Wikivoyage/Lounge/Archive/2009-05-11

To Do List

Time to update the To Do List here on General:, i.e. to once check which articles have already been translated and which ones still need to be translated so we have a good starting point for any new version that might/will get started. I'll try to make things a bit clearer, but I think that all English speaking help will be more than welcome. There is still a lot to translate or to adapt. --Mulleflupp - Беседа 21:11, 12 October 2007 (CEST)

Translations for extensions needed

Two extensions I wrote define system messages. These messages are available in English and German. Please help to translate them also to other languages. These messages will later be part of the extensions. Please give the translations on the discussion pages of the extensions:

• tech:Listings extension
• tech:TocTree extension

Thank you for your endeavour. --Roland 15:14, 4 November 2007 (CET)

Blueprint for lang vers - a set of necessary have to have meta articles

To put all this in one place - as User:Mulleflupp has noticed ([1]) I have translated Welcome for the specific needs of gen: (general, language-independent topics, for organisational matters and not for travel-articles). I wanted it to be a welcome to gen: not to any lang version of guide.

However I would like to finish the welcome page in the form for future language versions, but got lost where to put it. I saw this ([2]), however am not sure if I should put it there ([3]). Can anyone direct me to the right place. If there is none currently, could we establish a place for English meta articles for a guide? LukeWestwalker⇔ 23:24, 11 November 2007 (CET)

I would like a seperate place to store the mentioned articles. How about meta articles as a link-page and then creating new subarticles like Welcome. What do you think of it?--Der Reisende 14:42, 14 November 2007 (CET)

As no opposing opinions appeared, I have just followed the above. LukeWestwalker⇔ 17:09, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Exactly what I had in mind when I made the first comment on "To do". For me it's OK. Once the translations are finished and revised I would even go as far to (half) protect these pages, as they will serve for every new language version but for nothing else. --Mulleflupp - Беседа 15:16, 14 November 2007 (CET)

Ok, so metaarts in English would go to [[Language versions/metaarticles/artname]]. Am I right we need English only there? If they are meant to be a starting point for other languages, I see their content to reflect general policies and spirit of WV. Therefore they shouldn't contradict whatever happens to it versions according to community there. So I suggest we translate them soon to Eng and then review for comaptibility with it - (it native needed). And then what - eternal protection? In this way we would secure some interlang compatibility - is this demanded or even possible? LukeWestwalker⇔ 22:07, 18 November 2007 (CET)

I think the translated articles should be protected. If change is necessary it should first be discussed on the articles discussion page and later implemented. --Der Reisende 12:37, 6 December 2007 (UTC) (sorry for leaving you alone a bit, but I'm pretty busy. Thank you for your valuable conr´tribs.)

Naming conventions

I have just come across a page, however have also noticed those pages. Can anyone put those to consistent state and write a short guideline for future? LukeWestwalker⇔ 17:16, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Pretty easy. It is Copyleft. The article shown on the special page is german and not translated. Therefore it contains the old link. In the language Versions the copyleft article belongs to the Wikivoyage namespace. On general it is in all pages.--Der Reisende 09:20, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. BTW - I found this [4], saying there is no Wikivoyage: on general. LukeWestwalker⇔

The project namespace name is General, not Wikivoyage. --Roland 06:11, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Playground vs. Sandbox

(moved from Talk:Playground#Playground vs. Sandbox on 23:15, 17 December 2007 (UTC))

Hmmm, now we have two areas where people can test how a wiki works: Playground and Help:Sandbox. Should we keep both or choose one and then adapt all the concerned links to that one? I don't think that we need two different "test pages" but they don't harm anybody neither. --Mulleflupp - Беседа 09:29, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I think we should definitely have one playground/sanbox/whatever for test edits. Let's move discusion to Lounge on:

• how to call it
• whether we need it on gen: in the exactly same form as on national guides.

LukeWestwalker⇔ 18:29, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. --Mulleflupp - Беседа 21:03, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Do we need a sandbox/playground on general? I think we don't really need one. This is for language versions. Should we agree on a playground/sandbox than playground is my preferred name.--Der Reisende 09:22, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't feel the need for experiment page on general either. However don't mind if anyone notices the need for it (please describe below why). LukeWestwalker⇔ 15:33, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Association's Members' Conference

The members' conference of the Wikivoyage association will be in de:Leipzig this year. It begins on 26. April 2008 at 3.00 p.m. The conference is public, so everybody interested is wellcome. See assoc:5. Mitgliederversammlung/Einladung (English and German) for more details. -- Hansm 10:11, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Sponsor Link on the Main Page?

For now, the Wikivoyage association is supported by members' fees and private donations, mainly by two German main authors. It's the association that pays for our server. On medium time terms, we will need to get more members or more donations from different donators, even from commercial ones, if necessary.

The last association's members' conference in Stuttgart has has decided (German) that under no circumstances sponsors can influence the content or maintenance of our wiki, but they may be listed in a separate sponsor's list, linked from the sidebars of our wikis. Furthermore, every sponsor may introduce himself on an own sponsor page.

Now, I have got a sponsoring offer from the German internet travel agency that runs amongst others the two sites http://www.kroatien-adrialin.de and http://www.italien-adrialin.de. They would like to sponsor our project under the condition that we present them as sponsors with a link from our main entry page or from the German wiki's Main Page.

It's the next members' conference's task to decide on this question at 26 April. However, I think in this case, it would be important to know the contributors' opinion, no matter whether they are association's members or not. Basically, it's a very general question if we could agree to sponsors' links from our main pages.

I'm curious for your statements and I'm sure that your opinion will be a very important basis for the members' conference's decision.

-- Hansm 20:16, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I think we have to discuss it on our next meeting in Leipzig. At this moment I will not agree to have a sponsor on our main pages except for the case of problems with the finance of our project. -- Jens 20:58, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

When I started contributing to Wikivoyage, I already had done a great deal of work on WT/en. So why have I stopped working there? Because I was looking for an independent and AD-FREE place to publish. I do not have a problem with putting a small link in the sidebar or an equal place that links to a site naming bigger "sponsors", but I am against an advertisement on our main page. --Felix 08:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure, there is no sharp border line between sponsoring and advertising. In this specific case, Adrialin did not ask for direct advertising, but just for a text link like: "Partners/Friends/Sponsors of out website: http://www.kroatien-adrialin.de and http://www.italien-adrialin.de". I know that we have to decide on a very delicate question. That's why the contributors' opinions are so important. -- Hansm 09:06, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I rather prefer private donations as the best form of funding the project. I also agree that there might be a time this is not enough. I personally would think a link on the main page should not be given to a single sponsor but to all meaning a link called sponsors that directs to a special page with all sponsor listed. The listing time should be limited to one year. Additionally I would like to hear the opinion of more than a just handful community members before deciding at the annual assoc-meeting.--Der Reisende 10:58, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I can only agree with Der Reisende. Allowing sponsors onto the main page will on short or long term lead to conflicts/questions like:

• How many sponsors?
• Which sponsor first, which one second...?
• How much place for how much money...?
• What criterias to be accepted as sponsor on main page, i.e. does the sponsor have to be travel related...?

In my opinion, the best solution to raise the funds necessary to operate the wikis will be the member cotisations and money donated by donators (which can get some space somewhere to present themselves, but not on the main page). If more money will be needed, a first step should be to motivate more users to join the association. And there we are again, at the quest for new users... --Mulleflupp - Беседа 11:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

In my opinion as an author, I think that everybody has (nearly always) fun in working with WV. But I think also, that the situation as it is now, meaning that only some give money for the fun, is not right. And, also, you might get an two - class- community. So where get the money ?

The other side: advertisement on the main Page - I think this mustn't be, arguments see before;

Undermentioned some examples about sponsoring an association: the DAV (yet) a little bigger than WV now is, they call the sponsors partners and link them to the partnersite (but even with an partnerbanner on bottom of the mainpage), an then www.alpine-auskunft.at a kind of alpine Tour-Wiki from OEAV, similar, a little smaller and younger, and its not difficult, to find any examples more. From somewhere the money must come.

And about me, thinking to become a WV-member: I'm just writing a little longer than one year. But what's in another year, or two: I don't know about my long-term interrests, the voyage - themes are limited, yet some of munich, some of the mountains. I've no intention becoming admin or so. So becoming a member - I even think not; - Donations- well maybe if necessary. But: is it necessary now ? Of any interrest then would be the middle-term budget of WV for, maybe, two or three years or so, and then: see;--Bbb 17:25, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Just a remark on Wikivoyage's yearly budget: We run a low end dedicated server. A virtual server would not be sufficient, but the dedicated server will probably have enough resources even for the next two years. Costs for the server: 600€/year. The other big point in our budget is the bank account which costs 150€/year. Unfortunately, low cost private bank accounts are not possible for associations. From time to time we need to pay fees for updating our registration at the law court, but this is a comperatively small part of our budget. In total, we can assume fix costs of about 900€ per year. Currently, our annual members' contributions are about 200€. -- Hansm 19:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

(Insertion) Well, then--Bbb 05:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

My opinion as author only (sorry for my bad English (: ): I think a link inside the wiki, e.g. at the German Main Page, is a No-Go, because this would have an appearance of an advertising. But I can imagine a simple link per sponsor (one only, not one to the Croatia Site and one to the Italy Site, and NEVER such descriptions like "your partner for Italy" or banners) at the access page (www.wikivoyage.org) in a special "Donators" section, because this site lies outside the wiki and has still a lot of free whitrspace. The point is, in my opinion, that no sponsor should get "exclusive rights" or something like this, and if there is more than one sponsor, they should be ranked alphabetically, not by the amount of money they donated. Every donator which wishes that (persons and companies) should have the opportunity to appear in this list, and if there are too many (I don't think this will take place in the next 2 years), there are possibilities like a scrollbar. Just my 2 cents ...and I hope this is no April Fool's day joke :D --Kkkr 22:09, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Seeing WT today, I think, thats clear too much in layout-pace. But the ads by google get the advantache, that the advertisements is serious (as serious as advertisement can be). The timing is very interesting. --Bbb 05:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Something is wrong with the clock, two hours late; --Bbb 05:20, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Off-topic: General: and Shared: use the UTC timezone. -- Hansm 10:56, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

What an incidence! As if somebody from the other big travel wiki had read this discussion: Google-Ads on WT from today on. But this is not what we want to introduce here. -- Hansm 11:00, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

What do you think of the way the Wikimedia e.V. Germany does ist? On www.wikipedia.de they have written: Wir danken unseren großzügigen Spendern Deutsche Telekom, Mozilla Europe und stellvertretend für die vielen anderen: Sebastian Saternus, Peter Schleifenbaum, Gerhard Burock. A sentence like this (with links to te pages) could be placed - imho - without problems in the www.wikivoyage.org main access page. --Kkkr 01:27, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

On a first glance, this looks reasonable. However, they list only two big donators and three representatives for all others. An other thing: Why don't they link to the German Telekom and to Mozilla Europe? If you ask me, the magic word is page-rank. A link from a site's start page makes page rank flow away to the linked site. -- Hansm 08:09, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

So as not to repeat the arguments above, I just wanted to back des Reisendes and Mulleflupp's opinions . Private donations in the first place, maybe list of donators without links or anything regarded as ads. Dangers of sponsorship have been already listed here. LukeWestwalker⇔ 13:43, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Budget threat

As sponsorlinks discussion revealed we are lacking 700€ this year, I allowed myself to start a separate thread on this subject. In the first place I consider this as a very sorry situation when members of international (sic!) project can not raise such an amount. I am sure we have developed (sic!) a very supportive comunity (if you disagree) and should not be afraid to appeal to the community for financial support. The more details and insight into finances granted to the authors, the more responsible will the feel. If we make the fundraising issue advertised enough on all language versions, raising enough money should be a matter of short time. LukeWestwalker⇔ 13:55, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

we still have donators who cover up 2 third of the above amount. We will discuss this matter at the meeting (wether to start a fundraising campaign or not).

OFF TOPIC: @Luke: Are you coming to the meeting?--Der Reisende 11:49, 14 April 2008 (UTC) -»Answered

Scheduled downtime

On Friday, 2008-6-27, the server will be down for maintenance. The works will start at 18:00 (UTC) and hopefuly won't need more than one hour. -- Hansm 09:41, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

protect Talk pages?

Special:Log/delete - is possible to protect talk pages from anonymous edits to prevent such creations? LukeWestwalker⇔ 11:44, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

1. Since version 1.10, there is an array variable $wgNamespaceProtection to protect namespace pages from anonymous edits.
2. Since version 1.12, there is an opportunity to prevent the creation of articles (protected titles).

Now we work with 1.11, so we can use only the first way, I think in autumn we will update the Mediawiki software to v. 1.13, but this branch is not yet opened. -- Roland 12:14, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I added the protection of the Talk pages of the main namespace. --Roland 12:26, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Great. And thanks for clarification. LukeWestwalker⇔ 12:28, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Location database: Alpha testers wanted

An alpha test version of the location database is running now. We need as many testers as possible. The testing time is at least three weeks from today on. If all critical bugs are fixed and you feel it is elaborated enough for daily use, I would like to activate it for our productive wikis. But we still have to talk about details. For now, we just need alpha testers. -- Hansm 18:37, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

MediaWiki version upgrade to 1.13.1: Testers wanted

I have prepared the version upgrade to MW version 1.13.1. Everybody is invited to test it on three development wikis:

• http://www.wikivoyage.org/it.1.13
• http://www.wikivoyage.org/de.1.13
• http://www.wikivoyage.org/shared.1.13

In order to block crawlers, an htaccess authentification is required.

Username: tester

Password: test

Please do not enter your wiki username!

Bug reports go to tech:MW version update 1.13.1 bugs.

-- Hansm 13:05, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Upgrade shedule

Since no bugs have been reported, I hope the version upgrade will be much easier than last time where there also was a database migration implied. I will do the upgrades on Thursday, 2008-10-2 from 17:00 UTC on. Here is an estimated shedule for the upgrade. If everything runs well, each wiki will be unreachable only for some few minutes. The shedule may run into delay if problems occure, however. I will update this table after each upgrade.

wiki	time in UTC	status
security backup	16:15 - 16:??	done.
shared:	17:00 - 17:15	done, but Main Page looks somewhat odd.
it:	17:45 - 18:00	done.
de:	18:00 - 18:15	done.
gen:	18:15 - 18:30	done.
tech:	18:30 - 18:45	done.
assoc:	18:45 - 19:00	done.

-- Hansm 17:55, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Hopeless in delay. OK, the most important three wikis have been updated. There are some error messages in the logs. I will try to fix them before doing any other updates. I hope, the wikis will be usable somehow. -- Hansm 18:33, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

OK, most critical errors seem to be fixed, now. Please report bugs on tech:MW version update 1.13.1 bugs. -- Hansm 19:25, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Location database: Proposing usage for productive wikis

The 3 weeks of Alpha state testing have almost been passed. Many thanks to all testers. I'm happy to see that no critical bugs have been found. Some of the normal and minor bugs could be fixed. The application side has been adapted to run on MW v1.13.1. If no critical bug will be found until Monday, the Location DB code will reache its Beta state what means that it seems to run stable and reliable. I wanted to propose this:

• Activate the locDB for the productive wikis de:, it: and shared:.
• On this three wikis, make the following modifactions:
  • Disable the Geo template since it is not needed any more.
  • Use the IsIn template in namespace MAIN or CATEGORY, respectively, only as fallback in case there is no corresponding location found.
  • Do the same with the AltIsIn template.
  • Use the traditional MediaWiki style interwiki link syntax only as fallback in case the locDB doesn't hold other interwiki links for articles in namespace MAIN or CATEGORY, respectively.
  • Activate the sub location listing for each article that corresponds to a location.
  • Activate enhanced search options including restrictions by IsIn and restriction on a circle with a given centre location and a radius.

When there are no strong argues against, I will do the above during the weekend starting on Friday, 2008-10-17.

-- Hansm 19:40, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Go ahead :-) --Felix 10:16, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for your confindence. The location database is active for shared:, de: and it:.. In contrary to what I have said above, the Geo template has not been completely disabled. Instead, it is used as fallback in case no corresponding location is found for the destination article. Everything else has been done as announced.

Each article in the destination namespace (MAIN on de: and it:, Category on shared:) has two additional links in the toolbox: "Location DB" and "List Sublocs". The more important is "Location DB" that links to the corresponding page in the location DB's maintenance interface.

Whenever you create a new destination article, also create a new location DB entry by followin the "Location DB" link from the toolbar. Also, the maintenance interface is the place where to alter the IsIn and the geographical coordinates. The old templates are still active as fallback, but, of course, they are useless for the enhanced search features. Thus: The use of the old templates "IsIn" and "Geo" is strongly discouraged.

There is a new special page on it: and de: that lists all locations in the main namespace that do not have corresponding locations. Most of this destinations should be added to the locDB manualy.

Some locations that actualy should have been merged during the data import could not be merged due to merge conflicts. This conflicts need to be resolved manualy. Please help on ldbwiki:Wikivoyage:Manual_help_needed_after_data_import.

For more details about the location database, see ldbwiki:Help:Location_Database.

-- Hansm 13:04, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Update: Already yesterday night, we have reached the desireable state that on both, de: and it:, all destination articles in the MAIN namespace have corresponding locations in the locDB. This makes the templates IsIn, Altisin and Geo superfluous for the MAIN namespace. I have disabled them in order not to misslead our contributors into the desert of confusion.

Now, whenever your IsIn or Geo don't work as they used to (they won't), remember to make your modifications in the locDB maintenance interface rather than in the article itself. Follw the "location DB" link in the toolbox!

For all of our wikis, there is a new interwiki prefix "ldbwiki" for the wiki part of the locDB. This should mainly be used for links to help pages or the mainpage. On shared:, it: and de:, there is an other new interwikiprefix "ldb" for links directly to the maintenance interface part, i.e. namspace Ldb: on the locDB pseudo wiki. It is designed to be used together with a destination article name. For example, from the shared: wiki, [[ldb:Lima]] links to /ldb/Ldb:shared:Lima. The same wiki markup link, but used on it:, links to /ldb/Ldb:it:Lima.

-- Hansm 10:16, 19 October 2008 (UTC)