Talk:Salar de Uyuni

= Sub-division, itineraries = Since this article covers stuff also from quite far-away from the salt area (basically the Andina Eduardo Avaroa natioanl reserve), should it perhaps be moved to relevant separate article?

Also, the list is probably too long - adding the itineraries (present in the original articles, before "pruning") could be quite useful for deciding how much time the stuff takes... Any suggestions how to do it? Andree.sk (talk) 21:13, 14 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I think this article is still a long way from being too large. See listings can be rather long lists, when there's a lot to see. Which ones would you say are not on the Salar de Uyuni? It's a 10.000km2 area... much larger than the national reserve. One complete article serves the traveller better than several half-empty ones, so I'd suggest we only move or split when it's really necessary. If there are sights that are outside the direct area but wouldn't fit better in any specific other article, we could also include them under Go Next. JuliasTravels (talk) 11:58, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Copyright violation for the last 6+ years?

 * This discussion began in the pub as a fork of Wikivoyage_talk:Wikivoyage_and_Wikitravel.

Look at Salar de Uyuni. Now, look at www.boliviahostels.com's Uyuni Travel Guide, starting with "Salar de Uyuni Tours and Uyuni Salt Flat Tours". There was a thread started about this on Talk:Salar de Uyuni in 2010! I think that the irregular headings in the itinerary article suggest that it was ripped off from a tour site, not vice versa. If you agree, the solution at this late date still would be to delete the article and begin from scratch. Please state your case at Talk:Salar de Uyuni. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:16, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I say nuke it from orbit and start with a blank slate. There seems to be no alternative to deletion, and frankly it is embarrassing that this could escape attention for so long... Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:19, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Have a look at this. I am not sure whether that also introduces back content from the previously deleted copvio. I'd advise you to not copy anything from WT at this point in time, until and unless we resolve policy on this issue in favor of allowing copying. Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:15, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Do the diff, I did copy almost nothing... Only the skeleton of attractions is so far the same, but you can go check, I could've as well used that filtered through translator .-) (but didn't...) Andree.sk (talk) 20:22, 14 February 2017 (UTC)


 * To be clear, current policy does not prevent copying of content from WT so no need to 'wait for any discussion to resolve'. Discussing something in the community does not have any impact at all until a consensus decision to change policy has been made.
 * Clear copyright violations should have that content deleted, leaving a skeleton. I dare say a good deal of articles suffer from copying from third party sources. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 21:58, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Could you give an example of what you mean by "copied from third party sources"? Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:51, 14 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Knock yourself out --Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:28, 15 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Could you be a tad more specific? Maybe give a concrete example? Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:19, 16 February 2017 (UTC)


 * "A clear-blue lake, coloured by magnesium and manganese" is used verbatim in www.boliviahostels.com's Uyuni Travel Guide, with the exception of the spelling of "colored". Please check everything carefully against the hostel's site. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:48, 16 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Indeed. Regardless of how we feel about copying from WT, the article there is also a real copyright violation from a third party, so in this particular case the WT article can not at all be used as a Creative Commons source. JuliasTravels (talk) 10:44, 16 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I couldn't agree more. Andree.sk, please help by checking everything you added from WT against the source I cite above and making sure to edit out all copyright violation as soon as possible, since www.boliviahostels.com is a copyrighted site. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:56, 16 February 2017 (UTC)


 * That was my intention - I only left some generic few-word sentences. Anyhow, even that is gone now... Andree.sk (talk) 17:17, 16 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot. In the future, if you'd like to edit some copy-pasted sentences and lessen the possibility that others may be concerned, you could always do it on your user page and then input it into the destination article when you're done editing. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:09, 16 February 2017 (UTC)