User talk:MuzikMachine Voyage Tips and guide

Contents

To help get you started contributing, we've created a tips for new contributors page, full of helpful links about policies and guidelines and style, as well as some important information on copyleft and basic stuff like how to edit a page. If you need help, check out Help, or post a message in the travellers' pub. If you are familiar with Wikipedia, take a look over some of the differences here.

Many thanks for your brilliant work with routeboxes. Best wishes, ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:48, 20 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for all your great work!

I moved Enterprise (NWT) to Enterprise (Northwest Territories) because we don't use postal abbreviations and such in article names on Wikivoyage (the only exception I can think of is Washington, D.C., because it's so famous as such). I also cleaned up all the links to the article under its former name. Would you like to do the same for Fort Smith (NWT)? I'll go ahead and change the article's name, in case you might have any trouble doing that (though I think you could).

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:24, 16 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Oh, I see Fort Smith doesn't have its own article, so I don't know if it matters much. But if there are any other articles that have abbreviations like NWT in their names, the abbreviation should be spelled out. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:25, 16 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Ikan Kekek: No problem, I got Enterprise (NWT) from the Enterprise redirect page, so I assumed that the Northwest Territories was an exception. I'll keep that in mind going forward. Cheers! --MuzikMachine (talk) 02:41, 16 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Cool. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:42, 16 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thanks for adding that map, which is great because it shows where all the points in the itinerary are. But could you possibly add the road itself to the map? It looks really strange to have a highway map with no highway.

Best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:05, 25 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Ikan Kekek: I'll see what I can do. Cheers! --MuzikMachine (talk) 13:55, 25 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Great! And thanks for all that you do here. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:10, 25 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Ikan Kekek: No problem! A quick update, I had to go into OSM and create some links and relations to Wikidata. According to the help page, it takes a couple days until the updates show up on other linked platforms, but assuming it worked the line representing the roadway should show up. Cheers! --MuzikMachine (talk) 23:15, 25 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Terrific! Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:40, 25 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi, first some great updates on towns in Alberta. Sorry for undoing some of your work but generally part articles are not treated as regions. There will be cases when city/town articles will be inside the park boundary, but will usually be placed in the same region. Creating the extra level of hierarchy is usually of no advantage. --Traveler100 (talk) 04:33, 31 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Traveler100: Hi, I was using some the the city/county hierarchies and using that as a model. For example, there is Quebec (province) > Central Quebec (region) > Centre-du-Québec (county/region). Banff and Lake Louise are fully contained by Banff National Park, and from political point-of-view their governance are influenced by Parks Canada, the governing body of Banff National Park (same with the Town of Jasper and Jasper National Park) - it can also possibly be comparable to a city region (article) within the city. Would you reconsider? Cheers! --MuzikMachine (talk) 23:12, 7 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

There is no reason to make a park article a region article. --Traveler100 (talk) 19:42, 27 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Traveler100: Respectfully, I had outlined my reasoning but it was not acknowledged. As the File:Alberta_Rockies_travel_region_map.png map is incorrect (Edson and Hinton are reversed), could I at least list Banff and Jasper National Parks, as well as Kananaskis Country as polygons instead of points? Maybe under the heading of either "Parks" or "Other destinations" -- MuzikMachine (talk) 19:24, 28 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

The parks as polygons is a good idea. Just there really is not reason to have an extra level of hierarchy. --Traveler100 (talk) 19:27, 28 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hey MM, are you thinking of having David Thompson Country as a sub-region of Alberta Rockies? Also it needs a clear eastern boundary to seperate it from Foothills. Let's discuss. Kevlar67 (talk) 20:01, 29 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Kevlar67: I would want to keep David Thompson Country in Alberta Rockies as an "Other" destination, most of what's listed is in the mountains as opposed to the foothills. Most of the listings follow the geographic boundary between the mountains and foothills, so I think the existing boundary on the Alberta Rockies works where it's between the Forestry Trunk Road and Hwy 22, running at an angle. I like the idea of Foothills in Central Alberta. Cheers! -- MuzikMachine (talk) 23:43, 29 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

You earned it. Keep up the good edits. Ibaman (talk) 20:19, 13 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your very useful updates on articles, including the ones in Alberta articles. We try to make things easier for readers by using one time format per article, rather than changing from one format to another to another through an article. In countries that use a 12-hour format, like Canada and the U.S., the format we use is 9AM-noon, 6PM-midnight. For days of the week, we use these standard abbreviations: M Tu W Th F Sa Su. This is set out in our style guide, WV:tdf. I hope that helps. Keep up the great work. Ground Zero (talk) 09:34, 27 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

I really appreciate the work you're doing in creating new articles and expanding existing ones. Following the time formatting chosen by the Wikivoyage community is no more difficult that the one you're using. Is there a reason why you're ignoring the policy on this? As I mentioned above, the purpose is to make is easier for readers to find information. It also gives Wikivoyage a less amateurish look than random formatting. Ground Zero (talk) 19:12, 3 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Ground Zero: My bad, I'll take another read of it and correct some of my more recent edits. -- MuzikMachine (talk) 19:15, 3 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Thanks very much! Ground Zero (talk) 19:16, 3 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

	The Wikivoyage Barncompass
	I'm a bit late but thanks and congrats on your first city district implementation. It's a lot of work to district a city and you've done a great job. Cheers, -Shaundd (talk) 09:09, 12 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hear, hear. Great work on Calgary on on Prairie articles generally. Ground Zero (talk) 22:13, 12 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

Thank you! -- MuzikMachine (talk) 19:40, 13 July 2019 (UTC) :)Reply

As always, you do great work. I have a favour to ask. I have been on an expedition to raise all city- and park-level articles in Canada to usable status or above. By adding a few listings to your great start on Gibsons, I completed my task today. Now, whenever a reader clicks on a link to a destination in Canada, they find an article that is in pretty good shape. (I suspect that many of the usable articles are in fact at the guide level, but I'm leaving that for someone else to decide.) See also Wikivoyage:Canada Expedition.

The favour I am asking for is that when you start a new article, could you try to fill it out a bit -- a few restaurant listings, a few hotel listings -- so that we can maintain our now-perfect record? Thanks for all of you work. Regards, Ground Zero (talk) 20:33, 16 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Ground Zero: I'll try to do that, my intent was to get it started and then come back to it - sometimes life takes over before everything can be included. Is there an "under construction" template that I could use if I can't do the entire article in one sitting? -- MuzikMachine (talk) 02:51, 17 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

I usually hold off for a while in the case of a new article. In this case, I wanted to finish off my project, so I jumped in. Your articles, by the way, are usually very easy to upgrade to usable because you put so much in them to start. I don't know about an under-construction template, but you could put that in the edit summary. Regards, Ground Zero (talk) 13:48, 17 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

RMaung (WMF) 14:34, 9 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

RMaung (WMF) 19:13, 20 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

RMaung (WMF) 17:04, 4 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

need help with anything? I can help you work on some things if you like? Thanks. StegasaurusPorri (talk) 01:02, 19 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

Nice work! Have a butter tart. Ground Zero (talk) 18:19, 7 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Ground Zero: Thanks! --MuzikMachine (talk) 05:38, 5 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi MuzikMachine, thanks for adding all those articles for small places in BC. With the Boston Bar article you just created, did you have any thoughts on Yale, which is about a 1/2 hour south? It has a couple of small museums and maybe some accommodation. I had been leaning to putting it as a "Nearby" in Hope (British Columbia) or combining it with other small communities in the canyon (like Boston Bar) under a Fraser Canyon rural area article (which used to exist but was redirected to Thompson-Nicola some years ago). Just wondering if you had any thoughts on it. Cheers -Shaundd (talk) 16:06, 2 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi Shaundd, I have to admit I'm not too familiar with Yale, but I had some thoughts. According to Google Maps, Yale is 24 km to Hope and 42 km to Boston Bar, so I'd be more inclined to include it as a "Nearby" in Hope (British Columbia). In reading about Yale, it's on the geographic line between the Fraser Valley and Fraser Canyon, so there could be a debate on whether it belongs in the Fraser Valley or the Thompson-Nicola, so I would be hesitant to include it an article with Boston Bar (British Columbia). With Lillooet and Lytton having their own city articles, there might not be much more to add with a Fraser Canyon rural area article, unless it were to become a region, but that may not be needed either. Just a thought - do you think Yale would warrant it's own article? Thanks! -- MuzikMachine (talk) 05:37, 5 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

It looks like it has two or three potential listings (including one small campground) so I think technically it could have an article but I don't think it adds value for travellers. I had read before it's the southern entrance to the Fraser Canyon and it seems it was the furthest upriver paddleboats could go. Based on all this, I think it fits best as a couple of Nearby listings in Hope. Thanks -Shaundd (talk) 06:11, 5 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

I'm planning to drive this route later in the fall, if the pandemic permits, so this information is very helpful. Thanks. Ground Zero (talk) 00:10, 25 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Ground Zero: You're welcome. Depending on where you're going, hopefully you're not effected by the wildfires in the BC interior. --MuzikMachine (talk) 14:14, 25 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

I wouldn't be coming through until October, so the fires should be over, but I will have to keep an eye on the road closures. Ground Zero (talk) 18:49, 25 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Given the covid situation in Sask and Alberta, we turned back at Manitoba. I'd like to try again next year though. Ground Zero (talk) 17:26, 18 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi, MuzikMachine. What does this code that's unfamiliar to me do? You added it here. Thanks!

Best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Ikan, it's a thin space code. I saw it on some American articles as a way to line up route boxes with an 'N' better than  , which is a full character space. See w:Template:Thin space. MuzikMachine (talk) 06:35, 15 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I hadn't seen it before and therefore thought it was vandalism until I saw you use it. I obviously know you're not a vandal, unless someone hacked your account! Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:45, 15 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Nope, no hack! Just found something that might improve alignment. Cheers! MuzikMachine (talk) 07:00, 15 September 2024 (UTC)Reply