Requests for comment/Travel Guide: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 09:24, 13 February 2015

Latest revision as of 19:37, 24 April 2023

(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)

Line 328:

# '''Support''' - God, I dread this. The multiplication of sub-guides will almost certainly make rabbits look like monks. But I can also easily see that it might draw a few more people to become editors in general, probably including a fair number of people from smaller areas, and that would probably be a good thing. And, yeah, if other existing sites want to merge into one here, that will provide a reasonably sound basis for a start. But this might make the English wikipedia look like an easy project to manage. [[User:John Carter|John Carter]] ([[User talk:John Carter|talk]]) 00:51, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

# '''Support''' simply, it will be very useful for people around the world , so i'm supporting it . {{unsigned|Mr AkRaM}}

# '''Support''' - It will be better if the local designation will have an allowance by supplying mapping and facts. However, will make disadvantages through misguidance. <font style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#1589FF 0.1em 0.1em 1.5em,#1589FF -0.1em -0.1em 1.5em;color:#800080">[[User:V838 Monocerotis|<span style="font-family:Arial Narrow; color:dark blue; background:white"><b>Jonas'VM</b></font>]][[User talk:V838 Monocerotis|<font color="#FFFF00"> ☼</font>]]</font> 9:18 19 July 2012 (UTC)

# '''Support''' - I hope to be a quality such as Wikipedia. --[[User:Vhorvat|Vhorvat]] ([[User talk:Vhorvat|talk]]) 01:57, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

# '''Support''' - I can understand opponents' concern for this proposal. But, I believe in power of this community. We can do it.--[[User:かぬま|かぬま]] ([[User talk:かぬま|talk]]) 02:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Line 363:

# '''Support''' All my articles about roman and italian buildings and churches could be packed together in a good way for travellers. --[[User:Capaci34|Capaci34]] ([[User talk:Capaci34|talk]]) 08:11, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

# '''Support''': As active user both in ru.WP and WT.ru, I believe that it would be a much needed and useful addition to WP and other WMF projects. --[[User:Л.П. Джепко|Л.П. Джепко]] ([[User talk:Л.П. Джепко|talk]]) 08:55, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

# '''Support''' Good idea. –'''[[User:ElmA|ElmA]] <small>([[User talk:ElmA|<span style="color:#0070FF">Talk</span>]] – [[Special:Contributions/ElmA|<span style="color:#0070FF">My contributions</span>]] – [[Special:EmailUser/ElmA|<span style="color:#0070FF">E-mail]]</span>]])</small> 09:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

#'''Support'''. I've consulted Wikitravel fairly often, and I've even edited it a few times. For all its shortcomings, Wikitravel does have some excellent content and a fairly active, if small, editor base. Thus, we've seen that a wiki travel guide can work. A Wikimedia-backed project would be far more technically reliable than Wikitravel, and would attract more editors from the various other Wikimedia communities. In particular, the new project would need experienced administrators, bureaucrats, and other functionaries, which Wikitravel seems to lack. <font color="green">[[en:User:Szyslak|szyslak]]</font> 09:04, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

#'''Support''' Good Idea and helpful in many points of view. --[[User:IlSignoreDeiPC|IlSignoreDeiPC]] ([[User talk:IlSignoreDeiPC|talk]]) 09:18, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Line 602:

# {{Support}}[[User:דוד|דוד]] ([[User talk:דוד|talk]]) 23:49, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

# {{Support}} Our ideas are well suited to the idea of free tourism. Pozdrawiam. [[User:MOs810|MOs810]] ([[User talk:MOs810|talk]]) 23:59, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

# <Ss>'''Oppose''' - My feeling is that such a project is out of the wikimedia philosophy. Its relevance would be to remove promotional content to WP articles. But in my humble opinion, it would be more valuable to link relevant content (educational ones like small places, monument, etc) from the WikiData project (which was launched some weeks ago by the german WP IIUC ?) in each WP article ...... [[User:Genium|Genium]] ([[User talk:Genium|talk]]) 09:33, 19 July 2012 (UTC)</Ss> {{Support}} - The [[w:fr:Discussion:Guedieiros/Suppression|Guedieiros]] article has been deleted from the French wikipedia without any redirect to the [[w:fr:Sendim (Tabuaço)|Sendim]] or Tabuaço pages, so the WikiTravel project probably makes sense. [[User:Genium|Genium]] ([[User talk:Genium|talk]]) 00:14, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

# {{support}} [[User:RaymondSutanto|RaymondSutanto]] ([[User talk:RaymondSutanto|talk]]) 09:35, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

# [[User:Jafeluv|Jafeluv]] ([[User talk:Jafeluv|talk]]) 10:08, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Line 650:

# '''Very strong''' {{Support}} - it's a nobrainer. Once this is done, I hope WMF will encourage a '''PR campaign''' highlighting how this event proves how truly unique (and important) the foundation is. If done properly, a successful PR campaign could help encourage more donations - which will be much needed if the new WT is to succeed. [[User:Oncenawhile|Oncenawhile]] ([[User talk:Oncenawhile|talk]]) 01:34, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

# '''Strong''' {{Support}} this is a quite good project to be done--[[Special:Contributions/79.90.237.161|79.90.237.161]] 09:40, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

# {{Support}} I am user of Wikitravel, and well, everything that I want to say has been already said. –[[edsonaoki|edsonaoki]] --[[Special:Contributions/130.89.224.159|130.89.224.159]] 11:30, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

# {{Support}} The evidence in the proposal, and a reading of some representative comments below (a few based on mis-assumptions), suggests that this is likely to be a net-positive change, for all. [[User:Quiddity|Quiddity]] ([[User talk:Quiddity|talk]]) 05:11, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

# '''Very strong''' {{Support}} --[[User:Vlad|Vlad]] ([[User talk:Vlad|talk]]) 13:42, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Line 832:

#::Several possible ___domain names are already owned, but why is this relevant?

#::What has this proposal to do with other possible proposals? All should be judges on their own merits.[[User:Pbsouthwood|Peter (Southwood)]] [[User talk:Pbsouthwood|^(talk)]]: 10:17, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

# '''<s>Oppose</s> Very strong oppose''': Undoubtedly is an awesome project. But visibly the Wikimedia hasn't a clear plan to improve, and even to think of improvements to other projects outside Wikipedia<ref name="test">this can be confirmed [//strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WMF_StrategicPlan2011_spreads.pdf here], where the name Wikipedia is quoted several times while the other projects are rarely mentioned.</ref> (with the exception of commons which has direct link to wikipedia). Wikimedia is good at creating a free encyclopedia, but was not successful in other segments which was proposed. If keep a multilingual project is summarized just to give some money to maintain the servers, leaving the rest with the editors and continue thinking about improvements only for Wikipedia. So no, thanks. And this election is rhetorical, because who does not know the stance of wikimedia when it comes to think of improvements for projects not related to Wikipedia(wikibooks, Wikisource, Wikinews, wikivercity, Wikiquote etc) will vote positive, then this is already a question answered. --[[User:Raylton P. Sousa|Raylton P. Sousa]] ([[User talk:Raylton P. Sousa|talk]]) 13:23, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

# {{#switch:{{BASEPAGENAME}}|Requests for new languages|Proposals for closing projects=Oppose|[[File:Symbol oppose vote.svg|15px|Oppose]] '''Oppose'''}}: At first I voted for the Travel Guide, but after a deeper look into the topic, I have decided to change my mind. I guess the plans are creating a new W'media site, which would use economical and technical resources. Given the World's economy, I do not think W'media should spend money on that when, if we/they want, it is possible to dump Wikitravel's information into W'pedia. Wikimedians also should look for their/our interests, Wikipedia already hosts far more tourist info than Wikitravel. If I look for Wikitravel page about my city, I can only find a Tourist's Yellow Pages. Given the fact that both licenses are nearly the same, I think Wikitravellers should just dump missing yet adequate and relevant information into the different Wikipedia language editions. I think that would make everyone happy. --[[User:Schumi4ever|Schumi4ever]] ([[User talk:Schumi4ever|talk]]) 13:41, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

#:<s>{{#switch:{{BASEPAGENAME}}|Requests for new languages|Proposals for closing projects=Oppose|[[File:Symbol oppose vote.svg|15px|Oppose]] '''Oppose'''}} Users must improve their articles, not a new travel guide. --[[User:Nightfly85|Nightfly85]] ([[User talk:Nightfly85|talk]]) 13:59, 20 July 2012 (UTC)</s> <small>opinion changed --[[User:Nightfly85|Nightfly85]] ([[User talk:Nightfly85|talk]]) 08:36, 24 July 2012 (UTC)</small>

Line 915:

# {{oppose}} Such a project scorns our values, especially regarding neutrality matters. --[[User:Koui²|Koui²]] ([[User talk:Koui²|talk]]) 09:17, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

# {{Oppose}}: Waste of effort. I fear it will be overloaded by commercial interests and/or (hidden) advertising --[[Special:Contributions/137.248.1.25|137.248.1.25]] 09:32, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

# '''<s>Oppose</s> Very strong oppose''': This is a slippery road to fragmentation of a great encyclopedia. Wikipedia is great because it is all-inclusive. I am vehemently against the proposal. What next? For example, since there is also a great demand for music information as strong as for travel information... Suddenly we will get a proposal for a separate Music Guide where we have only singers and bands, albums and singles and record labels and migrate information to that guide? There is huge demand for education information... So yet a third layer called Education Guide for schools, colleges and universities... I am against Travel Guide, Music Guide, Education Guide, Whatever Guide.. Keep it all under one project and let the reader search within the confines of a great all-inclusive database rather than just consult "some other guide" which what this new proposal boils down to. [[Special:Contributions/70.27.237.45|70.27.237.45]] 13:23, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

#:We have a number of [[sister projects]]. Wikipedia is not a dictionary thus we have Wikitionary, Wikipedia is not a collection of quotes thus we have Wikiquotes. Wikipedia is also not a travel guide [//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_a_manual.2C_guidebook.2C_textbook.2C_or_scientific_journal] thus we have this proposal.[[User:Jmh649|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Jmh649|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Jmh649|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Jmh649|email]]) 16:21, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

#*: Of course, similar ''guide''-like educational projects would be proposed by someone (at least me) if this WT becomes a success. And it ''will'' be educational. Supported by WP and [[w:Wikibooks|WB]] and with all those helpful [[Wikimedian|wiki'''m'''edians]], an educational project (or a subproject of [[Wikiversity]]), if launched, can be very successful and directly assumes fulfilling the [[Mission|goal]] and the [[vision]]. :) <span style="text-shadow:#A3BFBF 0.2em 0.3em 0.2em">[[User:Vanischenu|'''V<font color="green">ani</font>s<font color="green">che</font>nu''']][[Special:EmailUser/Vanischenu|m]]<sup style="margin-left:-3.2ex">[[User_talk:Vanischenu|Talk]]</sup></span> 23:38, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Line 989:

#: Hmm, if you look at the RFC, the question being asked is whether the WMF should assist WT in their move away from IB. This requires consent from both WT and WM communities, and eventually Wikivoyage besides. In the (now unlikely) event that the RFC ends up in the negative, Wikitravel would move to Wikivoyage servers instead. If things go to the positive, Wikitravel and Wikivoyage will both be joining WM(F), including most of their devs and other infrastructure. The new merged wiki will mostly be looking after themselves, so you don't need to help out with unless you insist. WMF can handle 800+ wikis, they can handle a few more. ;-)

#: This is a structured discussion, if you have concerns, then we'll try to answer them as best we can. I'm also poking some supporters now. But just like at say wikipedia RFA, convincing opposers is generally more productive, so one always gets more attention if one opposes. It's up to you to (ab)use that in a positive way! ;-) --[[User:Kim Bruning|Kim Bruning]] ([[User talk:Kim Bruning|talk]]) 04:50, 19 August 2012 (UTC) <small>''the trick is to go 'I'm going to have to oppose unless we manage to fulfill x,y,z'. If your demands are reasonable, your odds of getting x,y,z as concessions is pretty high. If/when x,y,z are fulfilled, you can switch to support''</small>

# '''oppose''' &ndash; not interested by a duplicate version of Wikitravel (same content, just different hosters amd sites). Furthermore, the fact that Wikitravel uses the same CC-by-SA licence as Travel guide, makes me fear that there would be massive content dumping between the two projects. We have Commons as media repository, but that wouldn't change anything except that we would have more images and media. Wikimedia volunteers should be more inventive than this. --<small><b><span style="border:1px solid #FF0000;padding:1px 3px;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;">[[User:Jagwar|<font color="#0000FF">Jagwar]] </font>]] </span></b></small>^{[[User talk:Jagwar|交談]] [//mg.wikipedia.org homewiki]} 21:48, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

===Abstain===