This is an archive of past discussions with User:Twofortnights. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hi Twofortnights! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Ushau97 (I'm a Teahouse host)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Visa policy of Australia, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Congo and Stateless (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Visa (document) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
and Principe]] is issuing electronic visas to all passengers through the ''eVisaST'' ststem.<ref>[http://www.smf.st/virtualvisa/ eVisaST </ref>
Welcome to en.wikipedia! I saw you created a map, but please note that every EU citizen has a freedom of movement in the EU, and that restriction from employment is a different subject. Cheers! --Göran S (talk) 04:40, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
A page you started (Visa policy of Bahamas) has been reviewed!
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Visa policy of India, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gaya (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Visa policy of Gabon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi,
Would you please edit the image "Czech Passport visa requirements.png" to change the color of Croatia from Green to Brown since Croatia is now a member of the EU.
Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albatalad (talk • contribs) 18:43, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
], [[Niger]], [[Rwanda]], [[São Tomé and Príncipe]], [[Senegal]], [[Sierra Leone]], [[Uganda]], [[Zambia] require all incoming passengers to have a current [[International Certificate of
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
for 2 years. [[Electronic System for Travel Authorization|ESTA]] required.<ref name="ReferenceA">[http://www.timaticweb.com/cgi-bin/tim_website_client.cgi?SpecData=1&VISA=&page=visa&NA=AU&AR=00&
00&PASSTYPES=PASS&DE=GU&user=DL&subuser=DELTAB2C|publisher=[[Timatic]]|accessdate=26 November 2013}}</ref>
*{{flag|Puerto Rico}} — Visa not required.<ref name="ReferenceA">[http://www.timaticweb.com/cgi-bin/tim_website_client.cgi?SpecData=1&VISA=&page=visa&NA=CA&AR=00&
00&PASSTYPES=PASS&DE=GU&user=DL&subuser=DELTAB2C|publisher=[[Timatic]]|accessdate=26 November 2013}}</ref>
|{{flagcountry|Federated States of Micronesia}}<ref>[https://www.timaticweb.com/cgi-bin/tim_website_client.cgi?SpecData=1&VISA=&page=visa&NA=RS&AR=00&
UAE}}<ref name="UAE">"[http://www.timaticweb.com/cgi-bin/tim_client.cgi?ExpertMode=TIDFT/AE/VI/NO21(&user=STAR&subuser=STAR Visa & Health - Star Alliance]", Star Alliance Visa and Health Information.
Move of "Visa requirements for U.S. citizens" article
Hi. I don't object to your moving this article so that its title will be parallel with that of other, similar articles. However, just in case it comes up, you should be aware if you aren't already that the category of "United States nationals" is broader than that of "United States citizens," so there is at least some rationale for the older title. That being said, at this point the number of people affected by the difference is small enough that it probably doesn't trump the reason you gave for the move. Thanks for all your work on these articles. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 01:54, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Visa policy of the Republic of Macedonia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Congo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi Twofortnights. I've blocked User:Matthewkimdlaekdehd and the IPs you identified, but it looks as though he has access to quite a large IP range - beyond what it would be prudent to block. If the problem continues, might I suggest that you request page protection for the articles affected (I realise there are quite a few of these)? That would prevent any more IP shenanigans, and hopefully he'll get bored and go away. Yunshui雲水14:10, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Visa policy of Singapore, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
You told me my edits were disruptive when I only marked in the article that "THE MAP NEEDS UPDATING TO PERU, COLOMBIA AND A FEW OTHER COUNTRIES[1]". This was rather not fair and alarmist.--89.128.236.143 (talk) 17:48, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
Yes I am aware of that. However, I have cross-checked that supposed info and fact with 3 sources before undoing it.
1. A tour company that operates to DPRK (who I personally went to DPRK with). They have confirmed that there is no change to the visa requirement to DPRK. I have an email on this matter if you would like to see it.
2. Ministry of Foreign Affairs Singapore. They have stated that only those on business visa with a special letter from the Singapore Business Federation qualifies for it
3. A friend who works with a local Singapore tour company. He also stressed that the Timaticweb site is only a guidance and is not to be used as a final confirmation.
In the absence of any formal announcements or press/news release (the only other country with visa-free access to DPRK is Malaysia - of which there are many press articles supporting this fact; and I personally have brought a Malaysian to DPRK visa-free), we can only verify and corroborate that this is incorrect.
I think you really need to read the following to find out why your phone calls and e-mails to some agencies can't be used as a reference let alone grounds to remove content supported by verifiable sources:
Wikipedia:Verifiability - In Wikipedia, verifiability means that people reading and editing the encyclopedia can check that the information comes from a reliable source. Wikipedia does not publish original research. Its content is determined by previously published information rather than the beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it.
Timatic is not a guidance but a system run by IATA based on information supplied by national Governments. It is updated daily (so even if you could find a link for that Singapore MFA statement it could be outdated and it's irrelevant anyway as it is not the Singapore MFA, but DPRK that determines their visa policy) and no passenger can board a plane for a certain destination if the Timatic says they need a visa and they don't have it. Equally, the airline won't face any fines if they boarded a passenger per information published on Timatic. Thank you.--Twofortnights (talk) 12:43, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
I'm aware of it being verifiable. However, the reality is that IATA is not a trustable or reliable system. I know where you are coming from - it is there, it is supposed to be trustable/reliable and hence it can be taken as "from the source". But my point of contention is - the "facts" there are not necessarily reliable.
Is there any point in putting up an information that is on Timatic but is NOT what is available in reality? In other words, if this is not practically possible, should we even be putting it up?
How about the fact that "reliable sources are not infallible" [[1]]?
I think we should refrain from making any changes until we can verify that this is not infallible - which I have done so with an email to IATA/Timatic. It is better to put in an incomplete information rather than a practically impossible information. --kwloo (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:07, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
I am sorry but that would be WP:OR, the whole encyclopedia relying on your word. Imagine if some birther came in and asked for Wikipedia not to include the place of birth in an article about Barack Obama until the issue is cleared, because he has evidence that he was born in Kenya. It wouldn't work, would it. The burden of proof is on you, if IATA updates their page, we will edit the article accordingly. Until then, there is not a single published source to dispute that information. And even if there was, if you would read the rules I linked you to, you would see the solution is not to delete anything but to give a balanced view - "When reliable sources disagree, present what the various sources say, give each side its due weight, and maintain a neutral point of view." from WP:V. --Twofortnights (talk) 13:13, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Since you said that each site is to give its own weight, that is the reason for the remark to check from the nearest embassy or travel agent. It is not saying that it is wrong and in fact that applies to all the countries as well. For the record, the reason I have not added for every other entry is because they can be corroborated with their respective embassy consular pages - which has the final authority on the matter. --kwloo (talk)Kwloo (talk) 13:31, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed your great contributions to the articles on visa requirements for Serbian and Montenegrin citizens. I just wanted to suggest to you to contribute to the article on visa requirements for Macedonian citizens since it's in a horrible state and hasn't been touched for long...
Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albatalad (talk • contribs) 15:23, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, although I haven't really worked much on those two articles either, just the maps and some tweaking around obvious errors like in other articles. I'll see to at least do the same for article on visa requirements for Macedonian citizens.--Twofortnights (talk) 16:03, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
OK I've done a quick fix of the article - map is now up to date, removed wrong data, added new countries but it still needs to be properly edited to include references, to be in some order at least alphabetical etc.--Twofortnights (talk) 17:22, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
] 74th in the world.<ref>https://www.henleyglobal.com/files/download/VISA_Index_2013_Web.pdf]</ref> Visitors engaging in activities other than tourism, including unpaid work, require a visa or
Heh, Twofortnights, you maniacally put the map in the article Visa requirements for Belarusian citizens in BeWiki. Thanks a lot for Your concern about us. But the map Visa requirements for Belarusian citizens.png and the content of the article are little different. In our article we divided all countries into such groups as Visa Free (Без візы), Visa on Arrival and E-Visa (З візай па прыбыцці або электроннай візай), Visa Required and colored our map accordingly to adopt it to the text. Thus two maps are little different, but our map is more adopted to the article. As for your reproving about Ethiopia, Eritrea and Somalia, in the article we define that visa on arrival for Ethiopia is possible only for international activities 1 (although I entered Ethiopia 3 years ago with tourists purpose and received visa on arrival for 50 USD without any problems), Eritrean visa on arrival is possible with submitted request from Eritrean sponsor 2. Somalia is not colored as "visa free" or "visa on arrival" state. St Helen Island is visa free for citizens of Belarus 3, Pitcairn is visa on arrival 4, Vietnam is visa on arrival for 15 days with an approval letter 5 (I travelled such last summer), Egypt (free so called Sinai visa in several airports and ports, but in reality they give a usual visa there) 6. Svalbard is visa free for all nations 7 (Belarusians are able to travel there via Russia not to receive a Schengen visa). Etc. 87.252.227.63 (talk) 05:25, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
I am not putting anything up "maniacally", please try to choose your words. And additionally, your comment is contradictory, as it is your version of the map that incorrectly includes those countries such as Eritrea and Ethiopia so I don't see what the complaint is about.--Twofortnights (talk) 23:50, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
I am really sorry, if my words hurted You. Once again, thanks a lot for Your concern about BeWiki. I only wanted to say that the map has to be adopted to the article, but not inside out. We have allowed for Your critical reflection on Ethiopia. It is removed from the countries Visa on Arrival and E-Visa (З візай па прыбыцці або электроннай візай). As for Eritrea, visa on arrival for the Belarusian citizens is possible ("a visa on arrival, provided"1). - 87.252.227.63 (talk) 17:03, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
But if you click on "For details, click here" you will see it applies only if "sponsor in Eritrea submits request to the Eritrean Immigration Authority". There are several countries that do that, not just Eritrea but also Bhutan, Cameroon, Côte d'Ivoire, Gabon, Ghana, Liberia, Libya, Mongolia, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone and Turkmenistan. Also not applicable to Belarus but similar policy exists in Kazakhstan, UAE and Uzbekistan. Somewhat similar policy also exists in Guyana, Iran, Pakistan and Vietnam. So you should definitely not paint Eritrea the same way standard visa on arrival countries are painted.--Twofortnights (talk) 19:24, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
What does it mean standard visa on arrival or nonstandard visa on arrival, if each country has its own specificity even in visa free entry? For instance, a citizen of Belarus to visit Macedonia has to prepay a voucher. It is almost the same work as to buy a visa to UAE. I guess Your arguments are based on the legal aspect. I should tell that I am always interested in visas and other permits only as a traveller, not a lawer... So Eritrea is... not painted as a standard visa on arrival country, simply because it is painted as a country "Visa on Arrival and/or E-Visa" with following interpretation in the article. Yes, it is not a standard country (sorry, not with the standard entry). 87.252.227.63 (talk) 02:56, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
It means "pre-arranged visa pick up on arrival" not "visa on arrival". Visa on arrival means you didn't have to obtain a visa beforehand, visa pick up means you just physically pick up the prearranged visa at the airport and not at the embassy. That's the difference. So this is not legal at all, but completely practical. If you would just board an airplane and fly to Kenya that's fine, but if you'd board an airplane and fly to Eritrea that wouldn't work, they will not let you in, and they will not give you a visa on arrival. You must arrange it prior to arrival.--Twofortnights (talk) 13:11, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Ok, I understand your idea. Pre-arranged visa looks close to an usual visa on arrival simply because it delivers from problems with consular bureaucrazy in the embassy, as well as problems of remoteness of some consulates, thus Belarusian trip advisors usually do not distinguish great differences. Anyway, Eritrea is colored as a country "Visa on Arrival, Pre-arranged visa on arrival and/or E-Visa". Probably, it would be right to write to the article in addition about visas on arrival differences... Would you recommend me any solid sourse to receive evidence that such differentiation (visa on arrival and pre-arranged visa pick up on arrival) is generally accepted? Thank you. - 87.252.227.63 (talk) 20:39, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
I don't think you do, because visa on arrival in those African countries mentioned is nothing more than a visa pick up meaning contact with bureaucracy or bureaucrazy as you called it is inevitable. I advise you to add another color for visa pick up countries like here https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c2/Visa_requirements_for_British_citizens.png Where to find this information? The best place is IATA's Timatic service, whenever there is "For details, click here" it means visa on arrival has additional conditions that apply. In there you will find information such as:
Liberia: Holders of a pre-arranged visa can obtain a visa on arrival, provided: commencing journey in a country without diplomatic representation of Liberia and - visa has been pre-arranged and paid for by local sponsor in Liberia; and - transporting carrier in Monrovia is informed of the following passenger's details: name, nationality, document number, flight number, date of arrival and address of stay in Liberia. Note: Passenger should not be boarded unless telex confirmation from airline's station manager Monrovia is stapled to the ticket.[2][3]
Ghana: Holders of normal passports can obtain a pre-arranged visa on arrival, provided holding: - copy of a visa-on-arrival approval issued (at least 48 hours prior to traveling to Ghana) by the Ghana Immigration Service. Such approval must contain both traveler's passport and visa numbers. - copy of the bio data and photo page of the applicant's passport. Visas can be applied for at director@myzipnet.com. Fee: USD 150.-. [4][5]
Cote d'Ivoire: Holders of an invitation letter issued by the authorities of Cote d'Ivoire prior to travel can obtain a visa on arrival.[6]
Sierra Leone: Holders of a copy of a pre-arranged visa can obtain a visa on arrival. [7]
Eritrea: Holders of a confirmation of a pre-arranged visa can obtain a visa on arrival, provided: sponsor in Eritrea submits request to the Eritrean Immigration Authority 48 hours prior to arrival; and - holding one passport photo.[8][9]
etc. Those are all visa pick up on arrival instead of pick up at the embassy. And compare it to let's say Mali which is a typical visa on arrival - "Visa required, except for Nationals of Belarus can obtain a visa on arrival."--Twofortnights (talk) 21:30, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
I do. I use timatic in my own traveling experience, and I have mentioned about different situation with Ethiopia in timatic and in real life. I had no any problems to buy visa in the airport, as well as to fly there without visa by Turkish Airlines. Your advice about the new map is very good, but it requires important amendments in the article. So we will work and develop. Thank you. 87.252.227.63 (talk) 23:00, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
There is always an element of corruption in African countries. In practically any travel report from there you can read about people getting in without a visa by bribing someone or talking their way through. But that is not something we can mention in our article obviously.--Twofortnights (talk) 00:08, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Yes, corruprtion is always possible, but I hardly know any aircompany that will take you aboard, if they are not convinced that you will normally get off. Another way, they will transport you back for their own cost. Yes, timatic is a good source, sometimes is more informative than official web-sites, but it is not irreproachable and better to recheck its information. - 87.252.227.63 (talk) 22:05, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Yes, that is why we use IATA's Timatic as a source, because airline companies use it. What is a possibility on the ground, well that's not for us to report on as it is not verifiable. Simply you can't use your own experience as a source for Wikipedia. It has to be a reliable, published and verifiable source.--Twofortnights (talk) 00:38, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
I do not use my experience for Wikipedia :). Ethiopia was excluded of countries visa on arrival, because there are no reliable sources. 87.252.227.63 (talk) 21:55, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Visa policy of Ukraine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Crimea (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello,
I don't understand your revision comment on Visa policy of Turkey means? One one hand, you provide a link that states that Mexican nationals may obtain an e-visa with certain conditions (that they must have a round-trip ticket and fly with Turkish airlines). The website is dated from last year. On the other hand, I found a website that states otherwise in that there are no conditions. When I myself was applying for the visa, it did not state that there were any type of conditions (as the website states). Please confirm how you are determining which website to use. Regards, Aquintero, (talk), 27 March 2014, 7:58 (UTC)
Hello, thank you for getting back to me. I guess what I find confusing about it is the fact that Mexico is under "Conditional e-visa" when there really aren't any conditions. Mexican citizens just get 30 days rather than 90 days entry. That's it! Can you please change the map for Visa requirements for Mexican citizens; I see that you have Brunei highlighted when it shouldn't also Bhutan as well. Another question that I have is regarding Rwanda and Syria. To my understanding and what I see on the Rwandan ministry of foreign affairs website; any foreign national can obtain a visa electronically. As for Syria, the link you provided states that it is possible for a Mexican national to obtain a visa on arrival since there is no Syrian diplomatic mission in Mexico. Please confirm. Regards, Aquintero, (talk), 27 March 2014, 12:54 (UTC)
Visa Policy of Turkey
Visa Policy of Turkey
Your welcome.. :) However, I don't know how I can show the changes on the image, maybe you would like to figure it out, Tunc89 (talk) 15:29, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Please update the Visa Policy Map of Japan
I have made an updated version of the file. The description and link is provided below:
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
"likely covered in the article about Tajikistan"? How difficult is it to check that it isn't covered by that article? The only thing you need to do is open that article and check. And find out that it doesn't cover the subject. As for the article citing the same source over and over again, that's simply preposterous, two clicks at two random references will show you it's not the same thing over and over again. It's connected to the same IATATimatic service, true, but it's not the same source as every country supplies data on visa policy to the International Air Transport Association separately. Then using the Timatic system one can connect a passport nation and destination to find out if visa is required or not. But it's not the same source "over and over again" that's for sure.--Twofortnights (talk) 22:16, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
Visa requirements for Thai citizens (and potentially others)
Hi Twofortnights, you recently made an edit to the above Visa requirements page. Your enthusiasm for editing this page and other Visa pages is appreciated, however there have been numerous problems with your edit. In Particular:
More reliable sources have been replaced with less reliable ones. The primary or authoritative source for Visa Requirements is the Department of foreign affairs (or equivalent responsible government department), and the visa information is often found either directly from them or from embassies (either printed or on their website). | Timaticweb is a database service by IATA for the aviation industry, often used by airline/agency staff to quickly ascertain visa/heath/document requirements. While it is generally reliable, it should not be used in place of information by official government sources. Importantly, Timaticweb is aimed at airline passengers, it may not reflect requirements for those entering by land or sea. For example visas may be available on arrival at some land entry points and not at others. Examples of some of the citations that your edit deleted include Sri Lanka, Japan, Turkey, Philippines. See Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources for more information.
There are too many citations and practically all of them are to a single source. This is overkill (see Citation overkill and Overlink crisis). There is no need to create the citation for each search on timaticweb, rather only to the main search page. it result in a bulky article, and all the links would become dead should timaticweb change their search parameters. This could be overcome by a sinle external link in references or by naming the reference so it only appears once. Some guidance can be found at Help:Footnotes, Citing sources.
Wikipedia should generally not be used as a repository or mirror of data from a single source (i.e. timaticweb), see WP:NOTMIRROR and similar. Most users of wikipedia could refer to timaticweb should they need to, but they the usefulness of the visa requirement articles comes from the variety of sources (in this case official government web pages). Should you wish to add or make changes to the visa requirements article, I would suggest sourcing it from these official government sources.
The table has been re-arranged. While a sortable table is often helpful, it doesn't help the article in this case as there is only one column "Country" for which to sort by. The old tables were split according to continent, and this made finding the country easier. I would suggest the one table with a column or feature that allows countries to be sorted by continent.
In future, if you do wish to make substantial changes to a page which has a long history and many editors, you should first make an entry into the Talk Page of the article, then perhaps wait a week or so (or even longer if not urgent) explaining what you want to do and why you wish to do it. This will give the chance for other editors to respond before you may spend too much time making the changes. See also Talking and editing
Because it is easier and less work overall to add one link, change the table than to remove repetitive links and individually restore some of the existing links, i have regrettably had to reverted the entire edit. I believe that the edit was done in good faith. I'd suggest making smaller edits end explaining each one in the edit summary, that way the whole work would not need to be undone.
Advanstra (talk) 02:37, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
You have reverted my edit with over 200 references to a version that has the whole 8 references. I don't know if I should go any further than that.
In short though, Timatic is the most up to date source on the matter as the Governments provide information to IATA daily. Timatic information is the Government provided information, it's used by airlines, but the content is provided by national Governments. Also many countries don't update their websites very often though. Malaysia lists even countries like Upper Volta and Zaire in their visa policy listed on Immigration website - [10], there is nothing reliable in that.
As for no need for single Timatic references - there is even a template Template:Timatic for easier insertion of single Timatic references. This template wouldn't exist if it wasn't intended.
Comment on usefulness of the variety of sources is again questionable with total of 8 references in your preferred version.
As for the re-arranged table, my version included all countries and I intended to add all regions with separate entry rules. Current version lists only a smaller group of countries, and the criteria is unclear and the article is thus slightly outdated. Sortable was only the country column but all of them so I don't understand what you meant by that.
Also may I add that I am fully aware that my version is not perfect, but it's a very solid base to improve. Current article is not a solid base at all, it has practically no references, it lists only some countries and is in part outdated. I would have expected you to add further references to strengthen the article (strengthen because Timatic is in 95% correct and the only serious discrepancies or missing other sources are found with Egypt, Congo, Malaysia, Nicaragua, Kyrgyzstan, Bangladesh and Syria and some smaller issues with maximum stays for Dominica and South Korea) as I've already started doing with some other articles. And again it's just a mirror of the diligence of national governments of those countries to either inform IATA or update their websites. While my version is obviously not perfect, reverting back to a version that's several times worse (especially in the aspects raised by you regarding my version) is hardly an improvement.--Twofortnights (talk) 12:40, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Visa requirements for South Korean citizens (and potentially others)
Hi Twofortnights, you recently made an edit to the above Visa requirements page. Back to your first editing of the page, you did only use | Timaticweb, which is a database service by IATA for the aviation industry. While it is generally reliable, it should not be used in place of information by official government sources. Importantly, Timaticweb is aimed at airline passengers, it may not reflect requirements for those entering by land or sea. For example visas may be available on arrival at some land entry points and not at others. Examples of some of the citations that your edit deleted include Sri Lanka, Japan, Turkey, Philippines. See Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources for more information. Moreover, you used old information back to 20:39, 9 December 2013 version (including the map), which doesn't reflect visa requirement to Laos. I strongly suggest you shall fix Laos shall be visa free country (typically : Visa requirements for South Korean citizens.PNG). I also would suggest the one table with a column or feature that allows countries to be sorted by continent. Finally, I also urge you shall note where Electronic authorization is required to Korean citizen (as last contributors did) Mailzzang+aus (talk) 11:58, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
Yes the article might not be perfect but it's a solid base to build on with further references. See my previous comments though on what should be a preferred source. For an example Iranian Government website lists Yugoslavia as a country whose citizens can obtain a visa on arrival, all this in an article published in April 2014. Malaysia on their website lists Upper Volta and Zaire. So we have to use common sense, we can't automatically decide. Data on Timatic is provided by national Governments to IATA. The problem arises just like with websites when countries don't take this job diligently. However there are far less countries that are late in notifying IATA than the number of countries that either have outdated information on their pages (like the above mentioned Malaysia but also some other countries) or no information at all (case with many African countries). From what I've analyzed countries that have conflicting information on visa policy are Egypt, Republic of the Congo, Malaysia, Rwanda, Dominica, Iran, Syria. There are some doubts over visa on arrival for Nicaragua, Bangladesh, Guyana, Nauru and Kyrgyzstan and some discrepancies on allowed stay in South Korea. So when you edit articles remember those few countries and don't be surprised that there is no definite answer to what are their visa policies. As for the South Korean citizens, I can't even get to fix minor issues on that page, simply because there is one persistent vandal going around whole Wikipedia altering articles to include false information on visa requirements for South Korean citizens so I never know what's true and what is the product of his vandalism. I will try to sort out the issues you've raised but I can't make any promises.--Twofortnights (talk) 15:37, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
Requesting major revision of changes made to an article
Hi Twofortnights, thanks for finding the correct link and posting it to the Russian visa page. In the future it's probably best to use a full citation in your reference and not just the link so that people know where they're linking to before clicking it. Also I removed the work "rank" since there is no explanation of what that means in the sentence and since Russia is not actually 41st, it's more like 60something in terms of being behind 60 some-odd other countries. If you want to count them all and include it, that's fine but to just leave it as it was is not accurate and not informative. Thanks again for posting the correct link. Cheers,Monopoly31121993 (talk) 12:36, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. As for the ranking, well that would be original research, the source says Russian passport is 41st so we can't say it's 60th in the article, we can't simply use a different methodology.--Twofortnights (talk) 15:01, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
