Thanks for encourangement. Not ready so far, for three reasons: (1) need some experience contributing to Wikitravel before creating something really new; (2) not sure it's many Russians enough for keeping it in a good shape; (3) judging by few days here, Wikitravel community itself is too young to spread its efforts into several versions--let's make good coverage in English first. Something like that... --DenisYurkin 16:36, 25 Sep 2005 (EDT)
Evan, I have two things that I'm not sure where to stick. Does it have anything to do with Russian Expedition? If so, what is the minimum overhead we can invest into Expedition to bring the ideas to live?
Russian people in specific countries / regions: how many of them can be found as residents, and where? Many Russian travellers prefer to NOT see anyone from their country when they travel abroad (either among tourists or local residents) -- so this info does make practical sense.
Less bulletproof: 'Country through eyes of Russians': many countries are richer, some are wilder or more poor than Russia -- and the way it seems by Russian is different from the way it seems by, let say, American or Australian. Not that bulletproof because views are still quite similar for Russians, Chinese, Eastern Europeans etc. Can think of examples, if the idea is not expressed well so far.
That said, occasionally a section of an article can become unwieldy, and thus warrant its own article. As an example, any info on Greek wines should go into the article on Greece. However, if so much info about Greek wines was added to the Greece article that it overwhelmed the article (and if that info was relevant for travelers) then it might make sense to talk about splitting the info out into a separate article (similar to Electronics and entertainment shopping in Thailand). Similarly with hotels, if for example there is a resort somewhere that simply has so much to do that it cannot possibly be described in a few paragraphs, that might be a candidate for a new article (see Disneyland).
A good rule is to always start out with info in the parent article, and to only discuss splitting that info out once it becomes unwieldy, provided the information is something useful and relevant for travelers. -- Wrh2 15:48, 27 Sep 2005 (EDT)
I think I've got it. I was also thinking about creating a precedent of giving much info, and then proceeding to discussion on organizing it the best way. The only thing that stopped me is that noone before stated this principle: "it's not that the additional information isn't wanted here". Thanks for clarifying this first -- maybe it's worth considering to mention in the Goals. Meanwhile, I'll try with adding info, and seeing how we go. --DenisYurkin 16:38, 27 Sep 2005 (EDT)
Just to be clear, an important caveat of the "add all you want" bit is that the information should be relevant for a travel guide, and other editors can always trim what you've written (just as you can always add things back). Be aware that just because there is a lot to say about a place doesn't mean it is important to say it all in a travel guide. That said, go ahead and update a few articles and let's see how it turns out. -- Wrh2 17:05, 27 Sep 2005 (EDT)
One of the first steps is Amymone in Nafplion#Sleep. Does it look like copmplying with the policies? Few more examples will follow. --DenisYurkin 05:30, 1 Oct 2005 (EDT)
I'd like to send you some private email, but you don't allow email through the Wikitravel interface. Could you send me an email at firstname.lastname@example.org? --Evan 11:57, 7 November 2006 (EST)
email@example.com. --DenisYurkin 15:47, 7 November 2006 (EST)
> but you don't allow email through the Wikitravel interface.
How can I enable this? In preferences, I already have "Enable e-mail from other users" turned on. --DenisYurkin 17:03, 7 November 2006 (EST)
It seems to be enabled now. --Evan 19:18, 9 November 2006 (EST)
Re: paper travel guides
Let me answer your questions:
what do you think of adding a section to the end of Wikitravel:Requests for comment with a title like "Guilty-until-proven-innocent", where we can attrach more enthusiasts to the topic?
I wouldn't. The pub is the best place for this, so:
will it comply to Wikitravel rules if I invite people in the Wikitravel:Travellers' pub to join the discussion taking place in User talk subpage?
This seems like exactly the right approach.
I seem to have been misunderstood on all counts here. I am recommending use of the pub to notify people to discuss whether an article can be formed that meets the conflicting goals. The pub is the conventional place for initiating the inquiry, which should be moved elsewhere ("swept in") as soon as feasible. -- Bill-on-the-Hill 12:44, 21 December 2006 (EST)
Bill, I apologize for any misunderstanding that could be in place. How do you recommend to change notification/invitation in the Pub from the current edition? I'm afraid the difference between IsNow and ShouldBe is too subtle for me now. --DenisYurkin 17:30, 21 December 2006 (EST)
overall, is it "legal" to keep and develop an article that does not comply to official rules? Do we have any similar precedents?
Yes, things like this have been done before, and user sub-pages have been used to develop articles that started with controversy but became acceptable. That's why I suggested addressing this topic this way. -- Bill-on-the-Hill 22:17, 20 December 2006 (EST)
More for Evan than for Denis: do remember that this user page was created before the article was deleted. This isn't about reinstating an article. It's about turning the idea Denis had, and saved here, into something that will pass muster. -- Bill-on-the-Hill 14:29, 21 December 2006 (EST)
You are always bursting over with ideas. I can't say that I always agree with them, but anyway I think it's great that you have so much enthusiasm. However, I have a question regarding a different matter - your docent location. A few months ago, I cleaned up the Western Siberia page and Altai - the republic, and Altai - the krai were separated. According to the way it was set up, you are currently docent for the republic. If that is not correct, you might like to change it. Also, I started pages for the major cities of those areas, which are currently looking a little bare. So if you get the chance, maybe you could add some info. Thanks. WindHorse 21:50, 11 February 2007 (EST)
That was a very quick response. Thank you. WindHorse 22:00, 11 February 2007 (EST)
I like your idea to drive my energy to something more useful than debates :-)
For now, I signed up as a docent for both Krai and Republic (although I seem to know more on krai), and for Barnaul city--let's see if I can help with any specifics. I've listed some cities (actually, most are the towns); I've created a personal todo for someday to help these articles with more content. Feel free to ask if you need something specific on these regions. --DenisYurkin 22:13, 11 February 2007 (EST)
Docent for Budapest
Dear DenisYurkin, thank you for considering me as a docent. Nowadays I am extremely busy with my graduation project, but if it doesn't take much effort I can become one. I can give it a try. - bujatt 06:19, 21 February 2007 (EST)
For now, questions to docents are really rare in my experience, but your mileage may vary. When you're ready to start, consider instructions in Wikitravel:Docents. Best of luck. --DenisYurkin 08:04, 21 February 2007 (EST)
Thanks for your help with Altai! I'm now pondering what to do with Moscow Oblast, since it has so many cities (~7 million residents now) and so many important sites. I think we should break the Moscow Oblast article into two or three regions (in addition to Moscow Federal City so that each region only contains 5–9 cities, but I don't know what is the best way to do this. Do you have any thoughts on how to split up the article by regions? Are there any regional categories that the people in Moscow use to talk about the surrounding area? Or do people just use the (unhelpful) small districts and rayony? If you don't have any ideas, we could just use regions like "South Moscow Oblast" and "East Moscow Oblast," but that is rather boring, I think. Спасибо еще раз за помощь. --PeterfitzgeraldTalk 15:13, 12 May 2007 (EDT)
Thanks for your Russian ;-) First of all, I am not sure I understand what exactly can we call cities, and what's name for smaller settlements (towns?). --DenisYurkin 16:23, 12 May 2007 (EDT)
As I understand it, the standard Wikitravel practice is to just group together all settlements, including towns and cities, under the heading "cities" when making region articles. So I don't think we have to worry much about this, but I have been calling settlements larger than 30,000 cities, under 30,000 towns, and under ~2,000 villages. I have been distinguishing the settlements, however, only in the one-line sentence describing the place. Either way, there should only be 5–9 settlements per region page, and Moscow Oblast now has 28! I suppose we will need at least 4 subregions. --PeterfitzgeraldTalk 17:43, 12 May 2007 (EDT)
Personally, I don't see much value of creating a hierarchy before we have enough traveller-useful content, like usadba's (Arkhangelskoe etc). I will take a look at some AroundMoscow travel guide, but judging by Russian Wikipedia, there's no good division except south-north-east-west. --DenisYurkin 08:51, 13 May 2007 (EDT)
I think the regional hierarchy is useful as a skeleton on which other editors can add information—and I enjoy making the region pages so why hold back!. In any rate, I myself intend to create a lot of content for Russia's cities, after creating a comprehensive regional structure. But I think you are right, there might not be a better way to divide up the Moscow Oblast pages other than: Moscow City, North Moscow Oblast, East Moscow Oblast, etc. Thanks again for your help! --PeterfitzgeraldTalk 18:34, 20 May 2007 (EDT)
Ok, I went ahead with the north-south-west-east divisions and moved the cities listings to sub-region pages. I had to narrow the cities/towns list on Moscow Oblast#Cities down to nine, but I don't know the region all that well—do you think the current list is a good representative sample of the most travel-prominent cities in the region? Also, we definitely should get the usadbas online. Would, say, Arkhangelskoe also have a town around it, where a traveler could stay? Or should it be incorporated into a nearby city's article? --PeterfitzgeraldTalk 17:19, 28 May 2007 (EDT)
As for Arkhangelskoe specifically, I don't think it would add much value for traveller to place it under Krasnogorsk, so I would refer to it directly from Moscow (city or Oblast, don't know). --DenisYurkin 05:43, 23 June 2007 (EDT)
Cyclades - Stay safe
Hi Denis, I've changed the stay safe section in article Cyclades to The Cyclades are very safe. Travelers should exercise usual precautions.
You are right, petty theft is uncommon on islands within the Cyclades, but it happens on the bigger islands close to the turkish mainland. I originally just wanted to point out that usual precautions are enough. I'm sorry, it took me quite a while to answer your request on my disucssion page. Kaykay 13:53, 24 June 2007 (EDT)