Wikivoyage talk:Event articles

Slush and Vivid
I don't understand the nutshell:
 * "Only big and major events such as the Olympics, or occurs in too many locations to list in one city (such as vivid sydney or Slush in Helsinki) gets its own article on Wikivoyage"

Slush in Helsinki occurs in Helsinki, and affects travellers only in the Helsinki region (through outsold lodging), and I suppose Vivid Sydney also mostly affects Sydney. From the Understand I understand the reason for Vivid to be mentioned is that it would "make the relevant city too long". Slush would perhaps also, if we tried to cover the programme of the event, but as it has a quite narrow target audience, I don't see the need for more than warning about outsold lodgings, and one paragraph is enough.

–LPfi (talk) 05:45, 9 August 2021 (UTC)


 * You'd know about Slush better than me, but for vivid, trying to cover all this in one article is quite difficult. I read somewhere that slush is also in Japan as well, and so it doesn't just have to be for interstate travellers. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 06:10, 9 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Yes, the Slush has expanded, but they are different events (kind of offspring, with some of the organisation in common, but not meant to be attended in the same go). Slush in Helsinki is just in Helsinki (or at least not extending outside the region). I don't think it is an event we should try to cover, as the target audience is better served by their own pages (at least unless we have an involved editor), more than to warn about outsold lodgings.


 * For Vivid, the point is that it would overwhelm the Sydney article, which is a totally different concern. I think we need to keep these separate.


 * –LPfi (talk) 06:47, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Get in
I am afraid the current wording suggests copying the Get in of the location and then even expanding it: "by all types of transport possible"; Le Mont-Dore and Helsinki should include how to get to those. I'd suggest linking the relevant destination articles for most of Get in and concentrating on transport specific for the event, such as shuttles to the event area, pointing out relevant parts of the ordinary public transport, and telling about relevant parking arrangements etc. –LPfi (talk) 07:38, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * LPfi, plunge forward. If you think it should be changed, then go for it. I'll probably replace the Le Mont-Dore example because I miss that town a lot, and I was probably biased when writing that. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:18, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * For large events it may also be useful to describe ways of getting to the venue avoid nearby transport hotspots. If the local airport is likely to be very busy, it may be cheaper and more pleasant to fly into another airport 1-2 hours away by train.
 * Should Get in also cover arriving at the venue, buying tickets (if not covered by prepare), venue security or check-in requirements? Alternative we could have a separate section for this. (May not be required for open events like Vivid, but allow an hour to get through ticket checks, security etc at an event like the Olympics.) AlasdairW (talk) 20:55, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I now did the rewrite, including the suggestions by AlasdairW. I removed most examples, as they didn't deal with the relation to the Get ins of the cities, and developed the Helsinki one. I think we should readd a couple of examples, especially some with event-specific arrangements. Helsinki is not an internationally well-known city like Camberra, but it is still well-connected enough, with a sufficient Get in section. —The preceding comment was added by LPfi (talk • contribs) at 07:20, 10 August 2021
 * I thought Helsinki had twice the population of Canberra, but anyway, thanks for the copyedits :-) --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 07:37, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Might be, but I think anyone (in my bubbles) will recognise the name Canberra and know it is in Australia, while I am not so sure Helsinki is well-known internationally. –LPfi (talk) 07:52, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Helsinki is the first thing that comes to mind when talking about the Nordic countries. Others like Turku and Stockholm also do come to mind, but I always think Helsinki. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 22:50, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Seriously, LPfi? I would say Helsinki is much better known globally than Canberra. The Australian cities that are best known are Sydney and Melbourne. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:16, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * And maybe Cairns for the reef. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 23:22, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Of course anybody around here knows Helsinki. I am happy if people also far away know the city, but for that I really have no way to check – anecdotal evidence suggested they might not. –LPfi (talk) 08:26, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't know if it's just Australia though, as 20 years ago before Korea had really good skiing resorts, people would have to go up there if they wanted to do professional skiing. Ours isn't really that great at all, but I'm still okay with skiing down such low altitudes (1300m). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 08:35, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Commonwealth games
Would that merit its own article? It's fairly large enough. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 22:50, 10 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Yes, I think Glasgow 2014 is the only Commonwealth Games article that we have. I have thought about creating one for Birmingham 2022, but not got round to it with the ever changing travel difficulties this year. [AlasdairW] 20:27, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Event articles
I was thinking whether maybe to introduce a new event article status (just like city, park, region, dive, itinerary etc.). To me, event articles don't really feel like a "Travel topic" to me. Travel topics usually just explain the sites of xxx relating to yyy.

A good example to bring up while were at this is Tokyo 2020. It has all the sites and everything, and it'll all make sense now, but not in a few years time, unless someone is keen on visiting them again.

Anyone else for that idea?

--SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 04:22, 29 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Worth thinking about. Are you thinking that anything needs to change other than the immediate categorisation in the hierarchy and the swap from e.g. usabletopic to usableevent? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 08:18, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Maybe creating a page on Event article status. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 08:20, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ at User:SHB2000/Event articles. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 08:40, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Events redirects to Activities which has no relevant content. Major events will often be the reason for travel to a city, should upcoming events be listed there or somewhere? But I suggest we should clear out past events, WV is not a historic record like WP. Though of course it's helpful to mention them as part of the city's history and legacy infrastructure. Grahamsands (talk) 08:54, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * We could perma protect all of the past event articles (such as Beijing 2008), since, why delete all the hard work that some contributors have put in for events. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 08:57, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Because the criterion is current / future value for the traveller, not the "sunk cost" of time already spent. Grahamsands (talk) 09:02, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * True. But again, they're archived. But anyway, I did do some modifications to stbox, and so now other templates like outlineevent should work now. It can always be deleted and reverted if it doesn't get community consensus SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:14, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

I think it is helpful to separate categories of travel topics – if we can give more detailed guidance through the separation and indeed do give that guidance. I suppose the status table now is just a copy. To make the separation useful, there needs to be some work done making the separate status table and the separate guidance indeed useful. I believe WV:Events should be fairly well developed before the separate category is worthwhile. Until then the general travel topic category offers enough flexibility. I don't think "travel topic" for an event is any worse than "city" for a resort.

On the old events: the articles should be kept. Our mission is not keeping historic records, but neither is it deleting history. They do no harm, if the name includes the year, and they are useful for a slew of reasons, including as models for future event articles

–LPfi (talk) 09:57, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * But is it the intention also to create a list of upcoming events? The really really big ones, that might merit their own page? I'd blithely assumed there already was one that I'd never searched for. It's easily created so long as it's confined to two-liners - date, city, nature and links is all - but it would need curating. Grahamsands (talk) 14:36, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * (LATER) I went ahead and created Events as a stub. Grahamsands (talk) 19:26, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't this fall under this previous VfD? Also, it seems we already have a category: Category:Calendar of events and festivals. Powers (talk) 01:59, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * That page appears defunct and demonstrates the impracticality of listing events that are merely "very big". The distinction here is events so huge that you can't not plan around them, and WV would be deficient not to summarise them somewhere. I think the present page is viable only if it stays focussed on that, and rebuffts attempts by the Albanian Golf Association to publicise all their qualifying rounds. However if there are external sporting and cultural listing sites that we think are comprehensive and reliable, those might be linked. Grahamsands (talk) 08:15, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I'll be drafting on that so hold on a sec. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:44, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Events so huge you can't not plan around them, need not be that huge, if they happen to happen where you are going. Something light Slush with some 25.000 participants is enough that you won't find lodging in Helsinki. I listed it locally because of that, although it isn't of interest for the average traveller. Does the OS have non-local effects on travel? –LPfi (talk) 16:09, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Sure, an event might be disruptive for a city, region or entire country, and you'd mention accordingly. This page aims for the very biggest and I doubt that, say, golf or tennis majors would qualify. Once the external sites are linked, the Events page will look "usable", and we can continue discussion on its own Talk page. Grahamsands (talk) 14:22, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * (Above conversation was copied to Events: Talk to set out the background, but not swept as it's a side-thread from the issue of "Events" as a page category - GS 8/8)


 * I support a separate "event" status for articles about events. Event articles are designed differently than travel topics and deserve their own status within the system. This would enable more focus within our travel topic status as well. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 14:39, 5 August 2021 (UTC)


 * I've just tested the tag out at London 2012. Have I missed anything? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:47, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Looks good. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 11:51, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * It looks odd to be asking readers to "plunge forward and help the article grow" on a defunct event, so maybe there needs to be a separate status box for past events? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:53, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * We've used the tt template before, so not a big difference since that also said to plunge forward. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:54, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * We did, but I'm suggesting that going forward, if we're going to use a new set of templates, we might as well use ones that make sense. Once an event is over, it doesn't really matter if an article is at 'Outline' or 'Guide' level.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 12:02, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * It could be used for historical records. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 13:00, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * If people wanted to, we could expand the template's internals to be date-sensitive, and leave out that sentence or not display the entire tag (e.g., starting the following year). You would then type something like   in the wikitext. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:02, 6 August 2021 (UTC)