Help Wikitravel grow by contributing to an article! Learn how.
New users, please see Help or go to the Pub to ask questions.

Difference between revisions of "Wikitravel talk:Cooperating with Wikipedia"

From Wikitravel
Jump to: navigation, search
(Move Links from Wikipedia: from pub)
(Integrating as a Wikimedia project)
 
(9 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown)
Line 31: Line 31:
  
 
::::Maybe. There is hardly a consensus for deletion there yet; hopefully common sense will prevail and we will either get to keep the templates as they are, or change them to generate simple external links. But it is probably wise not to use the templates any further until the Wikipedia consensus is determined. -- [[User:Chris j wood|Chris j wood]] 11:51, 18 Oct 2004 (EDT)
 
::::Maybe. There is hardly a consensus for deletion there yet; hopefully common sense will prevail and we will either get to keep the templates as they are, or change them to generate simple external links. But it is probably wise not to use the templates any further until the Wikipedia consensus is determined. -- [[User:Chris j wood|Chris j wood]] 11:51, 18 Oct 2004 (EDT)
 +
 +
 +
Spanish Wikitravel user [[:es:Usuario:Tequendamia|Tequendamia]] has just [[:es:Discusión:Portada# Enlaces desde la wikipedia hispana|reported on es:]] that the Spanish Wikipedia '''deleted''' the existing <nowiki>{{wikitravel}}</nowiki> template and also '''removed all links''' to es: that had been recently added to Wikipedia articles. Their [http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Caf%C3%A9/Portal/Archivo/Noticias/2006/04#Plantilla_Wikitravel_Lista_para_ser_usada reasons] apparently were:
 +
# It's not a WikiMedia project
 +
# The linked Spanish Wikitravel articles were just stubs/outlines, with no real content yet
 +
I don't follow w:es policies to judge if they're right or wrong but I guess this should work as a warning for us to be more careful about creating those templates and links there. [[User:Rmx|Ricardo (Rmx)]] 19:12, 27 April 2006 (EDT)
 +
 +
:We've been pretty careful on en: to avoid over-promoting Wikitravel on Wikipedia. It's probably a good idea to treat Wikitravel links like other external links on wp:, and not to be too pushy about them. --[[User:Evan|Evan]] 20:56, 27 April 2006 (EDT)
 +
 +
==Uniting Wikitravel with Wikipedia, Wikiquote, Wikisource, Wiktionary and Wikibooks?==
 +
 +
[Moved from [[Wikitravel:Travellers' pub|Travellers' pub]] by [[User:Hypatia|Hypatia]] 17:30, 18 Dec 2004 (EST)]
 +
 +
I think that Wikitravel should be eaten by the Wikimedia foundation, which owns the Wiki projects mentioned above. (I couldn't find an earlier discussion about this.) It seems to me that all Wiki projects, and especially Wikitravel, should benefit from such a strong alliance. Personally I would have heard a lot earlier about Wikitravel if it was already listed under the other Wiki projects. I'm not sure if this is possible by the differences between by-sa and GFDL though. What do you guys think? [[User:Georg Muntingh|Georg Muntingh]], 2 Aug 2004
 +
 +
: No - disagree strongly. One of the reason I came here was because it wasn't run by the Wikimedia foundation and hence was more international etc. Also cc-by-sa is superior to the GFDL and the wikimedia foundation loves fair use images which are not useable outside the US. Apologies if this sounds like a rant. [[User:Secretlondon|Caroline]] 14:42, 2 Aug 2004 (EDT)
 +
 +
::1) Wikimedia is much more international than Wikitravel. Wikipedia exists in 100 languages, while Wikitravel exists in 5. 2) Both the Free Software Foundation and the Creative Commons projects are working on making the two licenses compatible to each other. 3) Only the English Wikipedia accepts fair use images.--Erik Möller
 +
 +
:I dunno. Being "eaten" by Wikimedia doesn't really sound like the most positive experience.
 +
 +
:I also think that it's good to have lots of different kinds of wikis hosted by lots of different organizations. A monoculture wouldn't necessarily be the healthiest wiki ecosystem. The [http://www.worldwidewiki.net/wiki/SwitchWiki SwitchWiki] shows some tens of thousands of wikis on the Internet right now. I don't think Wikimedia should, or wants to, host and manage all those projects. --[[User:Evan|Evan]] 11:46, 3 Aug 2004 (EDT)
 +
 +
:: Okay, I see your points. [[User:Georg Muntingh|Georg Muntingh]] 09:11, 4 Aug 2004 (EDT)
 +
 +
::Actually, the number of wikis on SwitchWiki is on the order of thousands, not tens of thousands. It's right there on the page I linked to! Sloppy research on my part, but I think the point is still valid. --[[User:Evan|Evan]] 18:16, 19 Aug 2004 (EDT)
 +
 +
== Removed bogus link ==
 +
 +
I removed this statement: ''Wikitravel is not a project of the wikimedia foundation. The reason is explained [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikitravel here].'' There are a lot of reasons that Wikitravel is not a project of the Wikimedia Foundation, but none of them are explained at that link. --[[User:Evan|Evan]] 13:12, 25 May 2005 (EDT)
 +
 +
==Integrating as a Wikimedia project==
 +
I believe that integrating would be positive for all involved
 +
*Would provide a secure funding base and reduce the need for google ads
 +
*Increase editors as no google ads
 +
*Would make it easier for the two sites to direct people adding content to the better place
 +
*Would make Wikitravel better know (lots of great content here in a useful format)
 +
*Would thus speed up the development of the project
 +
*Potentially increased reliability (I am having trouble viewing this site right now)
 +
I cannot really think of any drawbacks. Wikimedia projects are now under the same license is here.
 +
--[[User:Doc James|Doc James]] 10:25, 23 February 2012 (EST)

Latest revision as of 15:31, 23 February 2012

What are the rules for copying from Wikitravel to Wikipedia if I am the sole author? Does it make any difference if the article has been deleted from Wikitravel? Notty

It makes no difference whatsoever. If you are the sole author of an article, you hold full copyright on it, and you can re-license it under the GFDL (Wikipedia's license). However, if anyone has made changes to the article, you can't copy it over. You can, however, look through the page history and find the last version that only you had worked on, and use that. --Evan 11:14, 3 Feb 2004 (EST)


Contents

Wikitravel in Wikipedia[edit]

Moved from Wikitravel:travellers' pub by Evan

There is now an article on Wikitravel in Wikipedia, in English and French. You said milestones? ;o) Yann 06:50, 22 Feb 2004 (EST)

Cool Logo. Is it going to be used here also? Caffeine 05:57, 27 Feb 2004 (EST)
It is already! If you change your skin from Cologne Blue (the default) to Standard, it appears on every page. --Evan 09:14, 27 Feb 2004 (EST)

Links from Wikipedia[edit]

[Moved from Travellers' pub by Hypatia 18:22, 16 Dec 2004 (EST)]

One simple way to increase Wikitravel's ranking in the web world: if you write a good non-stub Wikitravel article, then link it in from the corresponding Wikipedia page (I use [http://wikitravel.org/en/article/X Wikitravel: X] under "External links"). This is relevant content — travel guides cover the same topic, but serve different audiences — and I've never had a link removed yet, and when the link propagates out to Wikipedia's many mirrors we get excellent linkage. And, as a courtesy, be sure to add a reciprocal [[WikiPedia:X]] to the Wikitravel article as well. Jpatokal 05:15, 4 Oct 2004 (EDT)

You can make an interwiki link [[WikiTravel:X]]. It'll appear in the text, not with the interlanguage links. -phma 10:07, 4 Oct 2004 (EDT)
Since that was written, a template called {{wikitravel}} has been added (by Wikipedia user Patricknoddy) to Wikipedia which creates a much more eye-catching link. However that template assumes that the Wikipedia and Wikitravel articles have identical names, and our different goals, granularity and disambiguation standards mean this isn't always the case. So I've just created a derivative template which allows you to specify the Wikitravel article name. To use it, enter:
{{wikitravelbyname|Wikitravel article name}}
- Chris j wood 10:06, 17 Oct 2004 (EDT)
FYI: The Wikitravel template is now listed under Templates for deletion, for the regrettably correct reason that Wikitravel is not a Wikimedia project and should not get the Wikimedia-style boxes used by Wikiquote etc. External links are welcome though. Jpatokal 00:34, 18 Oct 2004 (EDT)
Maybe. There is hardly a consensus for deletion there yet; hopefully common sense will prevail and we will either get to keep the templates as they are, or change them to generate simple external links. But it is probably wise not to use the templates any further until the Wikipedia consensus is determined. -- Chris j wood 11:51, 18 Oct 2004 (EDT)


Spanish Wikitravel user Tequendamia has just reported on es: that the Spanish Wikipedia deleted the existing {{wikitravel}} template and also removed all links to es: that had been recently added to Wikipedia articles. Their reasons apparently were:

  1. It's not a WikiMedia project
  2. The linked Spanish Wikitravel articles were just stubs/outlines, with no real content yet

I don't follow w:es policies to judge if they're right or wrong but I guess this should work as a warning for us to be more careful about creating those templates and links there. Ricardo (Rmx) 19:12, 27 April 2006 (EDT)

We've been pretty careful on en: to avoid over-promoting Wikitravel on Wikipedia. It's probably a good idea to treat Wikitravel links like other external links on wp:, and not to be too pushy about them. --Evan 20:56, 27 April 2006 (EDT)

Uniting Wikitravel with Wikipedia, Wikiquote, Wikisource, Wiktionary and Wikibooks?[edit]

[Moved from Travellers' pub by Hypatia 17:30, 18 Dec 2004 (EST)]

I think that Wikitravel should be eaten by the Wikimedia foundation, which owns the Wiki projects mentioned above. (I couldn't find an earlier discussion about this.) It seems to me that all Wiki projects, and especially Wikitravel, should benefit from such a strong alliance. Personally I would have heard a lot earlier about Wikitravel if it was already listed under the other Wiki projects. I'm not sure if this is possible by the differences between by-sa and GFDL though. What do you guys think? Georg Muntingh, 2 Aug 2004

No - disagree strongly. One of the reason I came here was because it wasn't run by the Wikimedia foundation and hence was more international etc. Also cc-by-sa is superior to the GFDL and the wikimedia foundation loves fair use images which are not useable outside the US. Apologies if this sounds like a rant. Caroline 14:42, 2 Aug 2004 (EDT)
1) Wikimedia is much more international than Wikitravel. Wikipedia exists in 100 languages, while Wikitravel exists in 5. 2) Both the Free Software Foundation and the Creative Commons projects are working on making the two licenses compatible to each other. 3) Only the English Wikipedia accepts fair use images.--Erik Möller
I dunno. Being "eaten" by Wikimedia doesn't really sound like the most positive experience.
I also think that it's good to have lots of different kinds of wikis hosted by lots of different organizations. A monoculture wouldn't necessarily be the healthiest wiki ecosystem. The SwitchWiki shows some tens of thousands of wikis on the Internet right now. I don't think Wikimedia should, or wants to, host and manage all those projects. --Evan 11:46, 3 Aug 2004 (EDT)
Okay, I see your points. Georg Muntingh 09:11, 4 Aug 2004 (EDT)
Actually, the number of wikis on SwitchWiki is on the order of thousands, not tens of thousands. It's right there on the page I linked to! Sloppy research on my part, but I think the point is still valid. --Evan 18:16, 19 Aug 2004 (EDT)

Removed bogus link[edit]

I removed this statement: Wikitravel is not a project of the wikimedia foundation. The reason is explained here. There are a lot of reasons that Wikitravel is not a project of the Wikimedia Foundation, but none of them are explained at that link. --Evan 13:12, 25 May 2005 (EDT)

Integrating as a Wikimedia project[edit]

I believe that integrating would be positive for all involved

  • Would provide a secure funding base and reduce the need for google ads
  • Increase editors as no google ads
  • Would make it easier for the two sites to direct people adding content to the better place
  • Would make Wikitravel better know (lots of great content here in a useful format)
  • Would thus speed up the development of the project
  • Potentially increased reliability (I am having trouble viewing this site right now)

I cannot really think of any drawbacks. Wikimedia projects are now under the same license is here. --Doc James 10:25, 23 February 2012 (EST)

Variants

Actions

Destination Docents

In other languages