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:World Heritage Expedition"

From Wikitravel
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Updating sites and organising by date)
(Updating sites and organising by date: +)
 
Line 15: Line 15:
  
 
:I updated the list with year 2012 inscriptions few days ago, but I don't know if before that the list was complete with the other 936 or so. [[User:Jjtk|Jjtk]] 05:37, 16 July 2012 (EDT)
 
:I updated the list with year 2012 inscriptions few days ago, but I don't know if before that the list was complete with the other 936 or so. [[User:Jjtk|Jjtk]] 05:37, 16 July 2012 (EDT)
 +
::Yeah, I noticed you've updated it. Good work on that; it's even more up-to-date than the Wikipedia articles! Let's assume that it's completely up-to-date now; maybe in future, we can have a bot or something count them all and confirm. So I recommend we simply add a notice to the top stating <nowiki><!-- Up-to-date as of the 2012 inscription --></nowiki> That way, we can know to simply add the extra sites each year; much more simple. <big>[[User:JamesA|<font face="Segoe UI"><font color="#4682b4"><big>J</big>ames'''<small>A</small>'''</font></font>]]</big>  <sup>[[User talk:JamesA|<font face="Segoe UI"><font color="#191970">'''>talk'''</font></font>]]</sup> 23:50, 16 July 2012 (EDT)

Latest revision as of 03:54, 17 July 2012

World Heritage Expedition[edit]

Archived from the Pub:

I've kickstarted a World Heritage Expedition to update and complete our list of UNESCO World Heritage Sites and knock off one of the last remaining Wikitravel milestones. There's a fair bit of work to be done, but there are "only" 878 sites, so this is eminently doable. Chip in! Jpatokal 23:09, 6 December 2008 (EST)

Yay, just to make sure, a country is done even if the linked pages are stubs? e.g. Denmark would be considered complete as it is? --Stefan (sertmann) Talk 23:24, 6 December 2008 (EST)
Yes, at least in my opinion. Jpatokal 00:19, 7 December 2008 (EST)

Updating sites and organising by date[edit]

Right now, when we update a country, we add a tag based off the year the most recent WH site was added, per "Use last year the list was updated, not the current date." But there seems to be some confusion. Take Benin for example. Abomey, its only site, was inscribed in 1985, yet the hidden subtext says it was "Updated in 2011". So are we basing the dates off a country's newest site's year of inscription, the year a WT user last added a site to the list, or the year the list was last checked and confirmed?

Considering the list is only updated anually, I suggest we have just one tag/comment at the top that states the year the list was last checked and updated with new sites. So now, we should update the list with the 26 new sites that were inscribed this year and put "Up-to-date as of the 2012 inscription". JamesA >talk 04:51, 16 July 2012 (EDT)

I updated the list with year 2012 inscriptions few days ago, but I don't know if before that the list was complete with the other 936 or so. Jjtk 05:37, 16 July 2012 (EDT)
Yeah, I noticed you've updated it. Good work on that; it's even more up-to-date than the Wikipedia articles! Let's assume that it's completely up-to-date now; maybe in future, we can have a bot or something count them all and confirm. So I recommend we simply add a notice to the top stating <!-- Up-to-date as of the 2012 inscription --> That way, we can know to simply add the extra sites each year; much more simple. JamesA >talk 23:50, 16 July 2012 (EDT)

Variants

Actions

Destination Docents

In other languages