Requests for comment/Travel Guide: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 19:54, 23 November 2012

Revision as of 16:21, 27 April 2013

Line 178:

# '''Support'''. I know very well from running my own Mediawiki projects that 1. a few people systematically maintaining many such projects requires much less work/overhead than many people managing many projects; 2. WMF's people are much more skilled and professional at it than a random webmaster, especially when it comes to scaling; 3. WMF projects naturally get more editors and more interwiki links than external wikis, because of global accounts, because editors trust them more, and because editors get a greater boost to their reputation for editing a WMF project than an external one. These are all very good things for Wikitravel. Will it "save" Wikitravel from falling into decay? That remains to be seen, but I think if they promote some good admins and get cooperation from devs on necessary settings changes, they can take any necessary measures to preserve the active content. [[User:Dcoetzee|Dcoetzee]] ([[User talk:Dcoetzee|talk]]) 23:27, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

# '''Support'''; this is an opportunity to reduce some of the duplication of effort (vis a vis images and maps, and technical improvements) on Wikitravel. How many times have I wished I could just link to a Commons file instead of downloading and uploading it? Technical support from the site's current owners is sparse at best, and they are learning MediaWiki as they go. Waiting for them to figure out how to operate a wiki is killing the community. [[User:LtPowers|LtPowers]] ([[User talk:LtPowers|talk]]) 01:19, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

#* Small note: including Commons files in any Mediawiki wiki is as simple as turning on [http[:mw://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/InstantCommons |InstantCommons]]. [[User:Dcoetzee|Dcoetzee]] ([[User talk:Dcoetzee|talk]]) 20:32, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

#** Sadly, Wikitravel is currently running under MediaWiki: 1.11.2 (r24791), not MediaWiki 1.16 (r59428). Slow updating of Mediawiki is only one of our problems with our current host, IB --[[User:Rein N.|Rein N.]] ([[User talk:Rein N.|talk]]) 06:09, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

#** Yes, what Rein said. IB claims to be in the midst of an upgrade, but we'll all believe it when we see it. If we can get InstantCommons turned on, great. [[User:LtPowers|LtPowers]] ([[User talk:LtPowers|talk]]) 14:32, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Line 425:

# '''Support''' - [[User:Kpjas|Kpjas]] ([[User talk:Kpjas|talk]]) 22:16, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

# '''Support''' --[[User:LZ6387|LZ6387]] ([[User talk:LZ6387|talk]]) 22:17, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

# '''Support''' - Intriguing idea, very logical, Wikipedia is filled with pages of villages and townships and places people would never search for on an encyclopedia, such as [http[:w://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/:Uher_%28village%29 |this town]], or [http[:w://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/:Pokr%C3%B3wka |this one]] or [http[:w://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/:Horodyszcze-Kolonia |this little village]], most of these would seem more belonging in a project dedicated solely to the topic. [[User:Pluto and Beyond|Pluto and Beyond]] ([[User talk:Pluto and Beyond|talk]]) 00:00, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

# '''Support''' --[[User:Generous|Generous]] ([[User talk:Generous|talk]]) 00:37, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

# '''Support''' This will be a massive project, we are in we support it.--[[User:Maxwell gauss|Maxwell gauss]] ([[User talk:Maxwell gauss|talk]]) 01:47, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Line 466:

# {{support}} It can be a good reason for others to start editing and make the WMF projects even bigger. I can take part for Bolivia--[[User:Jduranboger|Jduranboger]] ([[User talk:Jduranboger|talk]]) 18:22, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

# {{support}}: At first I thought, what, another small startup languishing forever with startup problems? And another tourist wiki competing against the established ones? But no, you mean the biggest of those others have asked to be swallowed alive into our Wikimedia empire. Yummy; at last a good place to put bicycle tour turnsheets that are properly out of place in Wikipedia! [[User:Jim.henderson|Jim.henderson]] ([[User talk:Jim.henderson|talk]]) 18:22, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

# {{support}}: As a long-time [http[:w://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/:User:Jdlh |Wikipedia contributor]] and [http://wikitravel.org/en/User:JimDeLaHunt Wikitravel contributor], I support a unified home for freely-available travel content, and I'm wary of the danger of badly executed forks. I've been away from Wikitravel for a while (due to my schedule, not Internet Brands), so I've missed the decline in service. However, I'm persuaded by Wikitravel contributors whom I respect who say that Wikitravel is languishing at InternetBrands. Rather than let the free content wither there, since WMF believes it can provide a good home, let's fork. I expect to put my efforts into the WMF fork rather than the Internet Brands fork. [[User:Jdlh|Jdlh]] ([[User talk:Jdlh|talk]]) 18:51, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

#:Before casting your vote, you may want to visit Wikitravel and see how the site actually is now. Many "support" votes were cast months ago, prior to the completion of the MW software and hardware upgrade, which dramatically improved performance, look & feel, and features, as well as addressing nearly all reported bugs. There has been for a while now a renewed cooperation between the host (IB) and community, meaning objections on those grounds voiced months ago are quite out of date today. Also, just a short note: Wikitravel.org is the actual site; the WMF site would be the fork. Thanks,--[[User:IBobi|IBobi]] [[User talk:IBobi|talk]] [[Special:EmailUser/IBobi|email]] 19:54, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

#::[[User:IBobi|IBobi]], thanks for your response. However, reading the threads on your WT user page about "[http://wikitravel.org/en/User_talk:IBobi#Deleting_discussions Deleting discussions]" and "[http://wikitravel.org/en/User_talk:IBobi#Rogue_admin.3F Rogue admin?]", I'm afraid I'm losing confidence in your credibility. [[User:Jdlh|Jdlh]] ([[User talk:Jdlh|talk]]) 09:03, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Line 563:

# {{Support}} It seems clear from my quick review of WikiTravel that the danger of censorship exists there, if contributors there flock to a wikimedia project as soon as there is an alternative, then we'll know. If they don't then the wikimedia project will serve as good healthy competition for wikitravel. [[User:Bloodzeed|Bloodzeed]] ([[User talk:Bloodzeed|talk]]) 23:12, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

# {{Support}} Because i don't want to see anyone editing Travel Guide related on wikipedia ever again, we must make this clear, we have different project regarding everything that related to travel guide. [[User:Aldnonymous|Ald™]] ([[User talk:Aldnonymous|talk]]) 04:23, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

# {{Support}} - [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Scottthezombie|Scottthezombie]] ([[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Scottthezombie|talk]]) 05:37, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

# {{Support}} -- [[User:TrSqr|TrSqr]] ([[User talk:TrSqr|talk]]) 06:48, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

# {{Support}} -- [[User:Alzwded|Alzwded]] ([[User talk:Alzwded|talk]]) 07:44, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Line 689:

# {{Support}} To maximize benefit to all, WT should be run on a non-commercial basis and offer regular data dumps for third party re-use; Wikimedia has the resources and infrastructure; synergy between Commons and WT is likely to be considerable; the project agrees with the WMF's mission; the contributors want to switch. [[User:AxelBoldt|AxelBoldt]] ([[User talk:AxelBoldt|talk]]) 18:27, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

#:I am sure that IB has the resources as well. The difference is one of philosophy and we within the WM movement generally have a very open one [[User:Jmh649|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Jmh649|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Jmh649|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Jmh649|email]]) 03:41, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

# {{support}} I've been a Wikitravel user since 2008 ([http://wikitravel.org/en/User:AHeneen here]). I prefer to stay out of politics—a reason I haven't been an active contributor on Wikipedia and related wiki bureaucracy([http[:w://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/:User:IBstupid |this]] has been my WP account that I've yet to merge...IB is for the International Baccalaureate program I was in, not Internet Brands!!!). I have long desired for WT to be a Wikimedia project, mainly to gain a larger editing based (due to perceptions about its for-profit owner) and advertisements. However, the recent actions by IB to stem dissent make it all too clear that IB is a very bad host for the Wikitravel project. The reasons I support a WM travel wiki (a continuation of the Wikitravel project) is that the wiki serves a good purpose: providing a guide to the world free of commercial interests and bias from commercial entities (book publishers, travel agents, local/regional tourism promotion agencies, etc.) that anyone can edit or contribute to. Travel isn't merely commercial (with few exceptions like Las Vegas or Ibiza), but exploring the world and the great aura of cultures around the globe is very important for society...and certainly educational! There are often many years between editions of guidebooks. WT allows anyone to contribute useful information, providing instant feedback useful to travelers—a restaurant has moved, border crossing hours have changed, a hotel offers wifi, a national park now offers guided tours, prices of admission have changed. It's true that most of this is readily available in developed countries (US, Europe, Canada, Australia). However for much of the world (including regions I'm interested in such as Africa, the Caucasus, & Central Asia) the continuous user feedback WT provides is incredibly valuable. Language barriers may also hinder the availability of such info to travelers. To those concerned about forking the wiki, consider the sheer amount of WT admins & contributors have voiced there support (or more telling...how many have voiced opposition) and since nearly all the admins and regular users are fed up with IB, the future of WT is bleak and without constructive edits/discussions and regular policing of edits the quality, credibility, and usefulness of WT will decline anyways (to those concerned about forking a good wiki). The few reservations I hold against a move of the wiki to WM are related to new policies created by WM & WP users who may flock to the travel wiki shortly after launch and create policies resembling those on WP, giving little thought to the excellent policies WT has come up with over the years. It is very difficult to implement NPOV, mainly excessive negative remarks. For example, a mention critical of tourism on the environment is perfectly ok with me, but having 5 paragraphs on how the local government has polluted a forest & how Western tourists have commercialized natives on a National Park page is overkill. But a greater concern regards the negative views of commercialization voiced by opponents of a WM travel wiki. It is necessary to list businesses such as hotels, restaurants, attractions, taxi/bus companies and more as part of a travel guide. I feel current WT policy deals with "touting" effectively, by limiting the amount of fluffy language used in listings and the external links policy. A quick look at the [http://wikitravel.org/en/Wikitravel:Welcome,_business_owners Wikitravel:Welcome, business owners] page provides a good overview. The current WT community is small and it is difficult to police edits (especially in over-commercialized destinations like Orlando) to ensure all meet these criteria, although I think we've done a decent job with what few contributors there are. However, in time as the community grows larger it should get easier to police and remove all edits that run contrary to our Manual of Style. And finally, it is very difficult to provide references for everything on a travel wiki. Although not an issue in developed nations, mentioning that the only banks that there is only one bank that exchanges traveler's checks or the ___location of the only three ATMs in a city in a 3rd world country like Chad or Angola is very useful and should be included in the wiki, yet also hard to provide quality Wikipedia-level references. A good example would be [http://wikitravel.org/en/Niamey Niamey, Niger]. There's lots of necessary and useful information that would be hard to provide references for: porters & currency exchange at the airport; details on taxis; descriptive writing about markets & restaurants; and most of the info in "respect" & "stay safe" It might be a good thing to start the wiki, but set aside 1 month or so to work out policies before jumping into editing/creating destination pages. There are likely to be many differences between the small group of ex-WT editors accustomed to & understanding the reasoning behind WT policies and those used to WP & other WM wikis. [[User:AHeneen|AHeneen]] ([[User talk:AHeneen|talk]])

# {{Support}}. WT was actually my introduction to the wonderful world of wikis. And although I eventually ended up on WP:EN and havn't done any substantial edits on WT in years, it has pained me the way it seems to have stalled. If WikiMedia can help it rescue itself, I'm in favour. [[User:Chris j wood|Chris j wood]] ([[User talk:Chris j wood|talk]]) 18:39, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

# {{Support}} It would be great for Wikimedians who love to travel. --[[User:Rangilo Gujarati|Rangilo Gujarati]] ([[User talk:Rangilo Gujarati|talk]]) 20:40, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Line 729:

#:: The horrendous spam and advertising is a result of the poor technical support of the current host, Internet Brands. For awhile, there was no CAPTCHA mechanism when signing up for an account; the block tool didn't even work for a few days! A WMF-run site would allow the introduction of bots to prevent obvious spamming, along with a multitude of other basic ideas that IB never bothered with. Plus, there would also be an influx of returning admins (who've voiced their support and interest) to the WMF-run site to help with maintenance and vandalism-removal. [[User:JamesA|JamesA]] ([[User talk:JamesA|talk]]) 11:11, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

#:: I presume that by "advertising" you mean spam? The [http://wikitravel.org/en/Wikitravel:Don%27t_tout Don't tout] core policy addresses this head on. The present problem with spam being entered faster than it can be reliably removed is partly because Wikitravel's present owners have managed to drive away most of the active users who used to do the janitorial work, but mostly because they have been extremely slow in implementing any of the countless technical anti-spam measures pioneered by Wikipedia. Shifting to the WMF and simply applying the same filters, bots etc that are used for other WMF wikis would drastically cut down on the problem.

#:: Also, BLP has not been much of an issue on Wikitravel to date, simply because individual living people are virtually never covered by its articles. But as already stated in [http[://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Travel_Guide#Pillars.2Fprinciples |the discussion]], Wikitravel admins have no objections to applying the policy to the Wikimedia fork. [[User:Jpatokal|Jpatokal]] ([[User talk:Jpatokal|talk]]) 11:20, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

#::Patrolling WT is a nigtmare due to slow speed. This makes getting rid of the advertising more difficult, so in spite of the policy against it it has become more difficult to keep up with the touting. Blaming the editors and admins for this is not particularly fair, and there has been a decline in numbers due to burnout and frustration with the (lack of) support. BLP is pretty much a non-issue, so has never really needed to be addressed. The no-recognizable photos of people rule is probably far more restrictive than the BLP policies on Wikipedia. Adding BLP rules would have about as much impact as forbidding fish the use of bicyles. [[Special:Contributions/41.243.200.45|41.243.200.45]] 18:16, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

# We have enough neglected, inactive projects. Let's focus on what already needs to get done. Our limited resources, in my opinion, could be directed toward more worthwhile endeavors. [[User:Blurpeace|<span style="color:#002BB8;">'''Blurpeace'''</span>]] 17:36, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Line 814:

# '''Very strong oppose/Tre forta kontraŭstaro''': It is better to integrate the travel information into the existing Wikipedia than to use ressources for a new mostly redundant project/vojaĝinformojn en la ekzistantan vikipedion ol foruzi energion kaj fortan por nova plejparte redundanta projekto![[User:DidiWeidmann|DidiWeidmann]] ([[User talk:DidiWeidmann|talk]]) 20:45, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

#:Much of the most valuable travel information can not be integrated into Wikipedia as it is in conflict with No Original Research. Original research is vital for a travel guide, otherwise it will always be out of date. [[User:Pbsouthwood|Peter (Southwood)]] [[User talk:Pbsouthwood|^(talk)]]: 10:17, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

# '''Oppose''' [http[:w://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/:Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_manual.2C_guidebook.2C_textbook.2C_or_scientific_journal |Wikipedia is not a manual, '''guidebook''', textbook, or scientific journal]] and Wikipedia should not be the one and only guide for everything. --[[User:Arcy|Arcy]] ([[User talk:Arcy|talk]]) 21:42, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

#: Note that the proposal is to migrate content (and communities) from the existing Wikivoyage and Wikitravel projects to a new WMF site (similar to wikinews or wikiquotes); nothing has been proposed that would change Wikipedia in any way. -- [[User:Wrh2|Wrh2]] ([[User talk:Wrh2|talk]]) 22:07, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

#: Wikipedia is not a collection of quotes, but ''Wikiquote'' is. Wikipedia is not a dictionary, but ''Wiktionary'' is. The proposal is about starting a new project, not about changing Wikipedia in any way. /[[User:abbedabb|<b style="font-family:'Arial black'; color:#ff9c15">abbedabb</b>]][[Användardiskussion:abbedabb|^<i>talk</i>]] 10:50, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Line 825:

#: Il ne s'agit pas de Wikipédia. Le but de e vote est d'ajouter un nouveau projet soutenu par la fondation Wikimédia. On aurait ainsi Wikivoyage à ôté de Wikipédia, du Wiktionnaire, de la Wikiversité, de Wikinews, ... [[User:Pamputt|Pamputt]] ([[User talk:Pamputt|talk]]) 08:02, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

#::Aucun intérêt : qu'un site, une agence de voyage s'appuie sur wiki et son encyclopédie, cela se comprend mais s'appuyer sur la communauté pour faire un projet distinct est un non-sens (à moins qu'il s'agisse de ''préparer le boulot'' pour une future agence de voyage "en mal" de petites mains ? [[User:Sg7438|Sg7438]] ([[User talk:Sg7438|talk]]) 09:40, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

# [[File:Symbol oppose vote.svg|15px|Oppose]] '''oppose''': there is [http[:w://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/:Wikivoyage |Wikivoyage]] with a free license. --[[User:Dktz|Dktz]] ([[User talk:Dktz|talk]]) 08:58, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

#:The Wikivoyage people decided that they want to join Wikimedia. So all existing Wikivoyage content as well as the community would be part of this new project - it might be even named Wikivoyage. -- [[User:Akl|Arne (akl)]] ([[User talk:Akl|talk]]) 09:45, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

# '''Oppose'''. I think that a new project should not be created unless the answers to these questions are "Yes": Is there already some content which will be moved to the new project? Does the Wikimedia Foundation already own the ___domain where the different language editions will be located? (In this case the answer to the last question is certainly "No" because the name of this Travel Guide is still under discussion.) For example, Wikijunior (a collection of textbooks for children until the age of 12) might be created right now because there is already some content for it (see [[wikibooks:Wikijunior|here]] for the English language, but also note all the interwikis) and because the Wikimedia Foundation seems to own the ___domain [http://www.wikijunior.org wikijunior.org].--[[User:Erasmo Barresi|Erasmo Barresi]] ([[User talk:Erasmo Barresi|talk]]) 09:28, 20 July 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 [http://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>

# [[File:Symbol oppose vote.svg|15px|Oppose]] '''Oppose''': Out of the scope of the Foundation, imho. [[User:Pymouss|Pymouss]] <small>[[User Talk:Pymouss|Tchatcher]]</small> - 16:04, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

# '''weak oppose''': the travel projects will not become better under the roof of the foundation. I do not see there much specific travel guide content like route planning, rather just a collection of information about places, cities, which is already better in Wikipedia, and should not be doubled. For a specific travel guide on a region or on moutain climbing etc. wikibooks is fine.--[[User:Bocardodarapti|Bocardodarapti]] ([[User talk:Bocardodarapti|talk]]) 17:45, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

# '''Symbolic oppose'''. Although it will not mean much. WMF has to do the project anyway because they have rightly figured out that it is where the strength lies, and where "user engagement" will help the foundation survive. It is a great business move, and will ensure the survival of the foundation. But is it "encyclopedic"? It will be a cold day in July in Orlando when this can be considered encyclopedic. The key to it is that no one wants to say that the "scientific encyclopedia" is failing - but most people know it. I do not know of the biochemistry parts, but the computer science parts are best 20% correct (and riddled with blatant COI) and the correct parts are getting to be out of date as we type. I wrote to the exec director over a year ago and asked her to do something about it... No response. So the hand writing is on the wall. This is what is going to happen: Wikipedia will still be "positioned" as an encyclopedia for some time, but in reality will tilt towards a new form of social media. There is a tremendous business opportunity for a Facebook type Tripadvisor.com with Wiki features, maps, video, etc. The one part in Wikipedia that has really succeeded and is the geographic information. I absolutely, absolutely trust that part. If I want to know about any town in New York, I know can rely on Wikipedia. I have only 10% confidence in what I would read about biochemistry (given what I have seen about computer science or physics) but that is another story. The real question is: who will gobble up whom first. There was talk of buying WikiTravel. But it can also happen the other way. The [http[:w://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/:Google_Knowledge_Graph |great siphon off]] has already started. So either Google Facebook or someone will take the best of Wikicontent (say geography) and use it. The rule in the valley is: innovate or die. So it is just a question of time before one of those companies siphons of the geographic contents of Wikipedia, merges it with hotel information and gets going that way. There are, as always, some elements of chance. Will the new Yahoo CEO see this as a ticket to Y-redemption? Time will tell.... But anyway, WMF will try this project, but only time will tell what will happen next.... Yet one thing is certain: ''Times, they are a'changing'': a new form of "semi-encyclopedic social network travel guide" is being born here. Could someone help deliver it please? [[User:History2007|History2007]] ([[User talk:History2007|talk]]) 21:19, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

#*If I had a clearer mind and a better pen I would have written this. I hope. And if I had not already opposed I would now. Tks. - [[User:Nabla|Nabla]] ([[User talk:Nabla|talk]]) 22:26, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

# [[File:Symbol oppose vote.svg|15px|Oppose]] '''Oppose''': If it is a project, then it is heavily industry driven, but only by a few competitors. Checked some places in the area, always the some hotel group and none of the others. Restaurants seem to be all Chinese though I myself certainly prefer European kitchen in these places. in German wie have the nice legal term "Marktverwirrungsschaden" (I dont know the exact translation ...). Integration of these projects in our encyclopedic world will cause a severe „Marktverwirrungsschaden“ for the WP-project...--[[User:Kresspahl|Kresspahl]] ([[User talk:Kresspahl|talk]]) 23:05, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Line 916:

# {{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 [http://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)

#{{Oppose}} Reasons are eloquently given above. [[User:Mugginsx|Mugginsx]] ([[User talk:Mugginsx|talk]]) 16:17, 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]] [http://mg.wikipedia.org homewiki]} 21:48, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

===Abstain===