User talk:50.195.72.217

Hello, 50.195.72.217! Welcome to Wikivoyage.

To help get you started contributing, we've created a tips for new contributors page, full of helpful links about policies and guidelines and style, as well as some important information on copyleft and basic stuff like how to edit a page. If you need help, check out Help, or post a message in the travellers' pub.

By the way, have you considered creating an account here? While you can absolutely keep contributing as an anonymous user, it promises a bunch of benefits, and no obligations.

Thanks for your edits to Riga (and everywhere else as well!)! :) --Nick talk 00:38, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Districts
Hi. Just FYI, changes in district boundaries are not normally taken unilaterally on this site, but are usually subjected to discussion on the appropriate talk page (in this case, Talk:Washington, D.C.) in an attempt to reach a new consensus before action is taken. And now that you've acted, you might want to start a discussion, lest your work is unilaterally reverted, just as you unilaterally took it.

I should add that while I've been to DC a few times, I don't know enough to have my own opinion about optimal districting for the purposes of this site, so I probably won't participate in any new district discussion. But that doesn't mean there shouldn't be one. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:19, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

External links format
Hello, and thanks for your edits to the Washington, D.C. article, but please use front-linking, as shown on the external links page, instead of the deprecated footnote style of linking. Thanks. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:55, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for fixing that so promptly! Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:33, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Listings format
Hi, you might want to look at Listings to see the listing templates that we use now. The listing tags you've been adding to articles in the D.C. area were phased out quite awhile ago. Also, make sure you're not inexplicably deleting content (I'm assuming by accident?) when adding content such as this edit to Bowie, which I ended up reverting. Thanks. Eco84 (talk) 16:27, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
 * What Eco84 said: Thanks for all your edits, but please use listing templates all the time, never the deprecated listing tags. I see a mixture in Cleveland/Downtown. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:39, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Your recent changes
Hi there! I see you're making a lot of comprehensive edits to a lot of different cities. I'd urge you to slow down a bit, though. Some of your edits seem to be reducing sections of prose down to a bare just-the-facts level of information that we discourage. You can see our policy on tone at Tone; it's kind of important that you not change things like this:
 * "Because of its small size, Hartford does not have the tourist-friendly mass-transportation of nearby New York, Boston, or its sister-city, Springfield. Thus, car is the best way to navigate Hartford and its surrounding towns."

to this:
 * "Hartford does not have tourist-friendly and a car is the best way to navigate Hartford and its surrounding towns."

The latter text is not as engaging to the reader as the former. As well, the large number of changes you're making can be very hard to follow for other editors. Using edit summaries would help; so would breaking the edits down into a series of edits, one for each section. We do appreciate your contributions, and if you have any questions, please do ask! -- Powers (talk) 19:05, 13 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I took out the BS. Hartford and Springfield are approximately the same size. Hartford's lack of public transport has nothing to do with its small size. let's be straight and to the point. —The preceding comment was added by 50.195.72.217 (talk • contribs)


 * Hi, and thanks for replying. Please sign posts on talk pages by typing 4 tildes (~) in a row at the end of your message, and indent by using a colon at the beginning of your reply. That way, it's easier to see where your reply starts.


 * I'll add that I get your point about Hartford and Springfield, but also that it's good to summarize reasons for edits like that in edit summaries, so that other people can understand your reasoning.


 * All the best,


 * Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:29, 14 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi. It is great to see you are interested in editing articles such as Hong Kong, however can you please edit more slowly so that changes can be checked? You change here is very hard to compare against the previous version and I really don't want to undo things like this. Andrewssi2 (talk) 12:20, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Please stop with the listing tags
I don't know why you're using listing tags, but please stop, and use only listing templates. From now on, I will revert on sight any edit of yours that includes adding listing tags. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:20, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Calm down - you can always just use the robot to change them to the format you want. Better to have tags than nothing at all. —The preceding comment was added by 50.195.72.217 (talk • contribs)
 * No. There's no good reason for you to use listing tags instead of templates, and there is no "robot" that trawls these pages automatically: someone has to run a bot, and there's no reason for them to do that unless new message tags are introduced, because the bot already, at least in theory, got rid of all the legacy ones a long time ago. And don't edit war. My previous remark stands, and I will act accordingly. And it's not because I'm not "calm,"; it's because you are unnecessarily wasting the time of other volunteer editors. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:58, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

XML listings
Looking at Category:Articles using legacy listings, most of those articles have been edited by you. Since Wikivoyage no longer uses the legacy XML format, I assume you are copying text from Wikitravel - is that the case? When doing so, are you being certain to provide attribution to all Wikitravel authors? If not the changes will need to be reverted as they would be copyright violations, so please provide some clarification as to what is going on. Thanks! -- Ryan &bull; (talk) &bull; 16:13, 12 November 2014 (UTC)


 * One additional note, if the text being copied is your own, original work then simply adding something in the edit summary like "copy of my own original work, also contributed to wikitravel.org" would be sufficient and would clarify to other editors what is going on. However, if you are editing existing articles on Wikitravel and then copying text that combines your own work with the past work of others, those other Wikitravel authors must also be credited in accordance with the CC-SA license.  Such copying is typically discouraged per WV:Wikivoyage and Wikitravel due to past legal action taken by Wikitravel. -- Ryan &bull; (talk) &bull; 16:27, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Edits to Pushkar
Hello again, and thanks for your edits to Pushkar. However, please listify the article, or at least please restore the listing templates you overwrote. Also, what happened to the information about bhang and bhang lassi? Although the information was in the wrong place ("Do", rather than "Drink"), these kinds of things should not be deleted without there being a really good reason. Please restore any content that you overwrote, unless you have a good reason to delete it. Thanks a lot for all your help.

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:52, 1 March 2015 (UTC)


 * DO we need to list "Bhang Lassi" in every city in India? I would think this should only be listed in the article for India since it is not specific to Pushkar. —The preceding comment was added by 50.195.72.217 (talk • contribs)


 * Thanks for your reply, and I get your point. If it's not specific to Pushkar, there's no need to feature it as a local speciality, although if there are places that make a good one, they should be individually listed. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:44, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Your edits to Novgorod
This a lot for this edit. Are you planning on listifying and adding content to the many names of sights that you added by themselves? If so, are you planning to do so soon? Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:03, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your edits to Washington D.C./Shaw. They really describe what these bars and restaurants are like, which is really helpful.

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:57, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Thread on Talk:Washington, D.C.
Hello, User:50.195.72.217, and thank you for plunging forward and editing the Washington, D.C. guide.

That said, there are concerns about your inputting the same information in this article as in the Wikitravel article about D.C. Part of the reason is the history outlined at WV:Wikivoyage and Wikitravel, but arguably a larger issue is that Google penalizes sites for similarity to other sites, so it is in that respect disadvantageous for the same words and phrases to be used on both sites.

I would welcome your input and participation at Talk:Washington, D.C., and when you do go there, please understand that none of the prior comments there are personal; instead, they're based on the factors I mentioned above.

Thanks a lot.

Best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:17, 28 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Sorry to be pushy, but please participate in the discussion on that talk page when you have a moment. Right now, people are talking past you, and my reading of their comments is that they're likely to again revert your work to avoid the Google similarity penalty. Changing only a few words won't help that much. But working with other interested people to come up with a new version that keeps the substantive updates you're making while restoring some of the previous prose or introducing entirely different phrasings could be really good. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:07, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Explaining edits
Hi, and again thanks for being so active.

I think, though, that when you make a substantive edit like this, it's really best if you explain the reason for some of your deletions in an edit summary, or if - as I suspect - a bit more space would be needed, post to the article's talk page. It looks to me like you deleted some good prose here:

''The island itself has been settled as long as there have been Japanese. The original settlement is the now-diminutive fishing port of Tsumuura. The most prominent settlement on the island is Honmura which was established as a coastal castle town in the Sengoku (warring states) period (1467-1568). A number of houses in this town have been radically reformed in the Art House Project. Miyanoura - the port at which you will likely alight - is now the passenger and transport hub for the island, yet remains a sleepy coastal town.''

I see from further reading that the "Art House Project" is quite adequately explained in "See", but there still remains the question of why it is best to overwrite prose that reads well. Sure, some of it could be condensed, but you didn't explain your edits.

And this is also a nice sentence that paints a more vivid picture than the text that remained after your edits:

It is the most popular attraction on the island so try to make it early, before the crowds settle in.

Note that I'm not saying your edits are bad, just that it's good to explain substantive edits. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:21, 13 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Fixed grammar. Information about the art house project does not belong in the history section. —The preceding comment was added by 50.195.72.217 (talk • contribs)


 * Thanks for the reply, but please sign your posts on talk pages by typing 4 tildes (~) at the end.


 * I tend to agree with you about the "History" section, but you did more than fixing grammar; you also made changes in style. "The island has been settled as long as there have been Japanese", if true, belongs in "History". And my point is that you should always endeavor to briefly explain significant edits in edit summaries or on the talk page of the relevant article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:46, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Naoshima was not the first island settled in Japan. That statement is not correct.50.195.72.217 14:29, 14 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Fine, and thanks for explaining. But next time, please indicate your reasons in an edit summary and/or on the talk page for the article. Thanks again for your edits. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:29, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Reorganisation: possibly useful information lost
Hi. You recently moved content from Okayama to a new page Inujima (an organisation I plan to follow in my translation into French), but you removed some information I think is useful. For ex, in the paragraph about the island, this part was lost: "There are often mini festivals on the island and other special art events on off-years. It's also a popular place for swimming, camping, and kayaking in the summertime.". I noticed the same thing than Ikan Kekek and I was not easy to understand why some information disappeared. Was it a mistake or was the origination information not accurate? I think some other contributors may be grateful if you could split your editions in smaller ones. For example, you could move the information in one edit, then in another one modify the content and put in its comment a few words about the modification. ChubbyWimbus may have some opinion about the freshness of the information because he is the main contributor of Okayama page. Cheers. — Fabimaru (talk) 18:22, 17 October 2016 (UTC)


 * It's difficult for me to follow the edits as well. I don't think it was right to move the cycling information out of the "Do" section in Okayama. On WV, cycling is a clear "Do" activity, and that cycling course is a fairly big draw. Also, as a "Do" listing, I believe we were able to mark where it begins which cannot be done as a text entry. I think Inujima should still be mentioned in the Okayama article as it is part of Okayama City. The blurb about kayaking, etc. is accurate. These are advertised tourist activities. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 13:52, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Also, why were the long/lat removed? That's counterproductive. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 13:59, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * The cycling that was moved involved cycling to temples. The temples are "see" items and can also be reached by train+walking. It shouldnt be in the "do" section, unless you want to put "cycle to every temple" in every city. Inujima may need a separate district article because there is a lot to see.50.195.72.217 18:44, 21 October 2016 (UTC)


 * No, the cycling information that was removed was all of it and it was a cycling course. That was explicitly stated in the blurb. It's an established course, not an arbitrary course created by WV. Cycling courses are not required to be boring; there may be things to see along the course. Please do not remove information simply because you are not familiar with it. I'm reinstating the cycling information.

Also, as someone else suggested, your sweeping edits of entire pages make it difficult to follow edits. It's better to edit each heading separately. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 11:30, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

User ban nomination
Hello, User:50.195.72.217. Please be advised that you have been nominated for a user ban on the basis that by making extensive edits, including to Star articles, which harmonize them with Wikitravel articles, you are damaging this site. It's important for you to explain your intentions and address the charges at User ban nominations.

I'll look forward to your input, and I hope that I am right that we can work with you in a cooperative way and that those who have concluded that you are determined to have things your way, even if that requires edit wars, are wrong.

All the best,

Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:48, 29 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Regarding edits like this one, it's worth re-iterating that several editors have raised serious concerns about text being copied from WT to WV when the text being copied isn't an obvious improvement. I think people appreciate it when you update listing details, but direct copying from WT to WV is seen as harmful to Wikivoyage unless the text in question is obviously out of date or otherwise incorrect.  You may want to comment further at the discussion that has been reopened at User ban nominations. -- Ryan &bull; (talk) &bull; 21:27, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

50.195.72.217The text in question was out of date on both and I made changes to both, including updated URLs for listings and removing closed listings. If you prefer, I can just update WT and leave WV out of date. Let me know.


 * I'm just trying to mediate a dispute in which concerns have been raised about text being copied verbatim and can't personally "let you know" what to do. Insofar as you have shown a desire to contribute to both sites it would be nice if there was a way to address concerns about copied text, ideally by using different wording when updating prose on both sites.  Alternately, if you have a suggestion for addressing concerns raised it would be great if you could comment at the discussion I linked to above. -- Ryan &bull; (talk) &bull; 00:41, 14 January 2017 (UTC)