited work for you to edit. Its like a photon or electron being a wave and a particle at the same time. Just because you look at it one way does not mean the other aspect does not exist, it is just that the uncertainty principle means that you cannot precisely confine the article to the conditions of one licence or the other but must accept it fits both licences without having any conflicts that prevents both licences fom applying to the article at the same time. If a contributor is dual licencing their work and both licences require the derivative work to be released under that licence alone, I would contend the original author is either creating a third licence that effectively prevents the work being modified because the two licences conflict or actually intending to release the content into the public domain. In some respects the original author could be saying just do what you want with it. (Note: The JDWYWWI is a valid licence concept I have seen used.) In this sort of area intent is the name of the game. -- (WT-en) Huttite 08:35, 21 Mar 2005 (EST)

 * Evan has also brought the question up on the CC licensing mailing list.
 * If a work is relased under dual licenses you get to choose what license to accept. E.g. I can dual-license all the pictures I added to WikiTravel under the "pay 15 cents per copy" licence, but you can still choose only the CC license so you do not have to pay me. However a commercial publisher can choose to pay me 15 cents per copy and not publish the book under a CC-licence. The same publisher can use the same picture on his homepage or in a CC-book and not pay me for that. There is nothing dishonest in that. -- (WT-en) elgaard 09:49, 21 Mar 2005 (EST)
 * Yes. In fact, that's how companies like MySQL do it. MySQL offers at least three different licenses for the same thing: GPL, commercial and OEM. You can accept the ones you need (GPL for GPL products, commercial for non-FLOSS, OEM if that works better for a different product). All for exactly the same piece of software. (WT-en) Jamesday 12:28, 9 Apr 2005 (EDT)

 * It is also discussed here. It seems to me that most people do think that the same person can accept the same dual-licensed work under both licenses at the same time. -- (WT-en) elgaard 10:14, 21 Mar 2005 (EST)

 * For most licenses, no problem. For the CC by-sa and the GFDL, they're both exclusive licenses. Even the GPL allows you to license derived works under some other license (as long as you also make it available under the GPL, too). Not so the by-sa or the GFDL -- derived works have to be under exactly the same license. --(WT-en) Evan 18:48, 21 Mar 2005 (EST)

 * That only says what that license grants you the rights to do. It doesn't affect the rights you're granted by any other licenses you have. You can comply with each individual license (indeed, you do if you're using Windows OEM and Windows retail versions on two different computers - two licenses, different terms, both in use for the same product). So long as one works, you can do it. That is: the more licenses offered, the greater the flexibility for reusers, who can do what they want if any license applies. It's only an issue at the source place (this site), where it's possible that some contributors may not want to make reuse easy or might want to seek competitive advantage for one license provider by not allowing the use of other licenses. I don't have a lot of sympathy for anyone who wants to create competitive advantage by making reuse more difficult. Come now: we discussed this and you said you'd ask the list, thinking that would result in people saying I was wrong. The responders actually said I was right. Isn't it time to accept that and change the page? (WT-en) Jamesday 12:28, 9 Apr 2005 (EDT)

 * The CC license cannot forbid me to make a derivative work under the GFDL license (if the original was also released under GFDL), and vice versa. It is licenses not contracts. If a work is released under two licenses I can make a derivative work and release it under exatly the same two licenses.-- (WT-en) elgaard 21:08, 21 Mar 2005 (EST)

 * I think it should be that way, but it's not. And, yes, the CC by-sa license can forbid you to make a derivative work under any other license -- in fact, it does. It doesn't say, "... unless the original work is under that license." Neither does the GFDL. They are the two strictest copyleft licenses I know of. They say, "make derivative works under this license, period." You can pick one or the other, but not both. A dual license is an alternation, not a conjunction. --(WT-en) Evan 23:16, 21 Mar 2005 (EST)

 * No, If you put it under a dual license, it just means that you put it under two licenses, you do not create a new license. It is not an alteration or conjunction. -- (WT-en) elgaard 06:11, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

 * (WT-en) elgaard is correct. (WT-en) Jamesday 12:28, 9 Apr 2005 (EDT)

 * I'd have to agree that (WT-en) elgaard looks correct. Each user owns the copyright on their changes, so they can license their changes however they want.  Combine a dual-licensed article with a dual licensed set of changes and you have the next version, right?  Really, I think everybody on here should be at least dual licensing as CC-By-SA 1.0 and 2.0, so that eventually the entire site could be under 2.0. [[Luke Stodola (aka LuminousCarpet or lbs6380), 30 April 2005

 * Eventually would be when everything written by any contributer today went into public domain in every country. This could be 200 years from now. I guess we could have everyone state on their User page, that everything they have contributeted in the past is at least both under CC1 and CC2. --(WT-en) elgaard 22:01, 30 Apr 2005 (EDT)

 * Luke: copyleft works because people can't just do whatever they want with "their changes". It's extremely, extremely rare that "someone's changes" are an independent work that's not derived from the previous version of the page. Because copyright gives authors the right to govern how derivative works are made, what the by-sa license says matters quite a lot with what people can do with "their changes".

 * I'm sorry that dual-licensing of derivative works of CC and GFDL works is impossible, but it's due to the poor wording in the licenses. If you have a problem with it, bring it up with CC and the FSF. --(WT-en) Evan 22:33, 30 Apr 2005 (EDT)

I'm still very confused (Noob Alert)
O.K., I've created articles such as Pisew Falls, which would be perfect for Wikivoyage. The Text is GFDL and I'm made the images public domain. But, since others have made minor changes to this article, can I license it here or not? Do I or can I dual license? Since the original work was mine, do I need to dual license at all? I'm using the same ID on Wikipedia. Now why on Earth didn't my Username pop up when I first sent this? (WT-en) Weaponofmassinstruction
 * You can certainly add the Dec 8 version, which looks good. As long as you only add you own work to WikiTravel, it does not matter what licence you have released it under previously. However you have to dual licence it to allow others to put future versions under multiple licenses.

-- (WT-en) elgaard 20:32, 27 Feb 2005 (EST)

Free Software Foundation position
I wrote FSF:

On the following forums/wikis: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2004-December/001366.html http://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Wikivoyage_talk:Dual_licensing#Please_correct_the_inaccuracies_on_this_page http://www.crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3:sss:9161:gffdceiijlpgnjnbalcn#b

it is discussed if it is possible to:

1. Realease a work under a CC-by-SA and GFDL dual license. 2. For someone else to create a derivative work of that and release it under the same dual license.

It seems we cannot agree os this, so I hope FSF and CC can give a somewhat authoritative answer.

And got this reply from FSF (just obfuscated my email a bit):

Fra: "Dave Turner via RT"

Til: elgaard at diku sot dk

Dato: I går 23:33:52

Sorry for the long delay.

You wrote: > it is discussed if it is possible to: > > 1. Realease a work under a CC-by-SA and GFDL dual license.

Yes.

> 2. For someone else to create a derivative work of that and release it > under the same dual license.

Yes.

-- -Dave "Novalis" Turner GPL Compliance Engineer Free Software Foundation

 * I'd be more interested in a longer response. "Yes" and "Yes" aren't really enough to convince me. --(WT-en) Evan 08:23, 3 May 2005 (EDT)

 * Then I suggest you write a question to licensing@fsf.org and CC that could give you an answer that would convince you. -- (WT-en) elgaard 08:43, 3 May 2005 (EDT)

 * I'm on it! (Email posted here: ) --(WT-en) Evan 08:54, 3 May 2005 (EDT)

I have to say that this page is a piece of nasty anti-dual licensing and anti-FDL FUD. Whole world understands dual-licensing the way elgaard describes it, including FSF, CreativeCommons and WikiMedia.

Benevolent dictatorship is a good form of government as long as the dictators are benevolent and wise, which is unfortunately not the case of Wikivoyage. --84.242.95.3 17:53, 19 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * I couldn't care less about any of this (I think Evan may be logically right, but since the Law follows intent more than logic, I think he's wrong). However, please refrain from attempting to use our articles as a soapbox.  That's what talk pages are for.   -- (WT-en) Colin 18:26, 19 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * And you recommend me what? Leave the misinformation to confuse readers? That's against my understanding of wiki. Sorry. --84.242.95.3 18:54, 19 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * Unless you are a lawyer, you're just throwing in your opinions. This will only be resolved if either the FSF lawyers or the CC lawyers offer their opinion.  I'lll be changing your input soon to something I hope will be agreeable to all. -- (WT-en) Colin 19:41, 19 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * I assure you: I have nothing against the FDL. I don't think it's appropriate for all works (for example, computer programs, or very small works like travel guides), but I think it's been very useful for lots of people. And I'm not anti-dual-licensing either. I find dual-licensing really confusing, and I think applying multiple licenses to a work is more complicated than people imagine. But the more work that can be shared between GFDL-licensed sites and CC-licensed sites, the better.

 * I'd be happy to see some official statements on dual-licensing from the FSF, Creative Commons, and WikiMedia. I don't think anyone's delved very far into these issues. The best I've seen is in response to this question, which was this . The upshot: "precisely this License" in the GFDL does not mean "only this License" in the same way that the by-sa does. So, GFDL and by-sa can be dual-licensed.

 * I've meant to come back and clean up the article based on that. I've taken a first poke; please, feel free to add more.

 * Lastly: I'm sorry you're so attached to... what? Dual-licensing?? Are people really that passionate about dual-licensing?... anyways, attached to something that you try to reduce the hundreds of people who work on Wikivoyage to some kind of serfdom. Nobody here labors under or for a dictator. They contribute because they want to make a Free travel guide. --(WT-en) Evan 08:41, 20 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * Well, the article did (and to some extent still does) have a negative tone. I would like it to be more constructive. I.e. focus on how dual-licensing can improve WikiTravel. IMHO we can gain a lot from sharing especially images with other projects. Commons.wikimedia.org does a great job of handling both multiple licenses and versions of images. They show that it does not have to be so confusing. Cooperation works boths ways. If we want to others to release images under CC-by-sa 1.0, we should put some of our material under GFDL, CC-2.5, etc. I started with Image:Flakfortet2.jpg as --(WT-en) elgaard 13:41, 28 Jun 2005 (EDT)

 * How about we just try to keep neutral on the issue? I still find the payoff not worth the confusion. --(WT-en) Evan 11:24, 29 Jun 2005 (EDT)

CC-BY
May I add files with just CC-BY-2.5? Or do I need to dual license with CC-BY-SA-1.0? -(WT-en) Samulili 10:00, 11 May 2006 (EDT)

Do we still need this?
This is many words, for something I have actually never seen done - and even less relevant now that WP has moved to CC licencing. Any objections to shortening this substantially - really it is only relevant to images, and that should be in the image policy. --Inas (talk) 07:14, 14 September 2012 (CEST)

 * No, please do. --Peter Talk 07:20, 14 September 2012 (CEST)

 * Agree. Perhaps the page could be cut quite short and link to more authoritative sources. --Rogerhc (talk) 23:13, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

title: Wikivoyage talk:Dual licensing


text:
Wikivoyage talk:Dutch Wikivoyage Expedition

So close
We have lots of people signed up, we have some of the pages already translated, and we have a language file partially complete. What do we need to do to put this one over the top? --(WT-en) Evan 21:48, 27 Aug 2005 (EDT)

 * Just start it please! It doesn't have to perfect in the beginning, it's wiki! I think it's such a pity that this project hasn't started a year earlier... (WT-en) Guaka 15:33, 15 Dec 2005 (EST)

 * Great! I know you really want this to happen, and so do I. Will you be the go-between for this project? --(WT-en) Evan 17:04, 15 Dec 2005 (EST)

 * Well, yes, if there are no objections. I don't object to it myself, and I'm willing to spend some time on it. :) (WT-en) Guaka 18:13, 15 Dec 2005 (EST)

Dutch Wikivoyage Expedition
I just started a Dutch Wikivoyage Expedition. Please add yourself to the list of team members if you think you could and want to contribute. (WT-en) Guaka 13:29, 11 Jan 2005 (EST)

Translating from english
I would help, but right now the language file has FRENCH as source language. This is totally crazy because it's a translation over a translation and french is not an easy language. It should be reverted to english by someone smarter than me (I don't want to make mistakes).

I've translated one small block and if it's in english, I'll try to put some time into it. --(WT-en) Twopeak

 * Sorry about that. I have no idea about how that became French. I've copied in the MediaWiki NL language file; please check it over to look for words like "encyclopedia" or "Wikipedia". --(WT-en) Evan 17:16, 17 Nov 2005 (EST)

It seems to me it's easyer to put the whole page in English and then to translate it. Halftranslated pages will be clearer. Most dutch-speaking users understand english, so they will be able to understand. Maybe it will also make someone plunge forward. --(WT-en) Twopeak 12:41, 24 Nov 2005 (EST)

When to use Nl: in article names
What's the use of it, when do i use it? --(WT-en) Twopeak 16:40, 15 Dec 2005 (EST)

 * It's a temporary hack. Any pages under Nl:Something will be moved into the actual Dutch Wikivoyage when it is launched. (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:07, 15 Dec 2005 (EST)

Launched
This is launched. Congratulations and good job all. --(WT-en) Evan 17:58, 16 Dec 2005 (EST) w0000t! I guess now is when the difficult things happen of finding untranslated pages and keeping it up to date... --(WT-en) Twopeak 08:02, 17 Dec 2005 (EST)

Nl pages
nl:Project:Welkom is an orphan page on the English version. Can someone ensure it is copied across to the correct version? -- (WT-en) Huttite 23:42, 17 Dec 2005 (EST)

 * It is copied! (WT-en) Guaka 17:10, 19 Dec 2005 (EST)

Dutch Wikivoyage
Swept in from the Pub:

It would be cool if the -1 articles bug could be fixed. :) It would make it more interesting to actually add some articles. Also, I think it's a bit redundant to have the "Today's Log" link in the Dutch Wikivoyage (I won't say anything about this in the English Wikivoyage, but you can guess what I think of it :) Also, the "In het nieuws" and "Financieel bijdragen" links can be removed. Some more "go-betweening": things are starting off. People from the Dutch Wikipedia came by, things are being translated and it looks good. Will spend some more time on it myself when I'm fed up with the hitchhiking wiki :) (WT-en) Guaka 19:52, 27 Dec 2005 (EST)

 * There is a set of untranslated words and phrases on nl:Gebruiker:(WT-nl) Evan/To be translated. I've corrected the -1 bug and given you admin rights. Things are looking good and I'm excited to have it getting off the ground. --(WT-en) Evan 01:03, 5 Jan 2006 (EST)


text:
Wikivoyage talk:Education Expedition

I've just added a section for ESL learners/teachers. Comments and advice eagerly sought (WT-en) Joseph tomei 08:28, 15 Nov 2005 (EST)

Learning Objectives and Active Projects
I think this is a great idea for an expedition! A couple of thoughts about the active projects though. While the Education Expedition sets out the ideas for teachers using Wikivoyage there does not seem to be any suggested way for those active projects to communicate their purpose and intent back to the other Wikivoyageers. I suggest that each educator with an active education project on Wikivoyage maintain a project page, which should be a user sub-page or even a page section that sets out the following:

 * A brief description of the project and the course it is related to. (Say 1-2 paragraphs).
 * The desired key learning objectives or primary educational outcomes. (e.g. Write an article colaboratively. Experience real world criticism and third party editing of a written article. Create linked hypertext articles. etc.)
 * Whether registered or anonymous users will be active in the project, with a list of known users.
 * An indication of the level of education, e.g. Primary/Secondary School, University, English as a second language, etc.
 * Where users will be doing their editing. An article page, A user sub-page, creating new pages or editing the whole wiki! etc.
 * The duration of the project, with specified dates for commencement, assessment and closure.
 * The expected integration of the resulting product/content into Wikivoyage.
 * Level of interaction between students and other Wikivoyageers.
 * Contact person/user in case of problems.

I think this information is neeeded for both students and teachers to have a rewarding and positive experience with Wikivoyage and so that other Wikivoyageers understand what is going on and can react appropriately. -- (WT-en) Huttite 08:07, 18 Nov 2005 (EST)

That's great!
I wrote something with a similar idea for the Hebrew Wikipedia. (WT-en) F16

Wikivoyage in the classroom
Very interesting use of Wikivoyage in the classroom here. This bring up an interesting point, do we want to ask people contributing as part of a project/organized effort/etc to identify themselves and/or their project? Obviously there would be no way to inforce it, but I'm always curious when I see a lot of effort on a seemingly random page. (WT-en) Maj 16:31, 3 August 2006 (EDT)

title: Wikivoyage talk:Education Expedition


text:
Wikivoyage talk:Esperanto Wikivoyage Expedition

So, this project seems about ready to start. I don't think it makes sense for me to the be the go-between for the new version, but I'm interested in getting it started. If nobody else steps up to be go-between, I'll do the job for a while. --(WT-en) Evan 08:56, 11 September 2006 (EDT)

User = "Ano"
So, I've started the Wikivoyage Esperanto version at http://eo.wikivoyage.org/wiki/. One thing that was tricky is that the default MediaWiki code translates "User" as "Vikipediisto", which is more properly "Wikipedian". I thought there was probably a reason it hadn't been "Uzanto" (the more literal translation of "user"), so I tried to take a middle road and chose a word meaning "member" ("Ano"). Any feelings about this? --(WT-en) Evan 15:28, 11 September 2006 (EDT)

 * I personally asked Brion to use "uzanto", but he chose "Vikipediisto" anyway. Oh well.  I think "ano" is nice since it's so short.  --(WT-en) Chuck Smith 10:07, 12 September 2006 (EDT)

 * I just talked to Brion about it, he says "Ano" sounds good. Apparently in 1.8 it's possible to have namespace synonyms, so it might not matter that much. --(WT-en) Evan 11:24, 12 September 2006 (EDT)

Article templates
So, for Wikivoyage we have some standard Project:Article templates for laying out destination articles. Since most destination guides will have descriptions of how to get in, what to do, where to eat, drink and sleep, it's nice to just solve the problem of how to organize an article once, and just copy it everywhere else.

For English, we've used short, sharp verb forms ("Get in", "Eat", "Sleep", "Get out") as the header names, and it's become something of a trademark. Other language versions use a similar format. It seems like at least French uses an infinitive form ("Arriver", "Voir", "Faire"), which seems to make some sense. Especially for languages where the infinitive form is one word, it seems slightly less brusque than the imperative.

Finally, we started calling our frameworks "article templates" for the English Wikivoyage long before there were "templates" in MediaWiki. We've never changed the name, but it might be nice to use another term besides ŝablono for this framework. I'm using skemo here, which seems to be about right.

I'm going to get started on these article templates for Esperanto as sub-pages of this expedition page, linked below:

 * Project:Esperanto Wikivoyage Expedition/Urbetogvidila skemo (cf. Project:Small city article template)
 * Project:Esperanto Wikivoyage Expedition/Urbogvidila skemo (cf. Project:Big city article template)
 * Project:Esperanto Wikivoyage Expedition/Urbegogvidila skemo (cf. Project:Huge city article template)
 * Project:Esperanto Wikivoyage Expedition/Regionogvidila skemo (cf. Project:Region article template)
 * Project:Esperanto Wikivoyage Expedition/Landogvidila skemo (cf. Project:Country article template)
 * Project:Esperanto Wikivoyage Expedition/Kvartalogvidila skemo (cf. Project:District article template)

Feel free to jump in or correct my bad translations (esp. the titles). --(WT-en) Evan 16:07, 11 September 2006 (EDT)

 * OK, so, some notes: I used rondiri rather than ĉirkaŭiri for "Get around". I'm not crazy about drinki for "Drink", but that's mostly because I've always been uncomfortable with "Drink". It might be nice to have a verb that means "step out" or "go out on the town", "go out for some nightlife". I didn't manage to find a verb that means "cope", which in the Wikivoyage case we use like "get along", "muddle through", "deal with the minor hassles of everyday life." It's where we put e.g. laundromats, gyms, technology stores, etc. I'm not sure what verb to use here. Trakti? --(WT-en) Evan 21:20, 11 September 2006 (EDT)
 * Would a interpretation of "survive" suffice for "Cope?" Maybe "elporti la situacion?" -- (WT-en) Sapphire 21:26, 11 September 2006 (EDT)

I believe "travivi" would be a good translation of "cope". Why not just use "Nokta Vivo" or "Night Life" instead of "Drink" for that point? Also, any chance we could launch this by Sep 25? I'm giving a lecture on wikis in Brussels to an Esperanto club then and it would be cool to start promoting it. --(WT-en) Chuck Smith 08:54, 14 September 2006 (EDT)

 * Sure, I think it's quite likely. I've updated the templates to use "travivi", but I'm not sure about "nokta vivo". House style for Wikivoyage has been to use verbs for most of the headers in the templates -- you can see it across most of our language versions. I wonder if "amuziĝi" would work... Or what about "noktumi"? --(WT-en) Evan 09:29, 14 September 2006 (EDT)

 * I think "trinkumi" might actually be the best translation then. --(WT-en) Chuck Smith 09:04, 18 September 2006 (EDT)

Vocabulary
I've started working on the specific vocabulary for Wikivoyage, see Project:Esperanto Wikivoyage Expedition/Vocabulary. --(WT-en) Evan 16:09, 14 September 2006 (EDT)

Contents
After we launch, Ljoŝa and I would like to help move all the pages from the Turismo-Vikio over to WikiTravel and then close the Turismo-Vikio. --(WT-en) Chuck Smith 09:15, 18 September 2006 (EDT)

Launch?
So, what is now keeping us from launching immediately? --(WT-en) Chuck Smith 06:57, 19 September 2006 (EDT)

 * I think it's just having someone act as go-between. If you or Bill would do it, that'd be great. I can also do the job for a while, but I'm kinda overstretched as it is. --(WT-en) Evan 09:24, 19 September 2006 (EDT)

 * I am really overextended at the moment. If Bill can't do it, I could ask for a volunteer from various discussion lists.  Also Evan, please answer the private email I sent you a few days ago.  Thanks.  --(WT-en) Chuck Smith 17:52, 19 September 2006 (EDT)

 * OK, so, the wiki is now open, but not launched. I'm working on creating some seed country pages based on a list from http://www.bertilow.com/landlin/ and the country template above. I think we'll at least need a main page before getting this started. --(WT-en) Evan 15:23, 20 September 2006 (EDT)

 * OK, so, this is done. It ended up being about 460 articles, which is a pretty nice catch. I can probably get 1-200 more from the list of regions here: http://www.bertilow.com/lanlin/notoj.html#regionoj . If we do a phrasebook template (like Project:Phrasebook template), then we can scrape the list of languages, too, and automatically build skeletons for ktp., which would make another hundred articles or so. (My guess is that it'd also be a place that Esperantists would dive in first!)

 * I'd like to use Wikipedia as a translation service. I'd take Project:World cities with 100K population or more and check for each city if there's an English Wikipedia article on it. If so, I'll see if there's an eo: wikilink. If so, I'll use the title of that wikilink as the title of a new city article. This might be a while, but with 100% hits that'd add another 4000 or so articles.

 * For launch: I'm going to be camping this weekend, meaning that I won't be working much on eo:. I know Chuck wanted to do a presentation on Monday, so I say we get a sexy-looking main page working and launch it before then. --(WT-en) Evan 11:37, 21 September 2006 (EDT)

 * I think we should at least get one nice article up... perhaps one on Lovena la nova (the place where I lectured), before we "officially" launch it. Then we can at least have some real content on the front page.  --(WT-en) Chuck SMITH 03:24, 27 September 2006 (EDT)


text:
Wikivoyage talk:Esperanto Wikivoyage Expedition/Urbetogvidila skemo

Mi povas proponi aliajn nomojn: (WT-en) Ljosxa 09:32, 18 September 2006 (EDT)
 * 1) Eniri - Kiel atingi
 * 2) Rondiri - Cxirkauxajxo
 * 3) Vidi - Vidindajxoj
 * 4) Fari - Kion fari
 * 5) Aĉeti - Acxetoj
 * 6) Manĝi - Mangxado
 * 7) Drinki - Distrajxoj
 * 8) Loĝi - Logxado
 * 9) Eliri - ? (ankoraux ne elpensis)