Wikipedia’s travel site’s official launch coming soon; what to expect and not expect

Skift Take

There is no question about it: guidebook publishers should fear Wikivoyage, but travelers should rejoice. Though give it some time to build up into a useful resource.

-Rafat Ali

by Rafat Ali, Skift

» Get your daily dose of Skift: subscribe to our newsletterRSSTwitter or Facebook.

[UPDATE: The Wikimedia Foundation is tentatively slated to launch Wikivoyage next week, on January 15, Skift has learned.]

Wikipedia’s next big push is a travel wiki, and the official launch of Wikivoyage is coming soon, according to Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales.

Wales was on Colbert Show last night talking about next big priorities for the organization, and he mentioned that Wikipedia’s travel effort, called Wikivoyage, is soon launching officially after being developed as a project for the last 5-6 months. The site has been live since late September but still as a project-in-development, not a fully-baked site.

From the show: “We have a travel site that’s opening up soon, we will see how it goes…called Wikivoyage.” Asked by Colbert if they would consider having a business model for the travel site, he flatly said, as he always has: “No.” Meaning no to any commercial considerations, or advertising, which is the same policy for the main Wikipedia site as well. The clip below:

The Wikimedia Foundation, parent of Wikipedia, agreed to host and support the new global travel wiki, despite opposition, including a lawsuit against volunteers, from Internet Brands, which owns rival Wikitravel. We’ve covered all of this in gory detail in past.

Since the early launch of the project in September, its vision has come along, and now spells out more clearly what its goals and “non-goals” are. These are helpful as guideposts to the already-hammered travel guidebook publishers and startups looking at this new giant free project as a threat to their existence. Some of these goals and non-goals are a bit odd as worded, but that’s possibly due to something lost in translation in this global, still-in-the-works project.

From the list, the goals:

Wikivoyage articles should be useful for at least the following purposes:

  • For on-line use by travellers on the road, huddled in a late-night Internet café in some dark jungle, who need up-to-the-minute information on lodging, transportation, food, nightlife, and other necessities;
  • For off-line use by travellers on the road sitting in a train with a subset of Wikivoyage on their PDA, laptop, mobile phone, iPod or digital camera.
  • For on-line use by travellers still planning to review destinations, plan itineraries, make reservations, and get excited about their trip;
  • For individual article printouts, that is, for printing a list of museums or karaoke bars and putting it in your back pocket for when you need it – or making a photocopy when someone else does;
  • For ad-hoc travel guides, small fit-to-purpose travel books that match a particular itinerary;
  • For inclusion in other travel books, giving up-to-date information for travel guide publishers.

As for what not to expect, the list is a bit stranger. Read for yourself and decipher (excerpts, full list here):

These are some specific non-goals; things people might think we want to do with Wikivoyage, but we don’t:

  1. Create a travel essay anthology. Wikivoyage is not a travel magazine. Articles should be directed toward practical information about travelling.
  2. Create a travel chat board. Wikivoyage has talk pages for each article, but these should be used to develop the article itself, and not as a “comments” area. Anyone can edit a Wikivoyage article; if you have useful information about a topic, put it in the article itself.
  3. Make an advertising brochure. Wikivoyage of course has listings and information about travel-related businesses around the world. We would be thrilled to have representatives of these businesses keep those records up-to-date. However, blatant advertising is not welcome, and overcompetitive acts (like deleting information about rival businesses) is gravely deprecated.
  4. Produce a Yellow Pages of restaurants, hotels, or bars for a city. City guides should certainly include information for travel-related companies, but these should be kept at a useful number. Think of a friend from out of town asking you where they should go – you wouldn’t list all 200 possibilities, but 5–10 options for a particular type, budget, or part of town.
  5. Build a Web directory. Wikivoyage articles should not have in-article links to external resources, with the exception of a link to the official website besides the name of a listing. It’s not a goal to collect links about any destination. External links should support and complement the content of articles; they’re not a goal in and of themselves.
  6. Make a travel guide supplement. The Wiki technique we use for Wikivoyage makes it possible for us to include information that’s not in other travel guides. This doesn’t mean that we only include information not found in other guides. Wikivoyage aims to be a complete travel guide – not just an additional resource on the side of traditional guides.
  7. Make an encyclopedia. Wikivoyage aims to tell people how to travel all over the world, not document everything there is on the planet or how it ended up that way. If you find yourself needing references and footnotes on Wikivoyage, whatever you’re writing should probably go to Wikipedia instead.
  8. Run a travel agency. Wikivoyage does not arrange visas, make bookings for airlines, car rentals, cruise lines, hotels, railways, or package tours.

» Get your daily dose of Skift: subscribe to our newsletterRSSTwitter or Facebook.


  • Durant Imboden

    Three predictions:

    1) Wikivoyage will have far more spam to fight than Wikipedia ever did.

    2) The “talk pages” are likely to end up being Q&A pages, simply because that’s how readers will use them.

    3) Wikitravel, a commercial Wiki site, will get a spurt of new traffic from users who forget that Wikipedia’s new travel site is called “Wikivoyage.”

  • Raul Julia

    Yes this article kind fo fails to mention that the “rival” Wikitravel is already “fully baked” and has been since 2003 when it started — and the “Wikivoyager” is just a copy of that site, not at all a new site. Not good reporting.

  • http://www.facebook.com/rafat Rafat Ali

    Raul, we did, see the paragraph below the video. We have been reporting on Wikitravel from very start, and links to all of our reporting is in the link in the graph. No one’s ignoring it, this story in a continuum in our coverage, you may not be a regular it seems.

  • Raul Julia

    Then why the angle you chose? You reported “Wikivoyager” as though it’s a new site, when all the content of the “new” site is already out there at Wikitravel.org and has been for years. It really seems like that should be the story here: Wikimedia Foundation Copies Travel Content From Existing Website & Rebrands It As “New”. Where’s that story?

  • Peter

    1) Yes, but it will have less fighting to do with so called “POV pushers,” who fight endlessly for their own interpretation of history/reality.
    2) They actually never did on Wikitravel, which is admittedly kind of surprising.
    3) Interesting point!

  • TagTangToo

    Looks like those guys have a prtty good plan. Wow.

    Cyber-Privacy.tk

  • http://twitter.com/hungrygarden Brian Puckett

    Love this idea! Tie it with openmaps and crowdsource wikimap for all to use.

  • sarahx

    This part bothers me. Who gets to pick what businesses are featured? What’s a “useful” number? We already see overzealous and egomaniacal editors on Wikipedia, how bad will it be on wikivoyage? And how often will businesses be fighting to add their name and delete others?

    If you’re going to include restaurant, hotel and attractions links somewhere, it should be open to any of the businesses that are legitimately operating within the boundaries of that location.

    (One of the NON-goals)
    “Produce a Yellow Pages of restaurants, hotels, or bars for a city. City guides should certainly include information for travel-related companies, but these should be kept at a useful number. Think of a friend from out of town asking you where they should go – you wouldn’t list all 200 possibilities, but 5–10 options for a particular type, budget, or part of town.”

  • http://www.facebook.com/pendrell Nick Pendrell

    I’ve always thought that Wikipedia would be better off running AdWords at the bottom of every entry giving users options for going deeper into a topic rather than having Jimmy Wales’ huge face plastered above the fold for several weeks. On this site, it will be a bigger annoyance to not have any commercial links. I will be continuing to use TripAdvisor to book hotels when I can do it with a click after reading the reviews rather than having to go Googling all over again. E-commerce is not always evil – sometimes it adds a much-needed extra degree of functionality to a site.

  • Ivan

    It really seems like you should read through the reporting. This is not about choosing an angle.

  • http://evan.status.net/ Evan Prodromou

    My name’s Evan; I’m one of the two founders of Wikitravel and I wrote the original copy of the “goals and non-goals” document.

    When we started Wikitravel and it didn’t have a lot of information yet, I needed a way to gently guide people’s contributions. A lot of people were taking the idea “wiki + travel” and just going all over the place with it, based on what they knew about travel sites.

    There were a lot of different kinds of travel sites on the web, like personal journals, chatboards and directories.

    So, that’s where the “non-goals” came from. They seem strange to you, but not to me; that’s either due to my experience with the community, or just the fact that I wrote them.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=707976432 Dennis Schaal

    Interesting to know, Evan. Yes, you’ve got to set up some limitations to ensure the contributions are useful and not unwieldy. I’m not a fan of the policy that you don’t put in any links other than official website links. I think that robs the reader of a lot of useful information. If Wikivoyage is truly to be a collaborative effort, then shutting out the wisdom inherent in insightful articles/posts on related subjects short-changes the readers.

  • http://evan.status.net/ Evan Prodromou

    You should probably read http://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Wikivoyage:External_links .

    “Using only primary sources makes our guide more succinct: where there is
    usually one or sometimes two primary source links for any subject,
    there can be hundreds or thousands of secondary source links. We also
    avoid subjectivity and conflict. It’s difficult to decide
    collaboratively which of the thousands of English-language newspapers,
    magazines, and Web sites has done the very best travel article about New York City, but it’s quite easy for everyone to agree that http://www.nycvisit.com/ is the official city visitor’s guide.”

    Also:

    “We should avoid links to other travel guides, to ensure we have travel information in Wikivoyage, not linked
    from Wikivoyage. This is an incentive issue; if we have lots of links
    to other travel guides, we lose the impetus to create our own. In
    addition, one of our goals is to produce a guide useful for printing or offline use, and therefore we need information to be within the article rather than linked to at another site.”