Wikivoyage/Lounge/Archive/2014-03-30

Logo round 2

Voting in Round 2 of the Wikivoyage logo contest is underway at Wikivoyage/Logo. Have your say by supporting one or more choices, and/or participating in the discussion! This, that and the other (talk) 08:40, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Beta versus full launch

WikiVoyage could potential launch in beta Nov 6th, 2012 on WMF servers. We have an issue surrounding moving images over to Commons (ie they will not all be their for a least a few weeks and thus some/most images will be red links). We are having a straw poll on if we should deal with images before a "beta" opening or defer any opening until after the images have been moved. Please weight in here [1] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:10, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed that the "it could be a bit bumpy while we're still in Beta" messages at the top of the English language version of Wikivoyage have now been removed recently. Does that mean that version is now out of Beta, please? --_singaporeAlice 03:42, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The message has not been removed, although it's possible you dismissed it. LtPowers (talk) 15:22, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're right - I suppose it will be January now before the launch --_singaporeAlice 18:46, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Translation

Will "Wikivoyage" be translated for other languages? Gálaniitoluodda (talk) 16:43, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Depends on the language version. For Russian Wikivoyage, we are running the poll right now. For the languages using the Latin alphabet is probably the most reasonable to leave it untranslated, but it is up to these communities.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:50, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My instinct would be to transliterate the English/French term to the target language, rather than translate -- if only because we may end up with conflicts in languages that don't have different words for "Travel" and "Voyage". LtPowers (talk) 18:43, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In Russian, transliteration does not really sound nicely.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:57, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish and Portuguese language versions

They are up! See voy:es:Página_principal and voy:pt:Página_principal.Welcome to the family! :-) --Globe-trotter (talk) 21:58, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

wikivoyage.eu

Apologies if this is being discussed elsewhere, but is there a plan to update [2] to the new website location? --Inas (talk) 02:14, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The move of the domain from the WV association to the WMF is still in process. -- Der Fussi 06:46, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the ownership isn't as important as the IP. Can't it just be made a CNAME? --Inas (talk) 00:06, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think one can CNAME the base domain name, just the individual subdomains. Redirecting it (HTTP error 302) should work, maybe they could do that? Changing the domain name server to point at a Wikimedia IPv4/IPv6 address only works if the Wikimedia servers are configured to return a sensible response to a request for the domain. K7L (talk) 00:13, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If we're going to the effort of redirects, then it is only the portal page that responds to the .eu address. Every link from there goes to wikivoyage-old.org. --Inas (talk) 05:02, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Interlingual Portal

On EN we're currently attempting to overhaul our main pages for both desktop computers and mobile devices and I thought it might also be nice to have a look at what we could do with the Interlingual Portal as it was earmarked for improvement on the Roadmap. I assume it's made in pure HTML, so is probably harder to edit collaboratively. What sort of things would we like to see? --Nicholasjf21 (talk) 11:48, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When you write "the Interlingual Portal", do you mean Www.wikivoyage.org template or Wikivoyage? --Stefan2 (talk) 12:47, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I mean the www.wikivoyage.org template in this case. --Nicholasjf21 (talk) 14:48, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Style pages on Meta

I just noticed there are a bunch of style "policy" pages on Meta/Wikivoyage (see special:allpages/Wikivoyage). What is their purpose, given that language versions have autonomy to develop their own style policies? I note that they are quite out-of-step with :en's policies. --Peter ^Talk 00:48, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly style policy pages do you mean? Most of the pages listed there are old service pages needed for different activities during the transition period, and are now historical.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:24, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikivoyage Logo

Hi everyone!

I was just messing around a bit and thought I'd have a go at making a Wikivoyage logo. I've created a new symbol (right) and wordmark. You can see the full selection, with (rather pretentious!) explanation here. There's also a mock-up of the site's portal using the logo here. Any comments or suggestions would be very welcome! --Nick ^talk 23:11, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I like it a lot but would prefer a slightly more subdued blue color. This one is a little too bright. Texugo (talk) 23:21, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic! I think it would also make a great north arrow for our maps, with the point turned up (though I guess then it would also gain a passing resemblance to the Eiffel Tower, but then that might be a good thing for a travel guide). PerryPlanet (talk) 23:36, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To quote myself... I'll happily say I'm a big fan of this! It suggests a V for Voyage, flight, a compass, and even a bit of ocean waves, while being very simple and sleek. Regarding the font, I think a little blue in it would be nice, but I like the font style itself. --Peter ^Talk 23:44, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments! I've darkened the blue slightly to make it a little less 'sharp'. --Nicholasjf21 (talk) 23:55, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What's the purpose of this logo? Would this be limited to certain uses? Replace the current Wikivoyage logo? AHeneen (talk) 23:58, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is a really nice work, and I agree with Peter's comments above. That said, I do not think we should focus on changing the logo right now in view of so many pressing / unresolved issues that, IMHO, should take precedence in occupying our limited time and attention. PrinceGloria (talk) 23:59, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The idea would be to replace the current logo, yes. Hopefully, this won't take too much time or organisation from everyone. --Nick ^talk 00:04, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I hear there may be an extenuating motive to change the logo. If so it would be nice if someone could give us a little info on that. Is there some legal issue? Texugo] 01:27, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I myself like the current logo better which I have by now used to create this neat derivative promotional image, this Wikignome derivative image, and to create the Hebrew Wikivoyage logo. I know that by now a lot of other derivative versions of the Wikivoyage logo have been made and that it would take a lot of time to redo them all (why didn't you hand in your suggestion in the [Wikivoyage logo drive] held half a year ago?) ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 02:59, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your work and thought behind it, but honestly speaking I prefer much more the current logo because, without any explanation it gives me the idea of the globe traveled in any direction, furthermore it's seems a 3D globe. --Andyrom75 (talk) 06:20, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

About a quarter of a year there was a comprehensive 2-round logo discussion and poll. I think we do not need a new discussion at this time. --RolandUnger (talk) 07:07, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the previous speakers. After all, the new logo is already established. Therefore I see no reason to change it now. --NatiSythen (talk) 07:17, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I also like better the previous one who is relatively new so if there is no legal reasons to change it, I'll rater keep the previous one--Adehertogh (talk) 08:02, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Current logo is quite good and better than proposed one. Current was selected in a long voting and discussion just a few months ago - do you want to change a logo each half a year? I don't see any reasons for it. --Base (talk) 13:05, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is my understanding that there is a legal reason why we will have to change, but I would prefer to let the WMF make this known themselves on their own timeframe.

Also, many Wikivoyagers were pretty unhappy with the last process--in particular, we felt overwhelmed by votes from users who are not Wikivoyage contributors. We actually don't allow voting on most versions of Wikivoyage! Our culture emphasizes discussion and consensus, and even that was ignored when setting up the last process. (And I have to be frank, the sort of knee jerk comments with pretty careless non-arguments like "we already have one," "I like the other one," contrasted with the serious thought Nick has put into designing a logo that would complement our culture and mission, reinforce concerns I have about the negative effect on consideration and discussion that voting produces.)

Within the Wikivoyage community, we have been pretty clear since the migration that we will have another look at our graphics. --Peter ^Talk 16:37, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The official announcement has been made. Texugo (talk) 16:48, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but what is the legal reason? --Ralgis (talk) 16:55, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please click the link immediately above your comment... --Peter ^Talk 16:56, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Thank you. --Ralgis (talk) 17:00, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The current logo is beautiful. Chocolate con galleta (talk) 23:10, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We cannot keep the current logo. That is not up for debate. LtPowers (talk) 00:22, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments about this logo

Blue text

So, this discussion was quickly derailed, and it would be nice to get back to thoughts and suggestions about Nick's idea. I wanted to share the version with a suggested font to the right too. There are more mockups here along with an explanation from Nick of his thinking. --Peter ^Talk 17:32, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here are versions for :ru and :es too. With Wikiviajes in a gray (I think the blue looks more Wikivoyagey, and complements the icon color). --Peter ^Talk 17:43, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Peter! If anyone would like to see another language version, just let me know what text you want and I'll sort it out. --Nick ^talk 17:57, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:26, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

From what I see, we need Greek, Hebrew, Polish, and Ukrainian.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:28, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'll get on it! Nick ^talk 20:31, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Does the grey or the blue look better on the text? --Nick ^talk 20:05, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gray; this particular blue, aside from being very similar to that used by a certain other travel site, has much more green in it than the rest of the logo. They seem to clash to me. LtPowers (talk) 20:18, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Having looked a bit closer, I think you're probably right. It does look a little close to another site's logo and is a little clashing. I'll change it back. --Nick ^talk 20:23, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is probably a stupid question, but shouldn't the image be on the right side for the Hebrew version? (RTL) PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:37, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think the text will actually go underneath the icon, eventually. --Peter ^Talk 05:47, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Peter's right - the plan would be for them ultimately to look like this:

Sorry for putting it on the wrong side though! --Nick ^talk 10:46, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the final two versions and flipped the Hebrew one round, though ultimately it shouldn't matter! --Nick ^talk 19:19, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for round one of the new logo selection opens!

Technically starts at 00:01 UTC, but meh. You can see Wikivoyage/Logo/2013 for more information, but I'm sure you all know about this already; this is just a reminder in that case. PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:56, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Thanks to the Wikivoyage community, the WMF, and other volunteers (special thanks to Rillke) for making this new logo selection as painless as possible. PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:06, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Logo-riffic

Okay, pardon my language, but what the hell do we have to do to get a logo that doesn't use the meta-wiki color scheme? LtPowers (talk) 22:58, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Consider it lucky that the winning globe icon was disqualified for legal reasons. It boils down to this - great logos are never chosen, let alone designed, by a voting population.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 49.180.117.48 (talk • contribs) .

I'd modify that to "rarely"; I think we had a pretty good logo for WT. And the new logo isn't bad, it just uses the worst possible color scheme. LtPowers (talk) 15:41, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. And Wikivoyagers like Lenka font, why we can look cubism-font? Digr (talk) 16:57, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well... you know, I like it :-) --Andyrom75 (talk) 14:34, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but why? Wikipedia doesn't use RGB; Wiktionary doesn't use RBG; Wikibooks doesn't use RGB; Wikisource doesn't use RGB; Wikiquote doesn't use RGB... only Wikispecies does, and even then they use muted low-saturation versions of the colors. LtPowers (talk) 00:13, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just for joking I would reply that you always say that we have to be unique ;-) Seriously speaking, I like the RGB combination and I don't see any cons of having a similar palette of meta or a different one from the ones of the other projects. The alternative proposed palettes were so "cold" (I had the same feeling for the green baloon). RGB can be a good compromise between a cold-palette and a "circus"-palette :-) As I wrote weeks ago I see a big potential on this logo; a creative guy could develop nice animation with those arrows, and maybe the arrows can also change their colors during that animation ;) --Andyrom75 (talk) 10:47, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We've had some quite nice comments about the logo through our Twitter feed. I particularly like this user's interpretations - naval bunting's quite a nice idea... --Nick ^talk 21:36, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ShareMap - Wikimedia grant - community feedback needed

Hello, WikiVoyagers ShareMap is applying for Wikimedia grant to continue project development. One of ShareMap principles is preparing map authoring usable for WikiVoyage authors and readers (even if it is not very project in Wikimedia scale, we really believe in its success).

One of grant results will be creation free mobile off line map viewer application for maps created by Wikimedia community.

I will be very happy for endorsement, opinions or even criticism from all WikiVoyage community member on Wikimedia grant project.

Grants:IEG/ShareMap#Part_3:_Community_Discussion

If you would like to learn more about ShareMap project please visit:

--Jkan997 (talk) 23:09, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]