|
Archives
|
Itinerary Format
[edit]
- That's a good idea. Would you like to start work on such a list in your userspace, such as User:NathanRlds/Itinerary list? Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:27, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
- Sounds like a plan NathanRlds (talk) 23:54, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
Standardising hiking itineraries
[edit]From User talk:LPfi, continuing the discussion here. –LPfi (talk) 08:38, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
———
Hi,
Thanks for the feedback on several articles!
I’ve added more details to several hiking itineraries, including ones like Södra Kungsleden. However, I’ve noticed that there are various approaches to structuring an itinerary. After reviewing professional hiking guides and Wikivoyage, I’ve identified two common formats:
1. Day-to-day itineraries– These outline each stage or leg of the hike with daily distance counts.
2. Section-based itineraries – These describe distances relative to the hike’s starting point, as seen in the Södra Kungsleden article.
The Padjelantaleden article is a great example of a hybrid approach. It includes hut-to-hut distances while maintaining a section-based format. However, expanding it with more details seems challenging. If there are additional details for a particular stretch, where would you place them?
Are there any guidelines on standardising hiking itineraries? A more consistent structure could make them clearer and easier to follow.
Similarly, when do you use listings?
It might be good to standardise around that as well. It seems like a good idea to always have a listing for a hut, so it's easier for people to add details on the fly, I really like that about the Nordkalottleden article.
In that case though, several articles (Kungsleden, Lapplandsleden, Massiv Ruta) where I've added information might need an update. Jpolvto (talk) 18:53, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
- I doubt that a user's talk page is the best place for this discussion, but am not sure where it should go.
- Other hiking itineraries to consider include Tiger Leaping Gorge & Three parallel rivers.
- Articles like Trekking in Nepal, Trekking in Vietnam & Wilderness backpacking also look relevant. Pashley (talk) 20:11, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
- Advice on itineraries in general is severely lacking (this page is now mostly on what itineraries you should and shouldn't write). Still, I think that starting with the more specific advice on hiking itineraries is useful.
- For distances, those from the start point of the itinerary or the leg are useful to get a feeling for where on the itinerary you are, while distance between cabins or other places for breaks (on longer hikes: overnighting) are useful for planning that day. Most people, I think, aren't too comfortable with subtracting the former distances on the fly, so the daily distances are important. However, I see no problem in including both. If you have sections on multi-day legs, I think that including the distance from the itinerary's starting point in the section lead works well enough in most cases.
- I note that "Stages" tables have been included in several hiking itineraries' Prepare sections. It'd be easy to have two distance columns there, one on total, one on the distance from the preceding stop. I think the distances should still be told also in the Walk subsections.
- For the Walk subsections (legs), I like the Nordkalottleden approach, with a lead, then a description of the leg as it unwinds, including distances and places on the way, and last a list of places to stay, in listing format. These sections are short enough that scrolling down to that list is no problem, and the listing lists avoid the need for having distracting info in the running text. Perhaps the section lead should be more clearly separated in some way (and it is probably unnecessary in many itineraries).
- For shorter hikes, where it is reasonable to have a Walk subsection for each day, the cabin listing could still be last, perhaps together with lists of other listings. An alternative is to describe each point of interest only in running text, like in Stuorrahanoaivi trek (a four-day hike with two cabins). I think Padjelantaleden just isn't well-developed yet: the daily legs should be described in more detail instead of just defining them.
- Wikivoyage:Itinerary article template now has no mention of Eat, Drink, Sleep. I think including them in Prepare is reasonable (in Nordkalottleden they are distributed over Understand and Prepare, with no explicit Eat or Drink sections). Fees and permits should probably be included in Prepare (permits are mentioned in the template).
- I assume we should write a Wikivoyage:Hiking itinerary template or Wikivoyage:Hiking itineraries. I'd start out with the former and copy content over to the latter when it starts needing trimming or the format starts to feel less than ideal, editing the template to conform with the other article templates.
- –LPfi (talk) 08:38, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
- A draft template created. Tweak as you see fit. –LPfi (talk) 10:10, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for creating the draft template!
- The stages tables were initially planned as resupply tables when I would have managed to find out which points could be used as resupply points. Right now they mostly serve as an aid to create the itineraries.
- For some trails, there is a set itinerary with stages and distances. For some trails, it's more of a "create your own adventure" itinerary. In that case, I think the approach of describing the trail in sections is the best approach. It does mean however, that you will need to calculate distances in any case, since you will be planning your own hike. For that reason, I think the cumulative km count is the standard in "section based" itineraries. See also Pacific Crest Trail, Appalachian Trail, Continental Divide Trail. Komoot does something similar for Nordkalottleden.
- I would propose these guidelines:
- For itineraries with set stages, it's recommended to describe each stage using a clear heading (location A to location B) along with the corresponding kilometer count. For itineraries that aren't typically hiked in set stages, it's recommended to describe the trail in sections and include a cumulative kilometer count when listing on-trail markers or listings.
- Edit: As an aside here, there are two things that would be fantastic to have. An improved integration with Wikidata, so listings could get a lot of data automatically from Wikidata, without having to duplicate it in multiple itineraries. Another would be the Kartographer extension supporting trails with multiple sections. To me, these are the two things that would make a huge improvement to hiking itineraries overall. Jpolvto (talk) 23:30, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
- Most things could be done with better integrations. Lodging could be added to OSM trails as well. On-trail kilometres (or kilometres between points) can be calculated by pathing apis. It feels like the OSM integration in general is the weak point for hiking trails. The Wikidata integration would be nice to have as well. Jpolvto (talk) 21:54, 18 March 2025 (UTC)
- For Wikidata, the problem is that one might want to tell things that don't fit nicely in the properties format, but is better described in free text that doesn't suit Wikidata (opening hours have been one area that has been tried, but even slightly more complicated opening schemes have proved awkward to code). For trailheads or resupply points that are on several itineraries, I have sometimes created articles just to have a central location for details (see e.g. Kvikkjokk, Ritsem and Murjek – they may be worthwhile independently, but I wouldn't have created them otherwise). For individual cabins that isn't a good model, but if itineraries overlap considerably, one can sometimes refer to one of the articles, such as not covering Nordkalottleden in E1 Long Distance Path, instead just referring to it for those stages. Similarly one could refer to Käsivarsi Wilderness Area for the part of Nordkalottleden through it, but I think that would be a bit awkward for the reader. This latter decision could perhaps shed some light on the issues. –LPfi (talk) 07:56, 19 March 2025 (UTC)
- While I understand the reasoning behind cumulative distances, but I think many people have a hard time doing the subtractions on the fly, and shelter-to-shelter distances are thus very useful for making it easy to grasp the distances involved on individual legs. This is good especially in early stages of planning. –LPfi (talk) 08:00, 19 March 2025 (UTC)
- Most things could be done with better integrations. Lodging could be added to OSM trails as well. On-trail kilometres (or kilometres between points) can be calculated by pathing apis. It feels like the OSM integration in general is the weak point for hiking trails. The Wikidata integration would be nice to have as well. Jpolvto (talk) 21:54, 18 March 2025 (UTC)
- Advice on itineraries in general is severely lacking (this page is now mostly on what itineraries you should and shouldn't write). Still, I think that starting with the more specific advice on hiking itineraries is useful.