User talk:Texaswebscout

From Wikitravel
Jump to: navigation, search

Hello Texaswebscout! Welcome to Wikitravel. Please take a sec to look at our copyleft and policies and guidelines, but feel free to plunge forward and edit some pages. Scanning the Manual of style, especially the article templates, can give you a good idea of how we like articles formatted. If you need help, check out Wikitravel:Help, and if you need some info not on there, post a message in the travellers' pub.

Thank you for contributing Galveston. You may want to have a look at our article naming conventions and templates before you go too much further, as I have to move your page to link it to any other articles. We have a different naming convention to Wikipedia articles.

Also, I do not think Houston is quite ready for the front page as it is still a stub. Please read the Main Page guidelines before adding an article to the main page. -- Huttite 06:24, 1 Jan 2005 (EST)


Hey, I would just like to add to Huttite's welcome message by saying please don't be discouraged if you don't know about the policies. There's always somebody around who will be happy to edit things into guideline-matching shape, so don't worry all that much about it.

As for Houston on the Main Page, I agree that it's not quite ready, but it's close. I think what the article needs is some more attention to the Do section, and some photos. Really for such an important city as Houston there should probably some neigborhoods listed and quite a bit more about getting around. Maybe a map would be good too, but even New York (city) doesn't have one (yet, I might do it after Paris).

Anyhow, welcome, and please keep up the good work! -- Mark 08:11, 1 Jan 2005 (EST)


Please read Wikitravel:Article naming conventions#Hierarchy. There is no need to name the article Galveston, Texas, that is not the convention here. Simply use Galveston, if there are two different places called Galveston, we can use Galveston (Texas) to avoid confusion, but that is not necessary until a second Galveston article is written about the other Galveston. -- Huttite 04:21, 2 Jan 2005 (EST)

OH! I see your problem - the page is broken, in fact they are both broken! - Huttite 04:42, 2 Jan 2005 (EST)
Yeah that is my problem, when I have been tring to save some pages, they are then changing to redirects, can you try to revert back to one? For some reason when I try to save it gives me a 500 error on some pages Texas Web Scout 03:55, 2 Jan 2005 (CST)
No, I cannot do it, even as an anonymous user. I have posted a bug report and e-mailed Evan. Hopefully he can sort it out next time he is on-line. -- Huttite 05:04, 2 Jan 2005 (EST)

Regions and headings[edit]


I see you're filling out a lot of Texas -- great! Can you do a few things when you create a new page?

  1. As the very first thing in the article, put:'''CityName''' is a city in [[Region Name]] of [[State Name]].
  2. Are you able to decide which cities go in which regions of Texas? If so, can you link to them from the appropriate region article? If not, can you link to them from the Cities section of Texas? (Someone will eventually move the minor cities to the appropriate region.) Some of your new pages are showing up on orphaned pages because nothing links to them.

Thanks! Hypatia 18:34, 2 Jan 2005 (EST)

  • I have had a stab at reformating and linking some of the cities that you have added recently. Have a look at the articles now to see how they are presented. Also have a read of the article templates to see how articles should be set out and some quick ways to do this.
  • To avoid creating orphan pages you should:
  1. Add the names of the new articles to another page and put square brackets around it, like [[Proposed new article title]]
  2. Save the page (do not just preview it, though you can do that first)
  3. Click on the (red) link you just created
  4. Add the new article into the Edit box that displays.

-- Huttite 22:40, 2 Jan 2005 (EST)

Cruise ships[edit]

Please have a look at What is an article

I am recommending both Cruise Lines and Carnival Cruises for deletion. Please discuss it there if you wish.

Travel operators should be listed on a destination page or pages. Also ships should only be listed when there are specific details for them. They are not destinations, merely modes of transport. If we did not limit ourselves we would have a page for every car, bus, taxi, train, and aeroplane as well. I agree that some ships do deserve their own articles, but probably not on Wikitravel'.

If you want to write something about cruising, or sailing, or other means of Travel by water, can I suggest you look at some of the Travel topics articles first.

If you want to create a completely new article that doesn't fit into our article guidelines please do it from your user page or consider Wikipedia.

Also, please only add fully developed article links to the main page. -- Huttite 18:06, 3 Jan 2005 (EST)

I do not think that creating Carnival Elation is necessary. But write it and then we can comment on it. In other words Prove it to me. -- Huttite 17:39, 5 Jan 2005 (EST)
Respectfully disagree. This type of post is great. First, Cruise itineraries are extremely popular and a type of travel onto themselves. They have their own "ins and outs". Second, the Cruise lines and ships vary wildly-- and this type of content helps people make better decisions about which ship to book or itinerary to take. A single ship will carry up to 200,000 visitors per year-- more people than visit many places profiled on this site. A single Cruise line will carry millions of people-- more people than visit all 90% of the places on this site. An objective point-of-view approach to Cruise itineraries and Cruise lines would seems terrific.
--luvdapug Aug 27, 2005

How to sign[edit]

Hi, just so you know, there's an easy way to sign your posts to discussion type pages. Just type this:

-- ~~~~

after your post, and it will be turned into your sig including timestamp by Mediawiki. -- Mark 07:53, 4 Jan 2005 (EST)

Carnival Elation[edit]

So I've initiated a discussion in Talk:Carnival Elation regading whether this experiment is working out. Perhaps you might like to comment there. -- Colin 19:27, 27 Feb 2005 (EST)

Las Vegas[edit]

Just a note to say thanks for all of your work on the Las Vegas article recently. It was quite a mess two months ago, and while it still needs a lot of addresses and descriptions it is vastly better. I originally listed it as a collaboration of the week candidate, but you've single-handedly fixed most of the major issues. Thanks!