Talk:Wikivoyage/Migration/Policy clean-up

(Redirected from Talk:WMF Migration/Policy clean-up)
Latest comment: 11 years ago by Pbsouthwood in topic Time for a review?

This is not the place to try to change policies other than clarification and cleanup. If a need to change an existing policy or create a new policy is identified, this should be done at WMF Migration/New policies

Note:The following discussions (until the next page break) have been moved here from Talk:Migration FAQ.

Not sure if this is the right spot to raise this, but it's somewhat related...

I was wondering if there was any support for using this intermediary time at WV to better organize our policies? One thing I found with the RfC is we know what our principles are, but we usually have to provide several links to answer a question about them (be fair, traveller comes first, don't tout, tone, etc.). I also generally find it difficult to find specific rules.

I haven't put much thought into how we'd better organize our policies. My initial thought is to try to create a number of categories and a heirarchy so that each rule fits into one cateogry (or subcategory if needed), kinda like our geographaical heirarchy. Ideally it would also follow our 7 +/- 2 rule to make it more comprehensible. Once the heirarchy was determined, I think it would also be helpful if we either create or re-purpose one of our existing community policy pages to provide a one page summary of the overall goals and main principles/policies of the project with links to more detailed pages. This page would serve as the portal for our policies, rules and so forth.

My main hope is a reorganized policy structure will make it easier for us to explain the project to Wikipedians who come to the project with their WP perspective, as well as make it simpler for newcomers to learn about the project and its rules. Just to be clear, I'm not proposing to re-write or change the rules!

A second thought I had was whether we should add more detail to the Welcome Wikipedians page to cover some of the items that were raised in the RfC and to better explain why our policies sometimes differ and provide links to relevant discussions (if they exist). Again, the hope it to have a single resource that we can point to to help increase knowledge of where WT is coming from and hopefully make the transition a little smoother.

Thoughts? - Shaund 00:03, 20 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Our policies organization is a disgrace. Could you map out what you are thinking with the hierarchical idea? Start at MoS, have a list of 5-9 articles at the top in bullet form, rinse, wash, repeat? --Peter Talk 00:17, 20 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Policy cleanup would be GREAT, although unfortunately I won't have much time to help out over the coming days. One thing that would be helpful, particularly if we're becoming a WMF project, is to model our policy pages using some of the templates that Wikipedia uses - in particular, the "in a nutshell" blurb at the top, which provides a useful summary, and the right nav TOC with links to related policies (Shaund's grouping suggestion would make that easier to organize). See for example [1]. -- Ryantalk • 00:24, 20 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK. I've got the next three days off, so I'll map out a hierarchy. I also like the "in a nutshell" summary and the RH nav TOC, so I'll work at drafting something up along those lines as well. -Shaund 04:07, 20 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
At Wikivoyage/de a reorganizing of policies was already done. So we have only four main categories for all project articles, we deleted some articles like Wikiwiki or articles never used, we combined some articles. Some articles were moved to the Help section like "How to create a user account". The bread crumbs trail extensions at Wikivoyage can be used in all namespaces, and it is done in the project namespace, too. --Roland 06:14, 20 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the link. I'm looking at something that will be more detailed, but those four categories we're very helpful in framing how I thought about the policies. -Shaund 04:49, 21 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
New demo at using Navboxes. Very compact and seems to have all the functions I wanted. I could be expanded another level if that is wanted. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 11:49, 24 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Proposed policy map edit

New page for this work at WMF Migration/Policy clean-up

So, I've reviewed all the policies listed in Category:Wikitravel policies and many of the guidelines listed in Category:Wikitravel help. My initial thoughts on how to group them are below. I'm planning to add more detail over the next couple of days but I wanted to get these out there for preliminary comments. Not all help articles are included -- I still need to finish reviewing them, plus right now I'm thinking help articles should be referenced to the policy articles but not necessarily form part of the policy hierarchy.

Note - I updated the policy hierarchy and moved the original to Talk:Migration FAQ/Proposed Policy Hierarchy Archive
Below is the updated hierarchy. I moved a couple of articles around and introduced some new sections as I worked through the Help articles more. I've also included some short 1-2 line summaries and links to index or help pages. It's not done yet, but I wanted to post my progress through the end of today. As always, thoughts and feedback are welcome. -Shaund 05:59, 22 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Travel Wiki Policy Hierarchy (DRAFT)

Policy Name Summary and/or Comments Related Pages

1.0 Guiding Principles

Goals and non-goals
The traveller comes first Our work should be guided by what works best from the traveller's perspective.
Consensus Decisions are made by achieving consensus.
Plunge forward Don't worry about being perfect and making mistakes. Jump in and make edits to articles.

2.0 Core Content Policies

Note: these Core Content Policies should refer/link to 6.1 Writing Style and vice-versa
Be fair Articles should not present an agenda. Information must be presented in a way that the travel guide is reliable and complete.
Don't tout Listings should describe the establishment or attraction in clear, honest and concise terms. A business should only be listed once per destination. Edits that look like touting may be reverted.
Tone Writing should describe the destination or attraction in a lively and concise manner. Avoid exaggerations, superlatives and vague, flowery language.

3.0 Community Policies

3.1 Unwanted Edits

How to handle unwanted edits Unwanted edits are contributions that do not agree with our policies and guidelines or Manual of Style. Any contributor may revert an unwanted edit. How to revert a page
Edit war Do not edit war. If involved in one, step back and use the article’s talk page to come to a consensus. User ban nominations

3.2 Links

External links External links should be kept to a minimum, and only links to primary sources should be used. There should not be an external links section on any article. Links to Open Directory
Sister project links - (links to articles within the Wikimedia group ) Note: New policy needed as there will be more than just Wikipedia to consider, though that is the most likely to be linked Links to Wikipedia
Internal links Note: Page should reference "don't overlink" guideline, or perhaps "don't overlink" should be incorporated into this policy?
Inter-language links Note: More of a how-to page than policy. There is some guideline info at the bottom that should be moved to the top.

3.3 Specific Community Policies

Sex tourism policy Information relating to sex tourism is not included in our travel guides. Information relating to red-light districts and strip clubs is generally OK.
Illegal activities policy Activities that are illegal at the destination should be discussed in the travel guide article if the information is useful to the traveller.
Deletion policy Articles and images can be deleted if certain criteria are met. If you feel an article or image should be deleted, nominate it for deletion. Some items, such as spam or blatant copyright violations, can be speedy deleted. Votes for deletion

Votes for undeletion

How to delete a page

Protected page policy Administrators may protect a page if certain criteria are met. It is preferred however, if abusive edits are counteracted without protecting a page.
Image policy Images must be compatible with our copyleft licence. The image page must contain a summary with the appropriate attribution information and licence information. Photos should not contain people unless it is a public space and the people are peripheral to the picture content. How to add an image

Image resources

Images in articles

Privacy rights Note: possible VFD or Merge - seems to be people in photos, which is already covered in the Image policy
Sock puppets

3.4 Roles within the Community

* Hierarchy
* Administrators
* Experts
* Docents

3.5 Cooperating with other Websites

* all of the various "cooperating with..." pages

3.6 Infrastructure and Software

* Technical infrastructure policy
* Script policy
* Using Mediawiki templates

3.7 Recognizing Contributors and Articles

Celebrate a contribution
Destination of the Month
Off the Beaten Path

4.0 Organization

4.1 Hierarchy of Travel Guides

Geographical hierarchy To help organize travel guide articles, they are arranged into a non-overlapping geographically hierarchy. The type of information contained within an article varies depending on where it is in the hierarchy.
Other ways to see travel Destinations, Travel topics, Itiniraries and Phrasebooks Pseudo-phoneticization_guide

4.2 Creating Travel Guides

What is an article? Generally, articles can be created for destinations where a traveller can sleep, such as geographical units in the geographical hierarchy (e.g., countries, states, cities). Attractions, companies and transports systems generally do not have articles unless there is a compelling reason for an exception. How to start a new page

How to merge two pages

Naming conventions
To manual of style?
Each article must have a unique name. Destination articles should use the name most commonly used in English-speaking countries, or if one doesn't exist, the most commonly used name in the local language. How to rename a page

How to redirect a page

Why project doesn't use official names

Bodies of water We don't write destination guide articles about bodies of water. They may be referred to in other destination guides as attractions or part of an itinerary or travel topic.
Disambiguation pages

4.3 Structuring Travel Guides

Article templates
To manual of style?
Use article templates to provide a more consistent layout for readers. Article template sections
  • provide links to the various templates
Section headers
To manual of stle?
Note: possibly redundant, or maybe revise and included sytle elements in MoS
Avoid long lists
To Manual of Style?
Long lists or large groups of items can be difficult to understand. If there are more than 9 items to group, sub-divide into small groups of 7±2 items. Note: this doesn't seem to have it's own policy page right now (which is surprising)... or maybe I'm missing it
Information boxes
To Manual of style>
An information box tells the reader something interesting about the destination or an attraction that is not included in the listing. They are good for providing supplementatal information but should not be overused in an article.
To Manual of Style?
Use standardized templates to provide consistent and complete information for business and attraction listings. Where you can stick it
  • link to the various listing description pages
One-liner listings
To Manual of Style?
A brief description of a destination that allows the reader to select the travel guide they want to read.

4.4 Travel Guide Content Policies

Avoid negative reviews Generally, if an attraction or business is not worth going to, leave it out. If a negative review is given, explain why the review is negative.
Rental listings Real estate and rental agencies are not listed unless specific criteria are met.
Tour operators Tours should only be listed if they are a value-added activity for the traveller.
Information for gay and lesbian travellers Information of interest to GLBT travellers is placed in the appropriate section of the article (e.g., gay bars go in Drink, gay-friendly hotels go in Sleep).
Routebox navigation
To Manual of Style?
Routeboxes are included in the Get out section and provide a quick way of identifying nearby destinations. Routes should reflect the type(s) of travel commonly used in the local area. Route icons

U.S. route icons

Slippery slopes Note: Recommend this page be upgraded. It's currently a list of examples without any real definition of what a slippery slope is and why we need to be careful of them. It could be useful to have this clarified before the migration.
When to use dates Attaching a date to facts can be useful to the traveller, but it must be balanced against maintaining a clear and concise travel guide. Prices are generally not dated, but cultural events may be. Operating hours (including seasonal closures) should be included in the guide.

4.5 Article Status

Article status The overall quality of each travel guide should be assessed on a five point scale using the identified criteria. Star status is the highest level and is only given after successfully completing the nomination process. link to various pages describing the different status types
Star nominations Only nominate travel guides that meet the criteria of a Star article. Star status will be given if consensus is reached within the community.
Star potential Travel guides that are very close to Star status should be identified and tagged as "Star potential". List of Star potential guides

4.6 Pages that are not Travel Guides

Namespaces Note: this page could be modified and used as the landing page for 4.0 Organization Namespace index
Main Page guidelines
Using talk pages
User page help
Special pages help

5.0 Legal Information

5.1 Terms of Use

Cookies Cookies are not required to read or edit the project, but they are necessary to log into and use a user account.
Privacy policy A description of how you user information can and cannot be used.
Terms of use

5.2 Licencing and Redistribution

Copyleft All written contributions to this project are licenced under CC-by-SA 3.0. All files uploaded to this project must be licenced under CC-by-SA or a compatible licence. * Full text of CC-BY-SA 3.0
  • Full text of GFDL 1.2
CC-by-sa Note: very little content and redundant - recommend merge with Copyleft and redirected there
Copyright details Note: this page is about copyright-related issues contributors could encounter - recommend changing the name of the page so it's more clear what it is.
Non-compliant redistribution Non-compliant distributors should be contacted and made aware of their obligations under the licence.
Dual licencing The original creator of a work can choose to dual licence it. Subsequent contributors can only dual licence the work if it was previously dual-licenced.

6.0 Manual of Style

6.1 Writing style

Creating emphasis Use boldface to call important topics and use italics for emphasis. Note: this is a combination of existing bold and italic policies
Don't overlink Not every noun needs to be linked. Links should generally only be made to other travel content.
Neutrality of the medium Wikivoyage may be printed or read on-screen. Write travel guides so they are equally useful in both formats.
No advice from Captain Obvious If something is very obvious or true for nearly all destinations, it does not need to be written.
Use of pronouns It is OK to use "you" when addressing the reader, but avoid first person pronouns. Note: this is a combination of the existing 1st and 2nd person policies
Words to avoid A list of words to avoid when describing a destination and its attractions and businesses.

6.2 Language

Abbreviations Using abbreviations for commonly known titles is encouraged. Abbreviations should be consistent across articles.
Foreign words It's often useful to point out the local-language name for a place or thing in an article. List the foreign-language word in parentheses after the English name.
Romanization Non-latin alphabet names should be written in the latin alphabet for English to assist readers in pronounciation.
Spelling Destination guides should be written in the local variant of English.
Trademarks It is OK to refer to trademarks, but trademark symbols should not be used.

6.3 Numbers and Dates

Currency The cost of an item should be listed in the local currency unless the local convention is to list the price in a foreign currency. Prices should be listed with the currency symbol or abbreviation that travellers will encounter.
Time & date formats Times should be displayed in the local timezone using the 12 or 24 hour format, whichever is the predominant local usage. Days of the week should be abbreviated to the minimum number of letters. Dates should use the format dd mmm yyyy.
Measurements Metric or imperial units of measurement should be displayed depending on the predominant local usage. It is good practice to provide both metric and imperial conversions (local units first with conversion in parentheses).
Phone numbers Format phone numbers as they would be dialled internationally but in a way that separates the country code, area code, and part that can be dialled locally.

6.4 Other

Avoid HTML HTML should be avoided in marking up articles.
How to change a policy or create a new one New page explaining the process, or do we already have one?

Comments edit

  • This is a thing of beauty. Order from chaos! Would each of the numbered titles get their own page with a quick description and then links? --Peter Talk 05:37, 21 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
* Thing of beauty - thanks! Re a page for each of the numbered titles, I hadn't thought that far, but it sounds like a good idea.
* BTW - The numbers were included to help organize the policies and make it easier to refer to policies during discussion. I'm not fussed either way about formally numbering our policies. -Shaund 17:03, 21 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Looks good. Maybe this could eventually be formatted in collapsible transclusion boxes (if that is what they are called — like WP navboxes in structure). Do you want any help at this stage? Pbsouthwood 08:07, 21 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I was thinking — a summarised (where necessary) policy listing transcluded in collapsible boxes, in which the links to detailed descriptions/explanations and to help pages would be found, including links to help pages on Commons, Meta and WP where appropriate (avoid duplication where possible).
* Do you have any examples (WP pages) that you could point to (just so I can clarify in my mind what you're referring to)? -Shaund 17:03, 21 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I have just reorganised my Wikipedia user page using collapsable wikitables, which have some advantages, there are also navboxes and collapsible lists. There are various similar structures using templates like Collapse top and collapse bottom, but my understanding of the workings of the markup isn't very good. I just hack around a bit until I get something to work well enough for my needs. The contents can be transcluded using the {{PAGENAME}} markup or its more complicated variations. I will try to put together a demo on a scratchpad on WP as the templates dont seem to work here on WV Pbsouthwood 16:34, 22 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks for digging those examples up, definitely think some of those could be useful. I really like the Navboxes, but we'll see what everyone agrees to. -Shaund 18:30, 22 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Maps, photographs and other images — where do they fit in? Partly in Organisation (4.3 Structure of articles), partly in MoS (6.1 Content)?
* There's an Image policy in 3.3. Right now it covers mostly policy (people in pictures, copyright issues, etc) but some style elements as well (minimal use of images). There's also a How to add an image help page that covers off some style elements and an incomplete Images in articles page that looks like it was abondoned, in part due to questions about whether it was needed because of the other two pages. I'm not sure right now if we need three pages (policy, style, how to) or just two. -Shaund 17:03, 21 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • It would be nice if one policy map/main page can link to all the policy and help pages, with no more than two or max three levels of detail. Pbsouthwood 08:29, 21 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
* Agreed, although it may be tricky to present in a way that's coherent and not overwhelming. -Shaund 17:03, 21 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I also agree that we should have one, although we already do at Wikitravel:Namespace index ;) I think we should re-organize that page in this new format, while also having a hierarchical navigation, which would be less intimidating? --Peter Talk 17:05, 22 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Obviously Wikivoyage community will have their input. Would it be appropriate to put up a site notice for them after this has taken some shape? Pbsouthwood 08:39, 21 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Would all language versions necessarily have all the same policy details? I would support allowing some variation in style. How do other Wikimedia projects handle this? (My language skills are not up to finding out for myself). Pbsouthwood 08:39, 21 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Language versions have always been given self-determination with regards to policies, with the exception of goals & non-goals and licensing/legal issues. --Peter Talk 09:53, 21 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The Wikivoyage structure looks good, and the breadcrumb navigation seems to work well for me.
  • I agree that help articles are not part of policy but should be linked from it.
  • It would be good to have this mostly hammered out before migration to Wikimedia. Most of the opposition from that side appears to be based on a failure to understand WT policy, possibly due to a failure to read the explanations. A clear, coherent, easily navigated policy with a clear consensus might help if there is any obstuctionism after the migration.
  • It might be worth putting in a formal BLP equivalent, or at least a redirect, to appease the Wikipedians who still dont get that it is a non-issue for us. Pbsouthwood 09:00, 21 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I agree, and will write one once we have :en up and running. --Peter Talk 09:53, 21 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
* I agree, as well. -Shaund 17:03, 21 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Regarding the comment "a page for each of the numbered titles, I hadn't thought that far, but it sounds like a good idea", before doing so let's make sure that there is valid content to include, otherwise we'll have the same problem that we do with region articles currently where we have an article that just says "go to these articles for the real information". Looking at Wikipedia, [2] is in the "Topic-specific conventions on article titles" group, but there isn't a specific article for that subject; in other instances there IS an article for the parent group, but only when there is information to cover that is not already covered in the child articles. -- Ryantalk • 17:11, 21 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My idea for the "top level" policy pages, e.g., "Organization of the wiki," would be in the same organizational vein one of those extended disambiguation pages that I don't like ;) A brief intro, followed by one-liner links with very brief descriptions to the actual policy articles. --Peter Talk 18:14, 21 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My idea looks almost identical in collapsed mode, but has little "show" links on the right hand side of each entry, and when you click on one it expands to show the next level of information transcluded from a subpage. Looks nice and is very user-friendly to the reader. A bit more complicated for the editor, but for policy pages that is not necessarily a bad thing. It can be made more user friendly for editors but I don't know how to code that. To get an idea of what I mean, consider the box structure of a wikipedia portal, but with collapsible boxes. I will go see what I can work out, but don't hold your breath. Pbsouthwood 16:48, 22 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Demo here. Obviously formatting could be greatly improved, but I haven't worked out how to do that yet. I also still have to work out how to put in an edit link. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 20:37, 22 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My thoughts are along the same lines as Peter and Peter. We may also need to have some kind of "top level" policy page in order to make breadcrumb navigation work (if that's the way we want to go). -Shaund 18:36, 22 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think that would be good because it gives you a logical place to start. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 20:37, 22 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New policies edit

Note: This discussion has been moved to Talk:WMF Migration/New policies.

Next steps edit

I updated the policy hierarchy again. Unfortunately, I have to head out of town later this afternoon and won't be back until Monday. I'll be able to follow discussions on my phone, but won't be able to do any heavy duty work. Feel free to update with missing information, changes, etc. The hierarchy is not as complete as I want it, but it should give a good idea of:

  • a possible hierarchy for the policy and guideline pages
  • a 1-3 line summary of each of those policies/guidelines ("in a nutshell" comments and can be used on high-level policy pages)
  • Help or Index pages that relate to the policy
  • existing policy/guideline pages that could be merged, deleted or upgraded

Possible next steps I see are:

  1. identify any missing policies that we need to add (already started above)
  2. review existing policies to see if any are redundant, out-of-date, incomplete or can be merged
  3. if we like the idea of 1-3 line policy summaries, review the ones I wrote (being concise isn't always my strong point) and write summaries for the remaining policies
  4. determine if we want breadcrumb navigation for the policy pages
  5. determine how/do we want to handle "high-level" policy pages
  6. should this become an expedition? I'm happy to organize, but it would have to wait until next week

Cheers - Shaund 19:03, 22 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll likely take a stab at revising the policy summaries. I don't think breadcrumbs would be as helpful as having a navigation box of some sort, as suggested earlier. LtPowers 20:31, 22 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think this should be an expedition. I have loaded my sled and harnessed the dogs and am plunging forward into the icy wastes. Maybe even in the right direction. I am already busy with a possible page layout based on the table above, but with collapsible groups. It is on one of my WP scratchpads (this version superceded by ) where all the templates work. It is sort of like a full page navigation box. Some fettling of the format will be needed. Comments and suggestions welcome. Anyone who knows how to get edit links into the table header boxes please show me how to do it. I will be experimenting, but why reinvent the wheel? • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 16:56, 23 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please all add missing policies and pages that should be linked to Shaund's table above.

  • Add policies as new rows,
  • List help pages, templates, etc to be linked from the policy in right hand column.
  • I like the idea of short policy summaries, it makes it easy to see which section you need to open to get to the details. Lets use the table on this page as the sandbox. If the new summary is significantly different, add it below the existing one.
  • I suggest two groups of policy and help pages — the one group is the policy pages, which will be things like "Don't Tout", or "Avoid HTML". The other group will be the help pages which are how to do it, linked from the appropriate policy page. This is much like the existing setup, but a few names may need to be changed, a few pages merged and a few split. I include page and some other templates as a subgroup of the Help pages.
  • There are a number of policies in the existing table under Section 4 - Structure, which I think belong in the MoS. I will mark them.
  • It there are problems or objections to the collapsing table layout, the same logical structure can be use in other formats. What I would like to end up with is a coherent structure which allows easy navigation to the information you need with a short learning curve and the ability to backtrack and keep track of where you are.• • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 16:56, 23 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So then, as I understand it, the idea would be to have a series of clickable links that are in bullet points (or some similar clear structure) in the MoS (and aside from "Don't tout" and "Avoid HTML," they should include things like what's now called "Tone," "First person," etc.). Sounds great to me. I don't have any other suggestions at the moment, but I just want to give all of you kudos for your wonderful work so far! Ikan Kekek 08:09, 24 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The page is very sparse at the moment, as I dont see the point in building up all the templates on WP and the having to do it all again with different filenmes later. It is very much a proof of concept and learning the markup. The "Guiding principles" bar shows the transcluded text in the deepest nested navboxes, with the entire text from the transcluded file, but nothing else. It is easy to add more links, or if preferred, remove part of the transcluded file by using includeonly tags.
The rest doesnt go so far yet, it just has text placeholders for Shaund's structure, but would be done in the same way eventually. The magic part is you can collapse it as far as you like by changing the state parameter.
The "Manual of style" bar has a deeper nesting for demo purposes (the colour has been made lighter the deeper you go) for one item. Clicking on the show/hide link works as any collapsable box, and the V·T·E links are for view, talk page and edit for the navbox, so you can find and edit them easily.
I am not sure which demo page you looked at (there are 2) the new one is at This structure is much better than the first, it looks better, works better, and has more potential features. It might even be easier to edit, and certaily less likely to hit the wrong link, as the "edit" and "show" links are on opposite sides of the page. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 16:59, 24 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's pretty slick looking, thanks for putting it together. I'm not too familiar with how they work though... will there still be individual policy pages that we can link to when, say, we are reverting an edit with an external link and we want to put a link to our external links policy in the comment?
Re including some of section 4 in the MoS instead of Organization section, I agree the article templates can be in the MoS. The templates are already linked from "What is an article?" so there's a link between the policy and the MoS (as a side note, I think we should also update the "What is an article?" policy so it explicitly states that the templates must be used when creating a new article). I'm not sure about the routebox navigation, I don't think of them as a style element, but I'm not fussed either way. The Naming Conventions I think should stay in the Organization section. There are some pretty specific rules about how articles are named, so I don't think it's a style issue. Cheers -Shaund 04:15, 27 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I wouldn't be comfortable with language that literally states that "templates must be used when creating a new article." If it says "templates should be used when creating a new article," that would be fine. I don't think we want to prevent newbies from putting up good basic content, even if they're unfamiliar with templates. Ikan Kekek 11:55, 27 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry, I've had to rewrite procedure manuals at work recently and the instructions were to be very direct. I think it carried over into this! Would "travel guides are structured using article templates" or "Use the article template appropriate for the destination to structure the travel guide" work better? I prefer to avoid "should" because it makes it sound like the templates are optional, which they aren't if an article is going to be classed as higher than stub. -Shaund 14:08, 27 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Templates are optional; that's why we have the stub tag. It's easy to add the template sections after the fact. LtPowers 14:37, 27 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, using the templates to create an article is optional, the section headings the templates represent we're pretty strict about. I guess it's more correct to say travel guides are generally structured using standardized sections and we have handy templates to help with it (and then provide a link to the description of the sections and the article templates page). -Shaund 03:52, 28 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That looks like a reasonable description of reality. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 06:03, 28 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am not too familiar with how they work either, and have run into a few snags with file size, so I am continuing experiments. If there is someone here who does understand how they work, I could use some advice.
  • The individual policy pages will remain. Any editing of these pages will be done in the original pages. they will be linked from the main policy page by ordinaty linke, or be transcluded. A small amount of markup may be necessary on the original pages to identify which parts should not be transcluded, if any.
  • I will reshuffle the organisation and MoS to reflect the changes as discussed. Nothing is set in stone.
  • more "Nutshell" descriptions would be useful. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 06:40, 27 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Now that I'm back, I'll work on more descriptions. -Shaund 14:08, 27 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As I see it, there are three aspects to the policy cleanup, all with the purpose of facilitating lookup of the relevant policy.

  1. Organise the articles so they are grouped a logical hierarchy
  2. Tidy up the policy articles where necessary, including renaming where necessary.
  3. Format and display of the articles in an index article
• • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 12:32, 28 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have used Shaund's proposed policy map as a starting point for organising, and have made a few changes to group items in a more consistent way. The main change so far is to group structure of the wiki under Organisation, and structure of the article under Manual of style. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 12:32, 28 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Some comments and suggested edits: edit

(1) "Administrators may protect a page if certain criteria are met. It is preferred, however, if abusive edits are counteracted without protecting a page." How about "Administrators may protect a page when necessary, but it is preferable if abusive edits can be effectively counteracting without protecting a page."
Under "Roles within the community," how about adding:
  • Members
  • Nutshell: If you have created a password so that you can edit articles on this site, you are already a member.
  • Related pages:
  • Registered users
  • Nutshell: Registered users have a screen name and are not identified by the IP addresses they post from.
  • Related pages:
Is the policy on negative reviews a related page for "Tone"?
Under "Creating emphasis," it should be mentioned that inputting the words "Bold text" just shows the words "Bold text." I realize that's a task for later, though, not for this outline.
I'll have a substantive comment on the bodies of water policy at WMF Migration/New policies. Thanks for your great work! Ikan Kekek 01:36, 29 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have made some changes bases on your suggestions for protection and roles. I think we can link pretty much any page that someone thinks is relevant, so will add negative reviews to tone. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 16:19, 31 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rental listings, Tours and Long lists edit

Our rental listings and Tour policies are currently subsections of listing descriptions. Both of these policies get a lot of attention, so I'd like to I'd like to pull them out and give them their own policy pages (I think it makes them more visible). The shortcut to the policies on the old WT pages are:

  • Apt - rental listings
  • Tour - tour operators policy

Avoid long lists (the 5-9 rule) is mentioned in a couple of policy pages, but again, I think it's important enough that it should have it's own page. I was waiting for the import to finish before drafting it up. - Shaund 13:46, 31 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think that's fine, but I also think that apt & tour are sufficient as written, so they would be short articles! Long lists (7+2) could use a full article. I don't think we have the policy written out that all lists (not just cities/ODs) are supposed to be no greater than 9. Or for that matter, that regions and districts lists are not subject to that policy (since it's impractical). --Peter Talk 16:07, 31 August 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Time for a review? edit

OK, things are slowing down and starting to stabilise, so it is probably time for a few people to look through the current structure and try to spot the faults.

Please sign below if you have looked through, and list any suggestions for improvements.• • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 15:06, 2 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think it is great! Couple of minor issues:

  • "Sex tourism policy" and "Illegal activities policy" will better fit into "Travel Guide Content Policies"
  • "Experts" looks misleading and probably obsolete. Expert is not a role in the community, so it should not be in the row of admins, docents, etc. I doubt that this article/policy is necessary. Was it of much use in the past?

-- Atsirlin 20:01, 2 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think you are right about sex tourism and illegal activities and will move them as suggested.
Until I started rehashing the policy tree I was entirely unaware that the experts page existed, so I have no idea if it was any use in the past. It does make some sense, so maybe it belongs somewhere else. I will leave it for now and wait for more opinions. I am learning more than I ever wanted to know about policies, but that seems to be the story of my life... • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 20:44, 2 September 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Return to "Wikivoyage/Migration/Policy clean-up" page.