Talk:Nature parks in Catalonia

Wikivoyage style
Thanks for starting this article! All that empty space and an unbroken stream of photos are not in keeping with English Wikivoyage style, specifically Image policy. It's not necessary to provide photos of every park, just some illustrative examples for the topic. Also, does anyone plan on creating individual articles about each park? If not, let's remove the red links. Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:57, 30 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi. I'm still working with some issues.
 * I created this page with the same style as this one: Canadian national parks. In fact I adapted much of the code.
 * for an unknown reason some parks that DO HAVE a page, apear in red. any help on solving that will be welcome.
 * I plan to create pages for most of them, but is going to take me some time.
 * Mmorell (talk) 17:28, 30 August 2023 (UTC)


 * No rush on anything. I know that some of the other park articles are not in Wikivoyage style, either. The Canadian national parks article is one of them. Could you please give an example of a park with an article that's showing up as a red link here? Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:46, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi. I was wrong. some parks exist in the english wikipedia but not in wikivoyage. So all of them has to be created.
 * Can you tell me which page, with a list of parks, is a good example to follow? I want to create the parks list in Barcelona province and having and example which follows the rules will be helpful.
 * Thanks Mmorell (talk) 08:52, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't think there's any really exemplary article about all the national parks in a given country or continent. I did some work on Canadian national parks and brought it closer to Wikivoyage style, but that article and United States national parks both have too many photos in a row too close to each other for Image policy. By contrast, African national parks has a pathetically small number of images and lots of red links. The happy medium is somewhere in between, but more toward the former. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:07, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi. I've seen what you have done in canada parks and adapted this format to Nature Parks in Catalonia. I Hope now is ok with rules Mmorell (talk) 10:49, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Still too many photos: I count two that are completely below the codes at the bottom of the page on my browser and one of which at least 2/3 of it is below those codes. However, if this article should have more content and that content is added, it might be able to support those photos. They're nice photos, but it's inessential to provide all of them. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:09, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
 * HI. I've checked in my browser (firefox) in my working screen and all of them fit in the page. However checking in a much higger resolution screen everythink fall out of section. Even the map.
 * I'll delete a couple of photos.
 * For which resolution and browser zoom it is supposed that pages has to work?? Mmorell (talk) 08:49, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
 * The guidelines aren't defined that way, I think. Here's the loose guideline at Image policy: "For longer articles, 1 image per screen (1,000–2,000 bytes) is generally adequate." Have a look at the rest of the guidelines at that link, if you haven't yet had a chance to do so. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:25, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
 * As a tangent, you also don't want this page to be something like New South Wales national parks (which has a lot of red links). -- SHB2000  (talk &#124; contribs &#124; meta) 10:58, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
 * National parks lists about a dozen articles on national parks in a certain country (with slightly varying scope). I don't know what ones would be good examples, but any of the developed ones might provide some inspiration. –LPfi (talk) 16:23, 1 September 2023 (UTC)