User talk:Ibaman Voyage Tips and guide

Contents

Hi, there. If you'd like to discuss anything with me, please post new topics at the bottom of the page and sign the posts with 4 tildes (the ~ key) in a row. Thanks! Currently inactive discussions can be found here:

• Archive 2013-2018
• Archive 2019
• Archive 2020

Happy new year, my friend. Thank you for this edit. Canada uses w:Canadian spelling, which is a mix of British and US spelling. In the case of the edit you reverted, you were correct: all of the words are spelled the British way in Canada, although this is not always true. We use US spellings for the "-ize" words, and for some others like "tire" and "program". Regards, Ground Zero (talk) 02:34, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

• may we all have a happy one, GZ! Thanks for this update, I was really unaware about this. Cheers, --Ibaman (talk) 19:07, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

I see that you protected Australia for more than a week. I cannot see any significant amount of reverts in the newer edits, but rather quite many edits to improve the article – i.e. it is not stable either. Is there some specific reason? I think we should welcome Australian editors, and I think there might be a chance to get more of them with the recent activity by a few. Is there something that I have missed? –LPfi (talk) 14:54, 5 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

• yeah, an anonymous IP number was keen on changing "Uluru" to "Ayers Rock", I know the modus operandi and opted to prevent further changes rather than engaging in discussion. I hit "one week" specifically, how odd that it came differently. That's what happened. I won't mind having the article de-protected as of this moment. Ibaman (talk) 16:19, 5 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
  • OK, thanks for the explanation. I de-protect it now and hope the person won't insist. –LPfi (talk) 19:45, 5 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Please have a look at User talk:Ikan Kekek#Spambots, because that thread bears on one of your moderation decisions.

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:01, 15 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

I’ve just noticed your edit deleting a dive centre from Plakias. At first I thought, yeah, this entry looks out of place, but having checked their website I noticed one of their diving locations is near Plakias — I guess, they have an office in Rethymno since that’s where tourists often come from (we also stayed in Rethymno for one night before going south). So maybe it’d make sense to bring it back and de-tout it.

Also, thanks for copyediting my entries :)

Andrej Shadura (talk) 15:18, 17 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

Not reliable or something. Highjumpermsu (talk) 18:17, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

We don’t link to Tripadvisor reviews because of that, yes, and also because we need to provide reviews on our own site. See Wikivoyage:What not to link to. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 19:10, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

The policy on other travel guide sites and sites with non-professional reviews is laid out at Wikivoyage:External links. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:51, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

2001:8000:1a9a:5100:b031:697:2420:a1df is just Brendan now trying to use an IP instead of accounts. It geolocates to the Brisbane/Sunshine Coast (about 50km apart), so it's probably him ban evading. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 21:45, 13 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

And the one you just reverted is another LTA (long term abuser). Any links to an “archive” website are likely just disruptive editing from a particular LTA. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 16:51, 26 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

That's Ljupco (w:en:WP:LTA/GRP) a WMF banned user who has served 3 years in jail for electrical harassment. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 01:05, 27 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

FYI: Just protected it for a month from those touts. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:51, 10 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hey, Ibaman! I haven't seen much of you lately, but glad to see you're still checking in to WV and hope you're doing alright.

I saw those edits on Cambridge earlier and thought they were borderline touty, but wasn't too sure so left them unpatrolled. Getting a second opinion (even if you didn't know you were giving a second opinion!) is reassuring, so thank you for that ;-) All the best, ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:24, 10 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

• Lately I haven´t had much time to edit properly, but I´m always around, watching and taking necessary action. Can´t stand being too far from our beloved travel guide :D All the best to you too! Ibaman (talk) 16:40, 10 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Any user with the string "Шумских Эмма" is an LTA (aka the Cyrillic letter LTA). So I've blocked them and reported them to m:SRG but just letting you know because you left them a message asking them to post in English. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 13:39, 12 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure if that's a spambot. It looks more a tout to me. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:13, 1 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Bro youve never been to SA but you're making an edit on the SA page Dopekid3557 (talk) 22:26, 12 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

If we relied solely on local expertise, Wikivoyage would have a small fraction of the content that it has. Ground Zero (talk) 00:04, 13 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the edits bro Dopekid3557 (talk) 22:58, 19 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

How are you doing, Ibaman? I was just looking at User talk:Ckurcz89, and they referred to their last attempt at a listing. It actually looks fine to me. What do you feel the issue was with that version?

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:21, 4 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

hi IK, and happy birthday! Things are more or less fine down here. This edit was somewhat an "autopilot" situation per Apt and WV:Tour and "luxury service private transfers" which I'm always glad to remove. It's good to have second opinions regarding these removals. I'll re-revert. Live long and prosper! Ibaman (talk) 17:07, 4 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. I'm glad things are OK where you are. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:44, 4 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I'm new here :) I see you've edited a number of my edits. That's fine! I'm bound to make mistakes as I learn the ropes. Any advice or tips you can give me? I'm so excited to be a part of this incredible community. Travel is something I'm truly passionate about and it's so amazing to help work on this incredible resource. Dayton Kingery (talk) 09:18, 16 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Your reversion is wrong because it imparts a wrong idea. The PCT follows the crest of the mountains that climax the western cordillera which happens to drain mostly into the Pacific Ocean. But it does not "extend along" the coast! We must prevent our tourists from mistakenly looking for a trailhead of the PCT in the Coast Ranges. Furthermore, a judicious alternative use of a gerund is in fact "tighter and better" although slightly longer as the sentence as a whole gains by being factual rather than vague and wrong-ish. Kurnkerner (talk) 02:31, 9 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello sir! May I know why did you remove the Meitei transliterations (held within parentheses) at your last edit in the page Panthoibi. It's in the first paragraph of your editing version. Haoreima (talk) 14:25, 23 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

• They don't show properly on the screen. The script is unneeded. This is not WikiReligion, this is a travel guide. Ibaman (talk) 14:27, 23 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Sorry. i don't know how that happened. I think i was adding content as you were deleting the page. So i was so confused. When i saved the page I saw no history, only my one edit. I'll keep working on it, if that's okay. --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 19:20, 30 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

• It was marked "vfd" so I deleted it as I do usually with articles marked "vfd". I'm the one who's confused. Ibaman (talk) 19:25, 30 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Would you like to restore the deleted edits? Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:42, 30 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@The Eloquent Peasant Done SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 20:29, 30 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@SHB2000. Thank you. I think Orocovis is worth saving because there is a lot to see there. --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 23:02, 30 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@The Eloquent Peasant No probs. I'm not sure why it was speedily deleted as even if it were to be deleted, it has not been 14 days of discussion, and it was not a speedy deletion request. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 05:01, 31 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hey Ibaman, hope you're doing well. Regarding this edit on Nagaland, I think it's still worth mentioning the tribes of Nagaland. I guess the table format was kinda encyclopedic, but for what it's worth, it's often useful (but not necessary) knowing the tribes of a place when visiting. Best, --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 14:57, 25 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

• Hi! Doing well really, thanks. What I thought on seeing the article was, besides being too encyclopaedic, that table makes the page ugly, style-wise. If you think it's really necessary, by all means, revert my edit please, and later we'll worry about the style. Ibaman (talk) 15:12, 25 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

  I agree that tables aren't the best (and I even made a thread on the pub a while ago, which has now been swept here) and I think they also distort the screen on mobile view too. I was just wondering if it were to make more sense if it were written in two sentences. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 15:16, 25 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

• Is knowing the names of the tribes useful? I think it is much more important to tell that there are tribes, the relationship between them, and the relation to the non-tribal society. Is there anything on them one should add to Respect? If the individual tribes are important, then there needs to be at least a sentence on each. –LPfi (talk) 16:54, 25 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

The map in 'Get In' shows everything interesting in the Old town. that's why it's called 'Map of the Old town'

But Dubrovnik has more districts to offer. That is what the map in 'See' shows: The whole city. So the reader does not need to zoom out the map in 'Get around'. And that's why that map is called "Map of Dubrovnik" as it shows the whole city Flightnavigator (talk) 17:31, 4 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

• Now the article has two maps. Previously, there were three. It's too much, really. The map is zoomable, and moreover, it appears whenever a marker is clicked, regardless of whether the artile has the map showing. Per Image policy, let's not keep repeating maps. Ibaman (talk) 17:43, 4 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

it's not repeating maps. just giving the reader the right perspectives of the city so the reader does not need to manually adjust a map. Flightnavigator (talk) 21:47, 4 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your edits to the Lanark article. Could I ask, though, that you don't rearrange the Get around section again; New Lanark is a village near to Lanark but is not part of Lanark. It is close by, though, and is a UNESCO World Heritage Site so many visitors to Lanark go to New Lanark as well, that's why I included directions in a separate section. Adam Black ^{talk • contributions} 06:41, 8 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

There's already an entry for Monte Kaolino in Upper Palatinate's see section, which is why I added it in do. The nearest city is Hirschau, which doesn't yet have an article so I couldn't stick it in there per wycsi. I checked this before creating the entry. Yes the website is in German, but they don't have an English one. Maybe change it to something more suitable? KaraLG84 (talk) 18:11, 13 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

• Thanks for your concern. I'd rather wait for the community to review this edit and express more opinions about it. Ibaman (talk) 18:27, 13 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

  That's ok. KaraLG84 (talk) 22:29, 13 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

That shouldn't be the only content in "Eat," but it's on-topic and helpful, and see Wikivoyage:Small city article template#Eat:

"Mention any local specialties or oddities."

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:18, 21 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

I noticed you deleted directions that stated what the nearest station was and how far on foot a location was in this edit [1]. It is actually very useful to know what the nearest station is and how far the attraction is. It's very typical of Japanese attractions (even in Japanese). I'm not sure why you don't think it's helpful, but please don't delete this kind of information. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 11:40, 8 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

• yeah, "a 5-min walk in the northwest direction" is useful; "a 5-min walk through Main Street" is too; "a 5-min walk" is not. I hope you can agree with me on this. However, I'll mind your suggestion from now on. Ibaman (talk) 11:51, 8 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

For directions, distance is always a better indicator than time.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:53, 8 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

"A 5 minute walk" doesn't take you there, but it lets you know whether or not it is a reasonable distance for you. I agree that a "5 minute walk northwest" is slightly more helpful, but a "5 minute walk" is more helpful than deleting everything. Even "Accessible from X Station" is a lot more helpful than nothing at all. I find distance makes sense for driving directions but time makes the most sense for walking. When walking, people want to know how long it will take. I don't know anyone who calculates the actual metric distance of a place from a station. Time seems way more accessible for readers and editors for walking distances. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 13:51, 8 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Distance is objective; time is not. In 5 minutes' walking (when I know where I'm going) I can cover ½ mile; in the same time my father could cover ¼ mile, while a friend of mine could do ¾ mile. If I'm being a tourist somewhere, and have my map and camera out, that same ½ mile might take me 15 minutes. If I'm late for a meeting, perhaps I'd run a mile in 5 minutes! In some cities, depending on the time of day you can spend 2-3 minutes just crossing one road, which reduces the distance you can cover in 5 minutes... You get the point.

Wikivoyage should present accurate information to suit all types of travellers, not just those of the same fitness level as the author. That is true accessibility, in my view. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 14:40, 8 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

I don't think "5 min walk" is as subjective as you're pretending it is. If someone is lost, walks with a cane, etc. they will know that it may take longer for them. You have to assume travelers are pretty stupid to think that they don't understand that running is faster than walking or that stopping and just standing somewhere isn't walking. You're acting like people who see "10 min walk from X Station" will read that and think that they could alternatively just stand outside the station and the destination will magically appear in front of them after the 10 minute timespan. That's not how anyone thinks. You can also take into account stoplights/typical traffic and terrain in an estimate which raw distance won't show, so walking estimates would be superior in that regard. It also takes into account the actual way will get there, which a raw "233 meters" probably doesn't, especially if you're expecting the traveler to come up with such numbers. It's neither mysterious nor difficult to understand walking distance. It's very simple, easy, and helpful, even for those who know they are generally faster/slower paced. Like I said, it's how all guides in Japan describe distance from stations when it is walkable, and I don't think it's due to Japanese having exceptional intelligence or reasoning capabilities compared with the rest of the world that makes it possible for them to understand and make use of such information. Walking distance isn't a WV creation. It's used commonly, and has carried over into digital directions. Looking at our star articles, most just say the nearest station with no further details, but when they give distance, I see what I've outlined (10 minute walk from X Station) but I haven't seen what you state ("321 meters from X Station"), so it's clear that walking distance is acceptable and doesn't need to be changed or deleted. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 05:32, 9 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

I think the biggest problems with walk times is that on a site like this, it is impossible to keep any standard. Some will think a kilometre can be covered in ten minutes, some think it takes 20 min, some will use their experience from the place, some "five minutes" will be written by touts. "Five minutes" still says something: it probably won't take more that 15 minutes with light luggage. If there is a standard for Japan, by all means use it, and please explain it in Japan#By foot. In Norway, hike durations are stated by DNT as hours: brisk walking by a fit hiker, breaks not counted. You could easily use double the time, but if you know the standard you just do your maths. I wouldn't use those times here unexplained. –LPfi (talk) 07:31, 11 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

My grammar isn't that best. 64.39.81.54 18:12, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

• No worries! Just plunge forward and have a good time. Ibaman (talk) 18:13, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Thank you 64.39.81.54 18:16, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

While I agree with your reversion, I ask that you be less angry in your edit summaries. It does not make Wikivoyage better, especially when deslingbwith a constructive editor. Also, Las Vegas International Airport is in Paradise, Nevada, not in Las Vegas. I know that I have made angry edit summaries in the past, but I am trying notvyo do that anymore. I hope you will try too. Ground Zero (talk) 15:54, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

• Roger that. Will comply. I was getting tired of reverting so many "located"s as well, but this seems taken care of. Ibaman (talk) 16:04, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

👍👍 that's nice and benefiting a pleasant and social competent atmosphere on Wikivoyage 154.239.235.224 18:55, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Ibaman. I understand why you made this edit. However, I think it's OK to list a vacation rental service as long as it has a description of "Vacation rental service" and contact information, if we're going to list vacation rentals in that city at all (noting that Park City Vacation Rentals is listed). If we aren't listing those per apt, please put a message on the user's user talk page when you can, explaining to them what they did wrong and what they might be able to do to fix it. Thanks! Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:37, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Oi, Ibaman! Where are these on Words to avoid?

• "excellent hospitality"
• "picturesque place"
• "Delicious and generous dishes"
• "Warm welcome"
• "his cooking [is] a delight"
• "[the burritos are] more authentic here [than the big chains]
• "the atmosphere is friendly"

Sorry, that was a trick question: they're not there! ;-)

I find the above very normal expressions for Wikivoyage, and have certainly used variations of almost all of them.

The only bit you removed that is on the list is "[one of the] best". Perhaps the "adorable" owner is also overkill, but maybe he really is very cute? I think he's allowed "delightful" cooking, though, whatever his true appearance.

Saperlipopette ! --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 20:02, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Ibaman, I'm concerned that you deleted the Disney travel topic without discussion, or even notifying me, the author of the article. You may disagree that it's a valid travel topic, but that's a topic for a discussion, not unilateral deletion. I've restored the page for now; if you'd still like to remove it from Wikivoyage, please start a VfD discussion. Powers ^(talk) 13:29, 16 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

• No contest. It was excessive from my part indeed. Sorry for the unpleasantness of my action. Ibaman (talk) 13:45, 16 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

 Not an offense, but can you explain why you would monitor each IP they edit? I want to know of why you pay attention to IP edits instead of user's edits, even though it is a page with few edits or infrequently updated. 204.129.232.191 16:32, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

• I'm an admin here. I monitor ALL edits. That's what admins do. Ibaman (talk) 16:40, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

I added this to: Amsterdam because it was missing in the list of all the available canal cruises. If it's to commercial I can change the text. It's not a commercial intention.

• Eco Boats Amsterdam. Eco friendly boats where you can go plastic fishing on the canals.

• Canal Motorboats. The oldest boat rental in Amsterdam where you can pilot the boat yourself.

~~~~ Renataheroes (talk) 13:24, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

• Please read WV:Tour, Don't tout and External links, and thank you for the attention and understanding. Ibaman (talk) 13:37, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

  the other links precisely below the links i posted are exactly the same. Why is that ok? Renataheroes (talk) 14:03, 27 September 2022

Yeah, they are too many of these in this page. Per WV:Be fair, I reverted myself on this edit. Ibaman (talk) 14:41, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I edited a wrong article.

Could you please revert my 19:13 edit in the Da Nang article? 80.187.74.205 19:23, 5 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

• Done Hope I did what you want. Ibaman (talk) 19:25, 5 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Yes thank you!

~~

Hi.

Hereby I request to change the name of the article

Puerto Rico (Spain

to

Puerto Rico (Spain) 80.187.74.205 12:02, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

• Done Ibaman (talk) 12:26, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

I'm sure you're relieved that Bolsonaro lost and Lula won! So am I. Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:12, 31 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

• Oh yes!! One of the happiest days in my life, actually. What a relief. Ibaman (talk) 13:20, 31 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Glad the 0.9% margin made a huge difference. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 21:17, 31 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

yeah, two million votes, a tiny difference in this context, maybe the narrowest ever, as is being reckoned. I was tense until 90% votes counted. But today is another day, thank the Universe. Ibaman (talk) 23:07, 31 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hey That price range in the Eat section of the Egypt article was from before 2009.

In comparison to 2009 prices are now 4-5 times higher than 2009 due to inflation and devaluation of the currency.

Stating that budget meals in Egypt only cost up to 10 LE (which equals 0.40 USD) does not make any sense.

In 2009 10 LE were 1.8 USD 154.239.235.224 16:13, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

• please do not use US$ on the Egypt article, only LE. How much would be a plate of falafel in Soor al-Azbakaya nowadays, for instance?

Hm I haven't been in every place in Cairo and it depends on how many falafel are on that plate. I'm not a fan of these restaurant price ranges as they get outdated quickly due to inflation/devaluation of the currency. Even in developed countries restaurant prices went up much quicker than the normal inflation rate in the last century. If there has to be a price range in the Cairo article, putting the thresholds at LE60 respectively LE200 reflects the reality nowadays way better than the current one.

Btw converting a price into USD/Euro is a valid check. Even in countries with hyperinflation like Turkiye and Argentina the converted prices into USD/Euro didn't change that much during those periods. Devaluation and inflation equalized itself. Just the stated local prices became outdated during those periods of high inflation.154.239.235.224

Happy holidays, Ibaman! Hello Ibaman, have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! It has been a pleasure to have you as a fellow Wikivoyager this year. Wherever you are, enjoy the festive season and stay warm (if you're north of the Tropic of Cancer)! Your help in maintaining, improving and expanding Wikivoyage will always be appreciated. Greetings from Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. --SHB2000 on 12:47, 24 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

• Thanks dude! It was awesome. I hope yours have been as well. Ibaman (talk) 17:35, 26 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

I'm rather perplexed as to why you'd want to revert the changes I made for the Four Seasons Bogota. I realize that it's good to have uniquely local hotels listed, but for a huge city that does receive a lot of business travelers, having some listings for the super-splurge places seems appropriate. I also see hotels like that listed in major US and European capitals, so why are they suddenly "Boring" just because they're in South America. Seems like an elitist perspective to me. Could you please reconsider and revert your revert?

• Didn't I do it already? The listing stands.

Please forgive me to become so annoyed every time I see ten or twelve "Bogotá, Colombia" stances that need to be erased per obvious. It gets tiresome quickly. Ibaman (talk) 17:18, 5 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, sir. Mrkstvns (talk) 17:44, 5 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Also, is there a way to communicate directly other than using Talk pages? I'd like to keep things civilized and not air minor quibbles in public. Cheers! Mrkstvns (talk) 17:15, 5 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Mrkstvns: That's how we do here, and those used to wikis don't think airing minor quibbles on user talk pages is anything serious. Taking something off-wiki, on the other hand, is unusual and thus much more disrupting. If discretion is really needed, then the option is there, but it shouldn't be used for minor quibbles. One advantage of having such discussions public, is that others can chime in, to add their views or, indeed, to keep things civil. Another is that all the community can see when some practice raises objections, and less seasoned editors can see how that is solved. –LPfi (talk) 22:31, 6 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for replying to my comment. I just want to be respectful to my fellow editors and if I question their judgment I'm happy to talk about it directly, but I don't want anyone to think I am doing so in a disrespectful manner. Mrkstvns (talk) 00:13, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Mrkstvns: Good. I don't think you will have any problems with that. Double checking how you word your concerns is still good practice, and if you got mad, sleeping a night before posting does no harm. –LPfi (talk) 10:38, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

I saw that you protected some article talk pages for several months (other admins seem to have done the same, but mostly for a week or so). Shouldn't we protect them just for the person to cool down. It is quite problematic if passers-by cannot use talk pages. Are they supposed to take everything to the Pub? Few would do that. Vandalism on talk pages isn't very visible, so we should be able to handle it. –LPfi (talk) 22:40, 6 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

• Hi there. Yeah, these are sensible points and I'm not unaware of them. However, this case in question is so problematic. This person is not likely to "cool down". This procedure is harsh, but if it's done otherwise, the mess will grow exponentially. Ibaman (talk) 17:49, 9 January 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • I suppose it should be discussed somewhere. The risk is that the cure becomes worse than the disease. –LPfi (talk) 20:33, 9 January 2023 (UTC)Reply
• I was going in to protect Talk:Central Russia at the same time. It looks like my one-week protection over-rode the permanent protection. I think one week is sufficient for now. If the vandal persists, we ca extend it. Ground Zero (talk) 21:17, 9 January 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • Cool, well done GZ, by the way, for the record, I never protect permanently, it's always 1 to 6 months. This discussion happened already and I won't disagree tat I get high-strung over this subject sometimes. Ibaman (talk) 22:02, 9 January 2023 (UTC)Reply
    • The vandal has moved onto Talk:Moscow (Idaho) with a different IP. Ground Zero (talk) 22:32, 9 January 2023 (UTC)Reply
      • And they will find new targets. Protection for the time after they have moved on is no use. They will of course return, but they are as likely to do so next year as after two weeks. –LPfi (talk) 09:35, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

I know the history with this individual, but I wouldn't say they are as a big a deal as they (or others) may think they are. All their "contributions" are easily reverted and revision-deleted, and the risk that some may remain live for a few hours longer than ideal is not worth impeding general access to talk pages. Since the protections don't stop the individual's behaviour, but do hinder other good-faith users, I'd scrap the protections completely for this individual's targets. Just my view, --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 12:41, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

It's been five times today. I've protected Talk:Moscow (Idaho) for a day. Ground Zero (talk) 17:40, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'm a bit late to this discussion, but sometimes this user can go on hours-long edit wars: see the history of b:Communication Theory/Print version, b:Brief History of Europe/Europe since 1914 or w:Kosciuszko National Park for some examples. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 10:04, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

• yeah, from time to time I have to protect my own talk page, or else they will indulge me with that nice vocabulary that has become so familiar to all of us admins. Trolls shall not be fed, I guess. Ibaman (talk) 12:01, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

What was wrong with the addition I made to Ibara, Japan? How couldn't the traveler appreciate the addition, when it comes to being educated about at least Japanese heritage regarding the nighttime sky? -- Apisite (talk) 21:36, 8 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

I, too, am not sure why you deleted the information. To me, it reads as informative rather than touty. I thought the information was unique and interesting. Perhaps it's a lot for a specific part of the city, but the article previously had no information at all, so there was nothing to overwhelm the section. I agree with removing the link, but that can be done without a full revert of all the information. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 14:29, 10 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, I don't disagree; I took proactive action and restored the useful parts. Ibaman (talk) 15:08, 10 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

It is a sorry realization that a silly bureaucrat dictates what a good travel resource is. You reverted my Pokhara edits that, small as it was, is substantial improvement over how it currently is. Really, get a life :). And your travel experience? You're a tourist. Enjoy your little 'power' here powerless peon. What a pathetic joke. 120.89.105.83 03:36, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

If you're not willing to read and heed Wikivoyage policies like what not to link to, go elsewhere. Policies on this site are decided on by consensus, not single individuals, so ad hominem attacks are not only, obviously, a blockabable offense but also irrelevant. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:45, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi Ibaman,

I just realized that you had reverted a number of my additions to the Assam article. I then reinstated them inadvertently, thinking I had failed to commit the edits in the first place (sorry - I wasn't trying to start an edit war). However, I would kindly ask that in the spirit of WV:PF you do not revert them again. They were all informative additions to an already mediocre-quality and out-of-date article, and while I appreciate your tip about guidelines on avoiding first-person language, there are much more productive ways to address this than blanking large amounts of content containing pertinent facts and advice. HitchhikingBirder (talk) 17:48, 30 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

• Your first try was very much un-salvageable. This next one is workable. Please mind policy on future edits. Ibaman (talk) 17:49, 30 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

To my understanding, the old Orthodox cathedrals in Istanbul were cathedrals before the Ottoman conquests, and turned into moosques after the conquest. So that would make them pre-Ottoman conquest cathedrals, and post-Ottoman conquest mosques. The dog2 (talk) 16:24, 1 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

• please read the Wikipedia links provided as sources and refine your understanding. If I were to suggest you have not really done your homework, that your historic grasp about this subject matter seems really thin, you'd have reason to take it as a personal offense. Let's keep it civil. Ibaman (talk)

If you look at the Wikipedia page, it one of the spoils of war from the British conquest of Punjab, even if it may have originally been from Persia. Since that it an article about the British Empire, I think there should be a brief explanation as to how that listing relates to the empire. Something that is merely British but unconnected to colonialism would be considered off-topic, wouldn't it? The dog2 (talk) 18:22, 7 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

• yeah, in Ancient Egypt the blue pigment used in the decoration of the royal tombs in the Valley of the Kings is actually ground lapis-lazuli, imported from Afghanistan. Does it NEED to be mentioned? Hell no, this is a travel guide, it's not WikiMinerals. You need to chill out, and abide WV:Tone, and learn to paint with a paintbrush, not a firehose. Ibaman (talk) 18:58, 7 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'm not saying we should write about the entire history of the diamond. That will be beyond the scope of the article. But as I said, the fact that some of the gems in the crown jewels were spoils of war from Britain's colonial exploits is what makes them relevant to an article about the British Empire. I would not include this detail in the same listing under Monarchy of the United Kingdom article. The dog2 (talk) 19:19, 7 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

• oh well, I hope you won't disagree the Elgin Marbles and the Rosetta Stone, in this very exact context, are much more significant in every way, and deserve the mention I gave them. And even these go with very sparse description: per WV:Tone our prose should compel rather than overanalyze. The Kohinoor is but a tiny marble, and is much better described in The Flashman Papers article; I think it's better for Wikivoyage in this way. Ibaman (talk) 19:31, 7 April 2023 (UTC)Reply
• See also Gemstones#British Crown Jewels. Pashley (talk) 01:00, 11 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

There is actually a significant difference between the two pronunciations. The guy running this channel speaks fluent Latin and covers some of the differences here. If you go to the Vatican or to a Latin Mass in a Catholic church, Ecclesiastical Latin is what you will hear. Of course we don't know for sure what the Latin spoken by the ancient Romans sounded like since sound recordings did not exist back then, but linguists have reconstructed what they think is a close approximation to that based on piecing together evidence (and yes, there's some minor disagreements between linguists over certain details, but all linguists agree for instance that the letter "C" was always pronounced hard in ancient Rome). That reconstructed ancient Roman pronunciation is what is called Classical Latin. I understand most visitors to the Vatican do not speak Latin, but if you are a Latin enthusiast who learnt Classical Latin and try to speak to the priests in that, chances are they won't understand you. You'll need to speak Ecclesiastical Latin to be able to communicate. The dog2 (talk) 20:45, 10 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

... dude. Do you really think that hardcore Latinists are meant to learn this from Wikivoyage. Our Latin section on Roman Empire is more verbose than I'd like but, OK, this is a community, dudes like you and Hobbitschuster take pleasure in explaining, so, let's collaborate and live and let live. However, in this article there have been quarrels about this subject, and this is why I asked you to read the talk page to check them out. I remember the consensus reached was, let's not advise the adventurous traveller to try to get by in Latin inside the Vatican.

IMHO, whatever the Latin pronunciation will be, it's too encyclopaedic to be included in a TRAVEL GUIDE. It has its place in the Latin phrasebook, yes. If we had not had consensus about this already, maybe, perhaps, perchance I might agree it belongs here. Ibaman (talk) 21:40, 10 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Here you detouted a number of listings in Bogotá/Chapinero-Zona G. Detouting is good, but Michelin stars are among the widely recognised awards that are good to mention. I have even complained on Talk:Bogotá that the Michelin restaurants aren't identified in the district articles. Some travellers do try to have a dinner at any of these when there is one near their destination.

(I would also much appreciate if alphabetising were done separately from other significant edits, as the diff tool isn't able to keep listings together.)

–LPfi (talk) 07:47, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hello Ibarman: Noticed that you have removed my image of Ray’s Tavern in Green River, Utah with a comment that it was “too promotional looking”.

Green River, Utah is a community with a lot of history since 1876 (that is a long time in the US) but given there are less than 1000 people there today, the town is struggling to survive. There are more empty storefronts there today than active businesses.

I have no commercial connection to Ray’s Tavern or Green River. I just happened to pass through the town in 2022 and made a few images of whatever I found interesting. Ray’s Tavern is one of the few businesses still open there. People who live there will know Ray’s and would recognize it in the WikiV article as part of their town. The image was taken on a Sunday morning (Ray’s is closed). If I had wanted to make it promotional, I would have taken it on Saturday afternoon when the doors are open with motorcycles and pickup trucks are parked out in front. The only reason I uploaded the image to Wikivoyage was that this business was mentioned in the WikiV topic on Green River.

What I would like to do here is revert your deletion and then upload a couple more of my other images of the town. I feel some sympathy for struggling places like Green River and like to present what is there in a positive way that people who live there will recognize. Your thoughts? GRDN711 (talk) 17:01, 7 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

• my thoughts don't matter as much as Wikivoyage policy:Wikivoyage:Image policy#Photos of businesses. Please take your concerns to Wikivoyage talk:Image policy if you want it changed. Ibaman (talk) 17:15, 7 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
  • The policy says "As a general rule …". If there isn't much competition, I don't see a major problem in having that image. It might conform with "illustrative of the type of business establishment". Mentioning the name of the business in the caption is still unnecessary (and it is kind of obvious from the image). I think we should rather ask whether having the image serves the traveller and makes the article more interesting. Are there other images that should be used instead? –LPfi (talk) 19:03, 7 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
    • I won't contest your reasoning, however, ohh man, THIS picture is perfect textbook Don't tout example if I ever saw one. My opinion. Ibaman (talk) 19:16, 7 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

      :-)

      For struggling places, if that's the only place to get a beer, they don't need the touting. If it isn't the only thing the place has to offer a visitor, we should perhaps add some nice images on what to see there instead.

      –LPfi (talk) 19:28, 7 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

• I'd be so glad if this dude came up with a less touty picture. Having said that, yeah, in this case, it could fly. Ibaman (talk) 19:31, 7 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
• Done I've restored the image, less the caption that was really touty and redundant. Maybe it would be better moved down in the article, but right now I'm on a cellphone and unable to proceed. Ibaman (talk) 01:38, 8 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hello Ibaman, just a note to explain why I undid your "corrections" to the Tula article. When you use "Tula de Allende" it's understood to apply to the modern municipality. The archaelogical site (and reason people would travel here) is called "Tula" (which is also the commonly used name of the town). I understand that this might seem less clear, but it's actually less correct when you "fix" it to be Tula de Allende. Best regards, Mrkstvns (talk) 22:01, 14 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

• there will be confusion with Tula in Russia, it would be better to disambiguate, IMHO. Ibaman (talk) 11:46, 15 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

  I agree that it would be good to disambiguate. I edited the page to try to explain the difference more clearly, but should go back through it more carefully. I think we should also add a disambiguation page to/from both Tulas. I am so Mexico-centric that I never even realized there was another Tula in Russia! Best regards, Mrkstvns (talk) 14:04, 15 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

If I may ask, what was the reason for using RB on this user? Qazzy52 is a user in good standing both here and on enwiki. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 10:31, 3 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

• per WV:City article status, there is no "Informativecity" status, so I reverted to "usablecity", that's the reason. Ibaman (talk) 11:27, 3 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

  It's an experimental category, tho. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 11:54, 3 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Yes, used in 18 articles. I don't know whether it is Qazzy52, SHB2000 or somebody else who has been adding them. For experiments, much fewer articles are needed, so reverting is OK. An edit summary rather than rollback could be expected, but on the other hand experimental templates should be added only by users who can figure out why they get reverted. Template talk:Informativecity has no discussion nor any link to Wikivoyage talk:City article status#Informative status or elsewhere. –LPfi (talk) 12:27, 3 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Reverting is okay, rollbacking is not. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 21:36, 3 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

  I will pay attention to this in the future. As it looked like a scrappy/graffiti type of edit, I hit the quickest button in autopilot. Sorry for any bad feelings. Ibaman (talk) 22:46, 3 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

I think the language you edited out is good if it's true. What we want to guard against is unprovable claims like "Best coffee in town!" Are you sure we shouldn't restore the wording? Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:49, 18 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

"largest in the world" looks very equivalent with your example to me. If it's proven true, I will make no objection, but how could we verify the truthfulness of this claim? Ibaman (talk) 12:08, 18 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

I don't know. Maybe I'll check later and see if there are other sources making that claim. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:52, 18 August 2023 (UTC

Hi i just see you restored the unsourced and misleading disclaimer added by the Roovinn[2], Do you think adding such a big controversial claim without any discussion or source is ok.!? 223.123.90.214 18:05, 21 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

• I see no reason why Wikivoyage should deviate from what is stated in w:Durand Line, which is neither controversial neither unsourced, at this moment. Ibaman (talk) 18:32, 21 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi Ibaman, I noticed that you had reverted an addition that someone made to the Zipolite article in which they added a recommendation to go au naturale on the beach. They included an irrelevant link, so I can understand why you wouldn't want that to be added. Just thought I'd mention that the crux of their addition is valid because that beach is the *only* one in Mexico with an official clothing-optional policy. I've therefore added back a bit of text (though without advocating for nudism and definitely without any links). The text is now:

• Relax on the beach au naturale. This is the only officially nude beach in Mexico and attracts people from around the world.

Hope that's better! Regards, Mrkstvns (talk) 14:30, 31 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi Ibaman, I noticed that you had an eye on me since my last edits on the Nha Trang article. To be honest, I did not understand your comment when reversing my edit on Southern Vietnam article. As a Mui Ne citizen living there since the age of 10. When I came accross inprecise information describing Mui Ne, my intention was to atleast make it more informative and correct. I did not edit it for PR purpose/Tout as I did not add any kind of listing or promote any service. It's just really depressed too see the place you were borned and lived for so long described merely at a "resort". Mui Ne is a ward of Phan Thiet City which consist of many beach resorts and the article incorrectly phrased "Mui Ne - a beach resort just east of Phan Thiet " MarvelousNewtie (talk) 18:07, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

What is the best practice for providing a synopsis or table of contents for lengthy articles. Many readers will read only the top paragraph before deciding if they want to scroll through the article. The article on Talk:Retiring abroad – Travel guide at Wikivoyage was reverted.

Personally I found it very annoying to continually scroll up and down as I was reading it the first time.

Robvann (talk) 18:07, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

• WV:Goals and non-goals: We're not an encyclopaedia, we're a travel guide. Info must be as concise as possible. That logic is also behind WV:Image policy#Minimal use of images. If it's too long, it's too boring, and too annoying to read scrolling up and down, yes. No article in Wikivoyage should have, or need, a table of contents. Cleaner is better. Ibaman (talk) 18:17, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

  OK, I totally embrace the minimalist approach for the articles about "places", which represents the majority of the content.

  However, as I start to see "worldly advice" type articles like this one with 10,000 words, it becomes less of a reference sheet in your back pack and more like a reference book. Perhaps in this case splitting the article into sub-articles would make sense? (similar to County's getting split into regions, then places).

  What are your thoughts?

  Robvann (talk) 18:30, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Actually, I just realized the standard banner has a horizontal table of contents for places, so if I could figure out how to make that approach include the major sections, that would be perfect for what I envision to make the more effective for new end users. Robvann (talk) 19:30, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

  

  Robvann (talk) 20:06, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

  I see the same kind of TOC in Retiring abroad, don't you? For me it disappears when the browser window gets too narrow (the threshold with my settings seems to be with a line length of about 95 characters, which is too wide for my taste). Do you have that same problem? –LPfi (talk) 21:16, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Yes, its working fine now. Not sure what happend before. Thanks for the feedback. Robvann (talk) 21:52, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

• I have my hands full at work, right now, and regrettably cannot contribute to this discussion. Please take it to the Pub. However I'd like to mention my extreme dislike of photo galleries and montages, in line with Image policy, these only add visual noise and pollution, IMHO. Ibaman (talk) 21:21, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Got it. Robvann (talk) 21:53, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

I do understand that photo galleries are not appropriate for use in Wikivoyage.

But, if I understand this policy detail correctly, it is ok to link to image galleries that reside in Wiki Commons, as long as they are linked explicitly from keywords within Wikivoyage. "Galleries are welcome on Wikimedia Commons, and can be linked from the article (explicitly or via Wikidata, or both)."

The test that you reverted in Boquete was simply to test the ability to launch a Photo Gallery as a related slideshow, which technically does seem to work. (unless you found that the slideshow did not work from that link?)

Is it ok to use that technique from relevant keywords from within a wikivoyage article? For example in the Eat section a keyword link could be "restaurants" or "photos of some typical main street restaurants".

What are your thoughts? Robvann (talk) 18:12, 18 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

• having opened the link, the feature does work, is impressive and nice, however, the link and related related subsection don't look so good to me style-wise. Having said that, I'm more of the grumpy/old-school/averse to changes and novelties type, I'm sure you will appreciate other opinions than mine. Such a change will require solid consensus and other opinions must be consulted. Ibaman (talk) 18:22, 18 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

  OK. I know your heart is in the right place, just trying to understand the vision and constraints we are all working in. I have always been a "bleeding edge" kind of guy, even though I am a senior citizen. Robvann (talk) 18:37, 18 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Here I think you over-interpret Wikivoyage:Image policy#People in photos. It seems to mostly tell that you shouldn't add images of "me in front of Notre Dame" and similar. It also refers to Commons:Photographs of identifiable people, which includes some legal and moral issues. I don't see any such issues with the photos you removed:

• 
  Band at the medieval market
• 
  Easter at a living history museum
• 
  Paavo Nurmi in 1952

–LPfi (talk) 20:04, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

• well, Image policy#Minimal use of images is an issue here, too, but if you'd rather revert the edit, no problem with me. Ibaman (talk) 20:10, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

  I might agree on that, but I think at least the medieval market deserves its image, and people is key there. I suppose Turku could use some pruning. [away checking images] I now removed some dull images (there is a Finnish user or a few who don't seem to care about our guidelines, and don't discuss), but restored the medieval band. I don't think there are too many images now, other than perhaps in See (and one or two of those might fit elsewhere). The minimal image policy has been discussed and amended, and "minimal use" isn't really the practice any more. –LPfi (talk) 21:54, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

See discussion at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:LibStar for some followups... Daceyvillain (talk) 04:35, 29 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Happy holidays, Ibaman! Kia ora, Ibaman, have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! Thank you for all the hard work you've put in the last year to make Wikivoyage the place it is today. Enjoy the festive season from wherever you are in the globe. Greetings from Te Moeka o Tuawe, Te Tai Poutini, Aotearoa. (Fox Glacier, West Coast, New Zealand) --SHB2000 on 00:33, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi Ibaman, I just realized you deleted a page I started creating titled National Museum of Unity, Enugu saying it is out of scope of Wikivoyage. Now, my question is how is a National Museum worth exploring out of scope?, this is more like heritage site that deserves to be on Wikivoyage worth exploring by tourists and visitors coming to Nigeria.

You need to make me understand the reason this is out of scope please! Thanks and I await your response to this. Aderiqueza (talk) 15:03, 23 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

please acquaint yourself with the WV:WIAA policy. Thank you for contributing to Wikivoyage. Ibaman (talk) 15:11, 23 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

It is not really out of scope; we should cover it. But Ibaman correctly points to WV:WIAA where the initials are for What Is An Article; this should be covered as a listing under Enugu#See not as a separate article. There is a listing there; can you expand or improve that? Pashley (talk) 04:18, 2 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Marmadri here. I found your reorganizing of the article a bit confusing. Basically now some listings are located in sections where there is no reference to them. I think it makes more sense for the reader (a traveller on a smartphone usually) to not have to scroll and find the reference elsewhere other than the section that speaks of that location. Thanks otherwise for the other corrections. 2800:40:38:3E:D28:7480:79B4:1A78 23:58, 1 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, my friend. I don't think that article should have been unilaterally redirected with 5 listings in it. It seems to me that it merits a talk page discussion.

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:35, 7 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

I suggest to improve your tone and social competence in the edit summaries of your reverts. And I suggest to improve the exercise of your admin tasks.

• I suggest you read WV:Goals and non-goals, WV:Tone, WV:NOTHERE.

I improved the page today and edited something in a way I find beneficial and you reply "we don't care about that."

• WV:Goals and non-goals, WV:Tone, Don't tout, read our policy.

I gave an explanation and quoted the correct WV regulation. And you simply reply "read again", named it an "edit war" instead of finding a solution on the talk page and protected the article because of a discussion regarding sorting.

• WV:Listings#Listing order, have you really read it?

If the sorting is so important to you, why don't you sort all listings in that article?

• watch me do it.

80.187.72.117 19:53, 22 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

• If you don't care about consensus, about reading accepted policy, about teamwork, please go write your own travel blog. Ibaman (talk) 20:02, 22 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

  I kindly ask for letting my messages as they are and replying under them as it's normally done on WV. Per which regulation on WV is it allowed to answer inside a user's message?

  As an admin one should act as an example for which I gave examples that I don't see it in the exercise of your admin tasks.

  I wrote about finding a solution on the talk page and you accuse me of not wanting to find a consensus.

  in WV:Listings it says "Alphabetical order should be used whenever there's no more appropriate logical order." "Where a non-alphabetical order is used, it should be explained if necessary." You see, only if necessary. And I don't see it as being necessary.

  WV has 2 contradicting regulations regarding the explanation of a different sorting. That should be changed and is not my mistake. 80.187.75.44 20:23, 22 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

  I have removed the protection as I believe an hour is enough for a cooldown period and hope you will both resolve the dispute here. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 20:33, 22 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

  there is no dispute. Alpha order is default. WV:Tone, External links, Don't tout: no other travel guides, together with their "ratings", should be linked or mentioned, be it TripAdvisor, Google Maps, Fodor's Online or whatever. Every day I have to deal with 10 or 20 anon IP numbers coming in and plunging forward without ever checking neither WV:Policies nor WV:Manual of Style and wanting to impose personal preferences, and whereas maybe I should always extend utmost courtesy to newbies as a matter of civility, sometimes I'm too busy offline to be able to engage in policy talk. What I care most are the accuracy, cleanliness and tidiness of this travel guide, according to policy and consensus. The consensus about this is Alpha Order. Ibaman (talk) 21:47, 22 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

[Edit conflict] 80.187.75.44, welcome to Wikivoyage! I really appreciate your updates to the Dortmund article. It's good to remove entries for defunct businesses and those that suck. However, as Wikivoyage is an independent site, it doesn't make sense to farm out our ratings to Google Maps. To further understand Wikivoyage policy on user-rating sites, regardless of whether they are known to be corrupt (as Yelp has been, for example), as opposed to ratings by recognized professionals and/or some kind of recognized standard, please have a look at Don't tout#Guidelines for destination marketing organisations (although you are presumably not a business organization, there is relevant content there) and Rating systems. If you have any questions after you've had a look at those links, please ask. Sorry you've had a rough start to your time here. All the best, Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:55, 22 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Talk:Fagbile olalekan, Talk:Adekunle Ezekiel.

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:27, 4 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

• hi there IK. I figured out that a Nigerian edit-a-thon or something similar must be happening, and found no other way to welcome these new users and give them guidance at the same time. Ibaman (talk) 13:31, 4 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Are you contacting them effectively this way? Don't you need User talk:, rather than Talk:? Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:36, 4 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

hummm. Good point. Lack of attention again, my bad. Ibaman (talk) 13:38, 4 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

On Martínez (Argentina), one of the founding fathers of the town is described as a dim person, without any cite. It seems pretty clear it is a vandalism. Why did you revert my change, removing those aggressive words and the link to the Wikipedia article? Pabloab (talk) 22:18, 9 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

• please acquaint yourself with the WV:Links to Wikipedia policy, which you might have not read. Also, WV:Tone: it's OK to think of Spanish colonial captains as dim, and say so (I'm of Native Brazilian ancestry and do it automatically, by the way). Thanks for contributing to Wikivoyage. Ibaman (talk) 11:44, 10 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for reverting that. I have never encountered that word before. I've only been speaking English for about 55 years, so I guess I still have some things to learn. Ground Zero (talk) 17:56, 21 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hey, hope all is going well. FYI, that is not out of scope – books can be made using the book tool (see Wikivoyage:Books), which by default, are under the Wikivoyage namespace. --SHB2000 (t | c | m) 12:03, 1 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi

I think there has been a misunderstanding. The link (evisa.sy/home-content) I inserted to the Syria page looks like a travel guide, but is in fact a website run by the Syrian government, and can be used to apply for e-visas. IbnLondon (talk) 15:15, 12 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

• I bothered to open the link to check it out, as I always do. It sure looks like a travel guide, and nowhere any "apply for e-visa" option can be found. Ibaman (talk) 15:50, 12 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Top right. You can sign in or make an account there. Once you have done that, a new tab appears which leads to the portal. Syrian government are not known for their expertise in user friendly web-design, or user-friendly anything. IbnLondon (talk) 15:55, 12 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

roger that. Ibaman (talk) 15:57, 12 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

On several occasion we tried to add listing of golf cart rental service only to have it remove.

GO San Pedro Rental, 60 Laguna Dr, San Pedro Town, ☏ +501 611-6625, [email protected]. a golf cart rental service located in San Pedro, Ambergris Caye, Belize. The company offers a variety of golf carts for short-term and long-term rentals, providing a convenient mode of transportation for exploring the island. San Pedro's narrow, winding streets and limited vehicle traffic make golf carts a popular choice for both tourists and locals. GO San Pedro Rental ensures that all their vehicles are well-maintained and adheres to local traffic regulations, contributing to the overall accessibility and mobility within San Pedro. 70 BZD.

In the listing we tried to explain that golf carts are the main mode of transportation. There was a second listing that was placed on 2023 that was also removed.

In no way we are trying to be spammy, just add helpful content. 146.70.103.10 14:55, 14 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I'm not Ibaman, but my advice to you is to stick to just the facts, no statements about convenient modes of transportation or restatements of which city the golf court rental is in. Read Wikivoyage:Don't tout and Wikivoyage:Listings carefully, and you should be OK. Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:38, 14 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I echo what Ikan said, though it's not entirely spammy, per se. --SHB2000 (t | c | m) 22:07, 14 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

well, speaking for myself, I am a very focused anti-spam and anti-vandalism janitor in this community, and in this intention I would love to more strictly enforce Don't tout, WV:Goals and non-goals#Non-goals, WV:Avoid long lists and WV:External links#What not to link to and get rid of all links to car and bicycle rental services, as I do with private luxury limo transfers, private jet transfers, luxury tour services et cetera, and sometimes I do. However I recall there's consensus that some of them must be available for the benefit of the traveller. I don't really like it like this, but this is a community, and I abide consensus. The advice about WV:Tone above is apt. Ibaman (talk) 23:06, 14 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

As a general advice: if you see your edit being undone, do not just repeat it, but try to discuss it, like here. Repeating a controversial edit without trying to communicate is one of the surest ways to get blocked, while not effective in getting the edit to stay.

For this listing, Ambergris Caye#Get around gives the impression that getting a cart is no problem, or at least that telling how to get them in general would be more useful than listing one individual company.

–LPfi (talk) 07:35, 15 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for correcting my entry. After I saw your correction, I checked again with the navigation company, and they don't have any scheduled hydrofoils to Bratislava either. They showed me a schedule to Esztergom on Friday, Saturday and Sunday only --there and back on the same day, leaving 9:30am, arriving 11, returning 17:00 arriving back in Budapest 18:30 Esb (talk) 16:51, 17 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

When reverting as obvious, unneeded, redundant, did you notice that the article covers both Sortavala and Ruskeala; the IP first added the location in the direction fields, then after you removed those, added subheadings.

Those directions and subheadings were obviously added in good faith, and harsh reverts risk driving away contributors (although I think this one is doing their own race regardless).

Grouping listings by location is common, especially when one can anticipate an article split (I moved a Ruskeala listing from the region article to Sortavala as I assumed Ruskeala wouldn't support its own, but it might). I also often add locations to the directions parameter like here in the case of rural areas and the like, where the POIs are far from each other.

Having a subheading just for Ruskeala risks those adding POIs putting in listings before the Ruskeala heading without noticing the subheading or because they don't realise the POI indeed is in Ruskeala.

–LPfi (talk) 16:56, 18 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

yeah, I've noticed and tried to cleanup accordingly. You will agree, the "See#at Ruskeala" makes sense and is useful, the "See#at Sortavala" much less so, in that context. Ibaman (talk) 17:18, 18 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Perhaps. Actually, I am not too concerned about it, but I thought that two reverts of the user's efforts was harsh as there was nothing obviously wrong with them. With a more friendly edit summary I would have been okay with the edits (I assume this user is experienced enough to read them). –LPfi (talk) 21:09, 18 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Definitely somewhat experienced – I'm familiar with this IP. --SHB2000 (t | c | m) 21:46, 18 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Could you please explain to them what was wrong with them? It's not obvious, to me anyway, so since you didn't leave an edit summary, I think it's essential to post to their user talk page. Thanks! Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:57, 24 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I came to say the same thing as well. I too don't get what 67.144.100.48 (talk · contribs) did that was unreliable but I may be wrong. --SHB2000 (t | c | m) 21:40, 24 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I have already reverted some edits of a similar pattern, where we have an anon IP number going to the routeboxes and substituting the actual routes with random nonsense, like, putting "Detroit" where there was "San Diego", and such. Revert me if it these edits are OK. Ibaman (talk) 10:16, 25 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Oh, right, I see. In that case, I agree they should be reverted. --SHB2000 (t | c | m) 10:30, 25 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for explaining and for having a sharp eye, Ibaman! Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:03, 25 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

But you're sure this IP was wrong? Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:06, 25 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

not really, therefore, "revert me if it these edits are OK" as I'm admittedly not the most knowledgeable wikiuser about the US highway layout. Ibaman (talk) 16:31, 25 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I don't know, either, but the edits were plausible. My feeling is, if you don't know edits are wrong, don't revert them. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:53, 25 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

yeah, new edits like these are happening at this very moment, I'll leave them be, hoping they're not wrong. Ibaman (talk) 18:56, 25 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

You saw that I eventually determined they were indeed making nonsense edits. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:54, 28 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

yeah, I'm happy about this developement of this situation. Thank you. Ibaman (talk) 11:20, 28 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sure thing. Too bad they were, but I think people who make plausible-seeming nonsense edits generally eventually slip. Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:42, 28 June 2024 (UTC)Reply