Wauteurz' talk page archive. 

• Tens
  • '16
  • '17
  • '18
  • '19
• Twenties
  • '20
  • '21
  • '22
  • '23

Well done!

	The Wikivoyage Barncompass
	For getting Rail travel in the Netherlands from zero to future FTT hero in four months. Thank you for this outstanding contribution! --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 19:11, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Dank je wel! There are still some things that I'd like to add at some point, such as the icons for signs found in stations I mentioned on the talk page, but the article is just as well-off without those. I too am very happy with what the article has become :)
-- Wauteurz (talk) 19:16, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Gefeliciteerd. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 20:57, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Template:Rail-interchange

Hi! Once you are done, please push the changes also back to en.wikipedia.org. I'd like to setup a bot later, to sync this automatically (from WP to WV), so your changes would be overwritten... Thanks! Andree.sk (talk) 16:46, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Hey there, I am not sure if it is all that useful to automatically transfer the changes from enWP to enWV for the simple reason that {{RouteBox}} gets called from the template as is. I won't have to tell you that this template used on Wikipedia is conflicting with our Template:Routebox. Also, I can't push back the changes. I will have to put in an edit request as the template on enWP is locked. I've already submitted an edit request. The template here needs some tending to though. For one, all instances of {{RouteBox}} should be transferred to {{Routebox entry}}, getting its links adapted in the process. While editing I've found that specific problem with Riyadh. There may be more or alike conflicts hidden in the other 160K bytes of the template. I'm not saying transferring the edits from enWP would be impossible, but I do think that it would be better to adapt the template for our own use and let it live its own life here, independent from its counterpart on enWP. Also, as a sidenote: Template:Rail-interchange should most likely be added to Category:Experimental templates until it is ready for proper usage ;)
-- Wauteurz (talk) 17:57, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Oh.... oh... I thought that it will suffice to use raw WP templates for the rint stuff, and perhaps just find some black magic to convert the links (for the links to other point to wikipedia, or discard the links completely). But I didn't have time to look into it yet, so in fact there may be unsolvable issues like you are describing. In this case, it'd probably then best to just mass-import all the WP/rint templates, if it doesn't make sense to sync. Andree.sk (talk) 19:12, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Having done a quick scan through the template, I have only been able to find {{RouteBox}} as a template that gets called (> 450 times) but doesn't exist. I'm not sure if this conflicts with our Template:Routebox, but just to be sure, I think we might as well merge enWP's RouteBox into our Template:Routebox entry, since ours doesn't get used a lot either way and enWP's RouteBox lets us link somewhere (which isn't impossible in Routebox entry) and lets us use fonts if we so desire (which we currently cannot). The six usages of Routebox entry can be changed easily within a day and one can easily switch {{RouteBox}} for {{Routebox entry}} using nearly any word processing software. It'll save you from mass-importing and will make you able to use the bot to sync the templates after all (so long as the bot knows that {{RouteBox}} should be replaced with {{Routebox entry}} and is able to do so).
-- Wauteurz (talk) 19:31, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi. I have switched most of "my pages" to {{station/sandbox}}, so that we can then easily (and almost outage-free) switch normal {{station}} later. The only left-out is Paris, where they have the stuff like rint|paris|m|2, which would be job for your new rint, I guess :) So anyway, you could perhaps do the same - and after most of the simple stuff is done, we can also go forward and switch {{rint}} for your version - and finish up. What do you say? I didn't see any real resistance in the pub... Andree.sk (talk) 19:41, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

@Andree.sk: At this time, I'm quite busy with stuff at uni, and it will take two to three weeks for that to cool down to where I'll permit myself to come back and edit here. My RINT is done in the sense that everything that is in the current RINT has been switched over, and that documentation is done for every entry in the template. There are still lines and networks to add in the future, though, but I do not think that those are very urgent at this time. If you want to, you can move User:Wauteurz/RINT to {{Rail-interchange/sandbox}} in anticipation of replacing {{rint}}. I didn't notice any disapproval of the modified, new RINT either, so I'd say we're good to go. Again, I'd rather not do it myself as I'll most likely get sucked back into nitpicking minor issues with the template, which I can't really have happening when I have three large projects to finish and hand in in the first half of April. If you'd like me to, I could create a little project page for RINT, detailing how to edit the template, how to document those edits and what the goals are for RINT, so that the step to plunging forward on the template gets lowered somewhat for others if it is ought to be beneficial for new editors to come in.
-- Wauteurz (talk) 09:24, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

@Andree.sk: Done I've moved the new RINT to {{Rail-interchange/sandbox}}. Would you like me to also move RINT/doc over? RINT/item (for displaying outputs in RINT/doc) is an exact copy of {{Rail-interchange item}} and won't need moving, and RINT/box is what I've moved to {{RbE}} about a month ago, so that won't need moving either. For documentation's sake, I'm done with most work at uni, so I should be able to focus a lot more on finishing up new RINT again.
-- Wauteurz (talk) 11:46, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Okay, I've finished the crusade to move all uses of {{rint}} to your template, which also included some fun with {{station}}. Now it's +/- done, excluding paris (still). If you'd like to review my changes, be my guest :) Otherwise, I'll overwrite the main templates (now +- unused) with the /sandbox versions, and then also remove the references from /sandbox to non-/sandbox stuff... That way, noone should notice any broken pages (but you may have noticed that e.g. Arnhem or Amstelveen temporarily use the original rint stuff, because that's what's included from {{station/sandbox}}...).

I only have one note - we should consider decreasing the height of the icons, I'd say 1px or 2px from both top and bottom. Now it looks a bit too intrusive, and will probably look bad in the London articles... 19:39, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Clicking around RecentChanges a bit, I can happily congratulate at having done a great job! The height of the icon's isn't easily changed though. The icons are achieved through spans, which just wrap around the text  Like so . The border, which doesn't always show as it is the background colour by default is already set to  2px , as a single pixel was too small in my opinion. Either way, the one thing I can do, would be to wrap the entire template in smalltext,  Like so , which might actually be a good idea now that I think of it. You could throw smalltext around any RINT output at this time like so: <small>{{Rail-interchange/sandbox|paris|7bis}}</small> (gives Template:Rail-interchange/sandbox), so I'd encourage you to check if that is what you're looking for. There are, however, several instances where smalltext is used in RINT, but luckily those can be counted on a single hand. Again, congratulations on the work so far!
-- Wauteurz (talk) 20:18, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

I was about to copy {{rail-interchange/sandbox}} to {{rail-interchange}}, but that would then look like I did it all... So please, go ahead and do it yourself - to gain the well-earned karma :) Andree.sk (talk) 19:18, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Regarding the style above - I'd almost say that smalltext really matches the style better. I'll get back to the 1px vs 2px border later on, once I have other stuff done :) Andree.sk (talk) 19:19, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

@Andree.sk: I cannot move the template from /sandbox to main, as the current RINT needs to be deleted first. I've already made an VfD. As soon as the current template is removed, the template can be moved.
-- Wauteurz (talk) 16:05, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

I guess it's all done now... thanks for the great work and good luck maintaining it! :-D See you around... Andree.sk (talk) 19:23, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Well, there are still some logo's that I made before I updated {{RbE}}, but those can be updated at any time. Either way, thank you, and very much likewise for your contributions to {{station}} :D
-- Wauteurz (talk) 07:54, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Dutch Masters...

As in Rembrant and others.. Wikivoyage has some coverage on art, but I was going to ask if this was something you would add to a very long to do list.

(BTW You seem to have found the Userdraft templates)

The stuff on reclamation projects isn't a typical destination ;) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 01:13, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

I'll add it to the list, yes. I should add to that that I am currently somewhat demotivated from editing here as I've got other projects and things in life going. This too is why I added {{Userdraft}}; so that others may find it in the future and add onto it. The idea behind Zuiderzee Works is moreso to give background information, which to my understanding is also the goal of its counterpart article, Delta Works. (The same line of thought applies to the Hollandse Waterlinie.)

Either way, is there a specific (set of) articles you want me to add onto about the Dutch masters? I would assume you would also want me to add some things about other Dutch artists such as Piet Mondriaan, Gerrit Rietveld, Hieronymus Bosch and so forth while I am at it? It fits in well with a study I've got my eyes on, so I'd be more than happy to write something about these topics.
-- Wauteurz (talk) 11:43, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Well it was Dutch art from a travel perspective, so in essence "Where you can you see it?, can you Buy reproductions etc? What locales inpsired them?" and so on. :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:39, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Don't worry about being demotivated. We all have too many projects on the go :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:39, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00: I've started an outline for De Stijl, which is one of the most notable Dutch artistic movements (aside from Golden Age art/Dutch Masters, of course). De Stijl is two-sided in that it is about both visual art and architecture, hence I'll list some buildings (theatres, cafés, mansions, et cetera) that were designed by some of the nine most prominent members of the movement, as well as several museums that have a high quantity of De Stijl works. It's a personal favourite of mine, so that should combat the demotivation somewhat. I'll see about the Dutch Masters/Golden Age painters once this article has come some way. Inputs and tips are always appreciated, should you have them :)
-- Wauteurz (talk) 19:01, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, I don't know anything about art, but figured it was a topic worth having :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:15, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

stop links of people

sorry but this is not Wikipedia. Only articles about locations. --Traveler100 (talk) 20:30, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

@Traveler100: I see where you're coming from, but what exactly is wrong with this instance? Sure, Mondrian might be a person, but he is more known world-wide than the movement he belongs to. How are people supposed to find that article (De Stijl) and thereby more museums with similar works without a link using his name?
-- Wauteurz (talk) 20:36, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Why stop at this one artist? Why not other artists, also royalty, historic military people, politicians, types of food, ... If people what to know about other topics then should go to Wikipedia. --Traveler100 (talk) 20:41, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

I think Wauteurz is planning to write an art based travel topic... Hence the link. Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:49, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

I'm planning to write more, yes, but the one for De Stijl is large enough to have been in mainspace for over a month by now and at some later point I'll expand it more. The case, however, is that De Stijl, which the Mondrian redirect we're talking about was linking to, is as good as synonymous with Mondrian (and Rietveld to a lesser extend) to where I've seen English folders, including one of the Kröller-Muller Museum from 2014/15, introduce De Stijl as more or less 'Mondrian's style'. Surely there is a clausule for synonymous names, and if not, there definitely should be.
Wauteurz (talk) 21:03, 21 September 2018 (UTC)