User talk:Vadim

From CruisersWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome to CruisersWiki!

We all look forward to your valued contributions to the Cruising Wiki to help it grow as a useful, free resource for all cruisers around the world. Now you are registered, you can set your personal preferences in "My Preferences" (link at top R/H of page when logged in).

Spend a little time reading the Wiki Help and the Style Guide to gain a better understanding of the Wiki formatting and how to edit articles. Also, please read the Cruiserswiki Copyrights notice, as well as the General Disclaimers (links at bottom of pages) before starting to edit. Then, do add what you can - even correcting grammar and spelling errors in articles is a great help - but do not use the Rich Editor to do so, since there is a problem with it at present. It is easy to see if you are going wrong, since you cannot save your changes to a page without previewing them first.

Use any page's "Discussion" tab (top of page's menu) to ask any questions or make any suggestions about that particular page.

Finally, please note that massive changes by a new editor are liable to be considered spam and the editor will be blocked. Please concentrate on editing pages of the places that you have actually visited. Also please avoid using the "Rich Editor", it does not work well and creates problems.

Again, welcome and have fun! Bring out that hidden "Cruising Guide writer" in you. Istioploos 11:40, 28 March 2015 (GMT)



Vadim, I'd prefer it if you didn't remove the heading (unless you're volunteering to make the same change on all the other port and marina pages, which will probably keep you busy for quite a few months!). Vasilis and I have spent a lot of time over the past two years trying to establish some consistency of style across the Wiki, since otherwise it begins to lack credibility. There's still a lot to be done on that score, as you will have noticed, but at least most of the Med pages are reasonably consistent. While there's certainly a lot that can be done to improve the layout and usability, it would be dangerous IMHO to do it piecemeal as we'd wind up with something akin to the proverbial dog's dinner.

Athene of Lymington

Hi Gordon! I appreciate your efforts very much. I've just noticed that these two successive headings look somewhat repetitive (Olbia). It seems Vasilis wouldn't mind removing the 2nd repeating header would be done gradually.
As a matter of interest this CSS rule hides the the 2nd heading if it's a very 1st thing in an article:
#jump-to-nav + h2,
script + h2
    display: none;
Cheers --Vadim 16:00, 1 April 2015 (BST)

Infobox marina & country


For some reason the "notes" in these templates do not work. However the "note" in Template:Infobox passage does work. I was unable to trace the cause of this. --Istioploos 16:22, 21 January 2016 (GMT)

Hi Vasilis! I seems to be fixed by now. As you spotted there was some inconsistency between "notes" and "note". It was "note" in Template:Infobox bottom hence Template:Infobox passage was OK. Now the both are using now "notes", like the others --Vadim 17:12, 21 January 2016 (GMT)
Yes I see that they are now working. Thanks. --Istioploos 20:14, 21 January 2016 (GMT)

Infobox Country


I wanted to add 3 optional items in Infobox Country (with their icons):

  • {{Coord|17|32|S|149|34|W|}} with [[image:World_icon.png]]
  • {[Gallery link}} with [[image:Photo_icon.png]], and
  • {{Chartlet link}} with [[image:Chart_icon.png]]

I am afraid that I might mess up the template so, since you have been rather active in templates recently could you do so?

Also when you are done with your templates upgrades could you please let me know so that we can revise Help:Embeddable_templates to reflect the upgrades?

--Istioploos 14:26, 29 January 2016 (GMT)

Infobox and Image right templates

Something happened between Template:Infobox and Template:Image right. The first one should display, by default, an image in 350px and the second in 345. This numbers make the images appear the same size. Now they are drastically different. As a matter of fact Infobox now displays the image smaller then 350px. For example see Europa Island. --Istioploos 21:57, 29 January 2016 (GMT)

My fault, sorry. It must be OK by now --Vadim 03:57, 30 January 2016 (GMT)
Thank you Vadim. It is now fine.


Hi Vadim,

I see that you are working on POI so most likely this is a temporary problem, but do see Bilbao where it is giving an error. --Istioploos 14:58, 1 February 2016 (GMT)

Apologies, Vasilis. The changes reverted, I must not make scrambled eggs with templates --Vadim 15:26, 1 February 2016 (GMT)


Vadim, I noticed the new template {{credits}} in the Santa Teresa Gallura. I have to confess that I strongly prefer the {{Contributors|}}. .

This is for several reasons. After a lot of discussions several years ago we, the then active editors, agreed to have a means of recognizing major contributor to a page so that members will be encouraged to contribute new material, especially from places that they had actually visited. By major we meant the creator of a page and others who had made substantial addition of original material. We deliberately excluded cosmetic and corrective editing. You will note that although I have worked on many pages I have included myself only to pages where I provided new material.

The new {{credits}} is non selective and mentions everyone who had edited the page regardless of contribution. In the Santa Teresa Gallura case it mentions a contributor twice (Lighthouse) and also a spammer (Riley Huntley) whose changes had been reverted. To do this takes a certain amount of critical judgement and would be very hard to automate. --Istioploos 19:52, 8 February 2016 (GMT)

No probs, Vasilis. That was only a test and I was not quite happy about how it renders either --Vadim 08:44, 9 February 2016 (GMT)

Vector Skin

I have been using, the "Vector Skin" instead of the default "Mono Book" for several days. I noticed that it does not give an editor the options (Move, Delete, Unprotect, & Watch/Unwatch) that "Mono Book" offers. --Istioploos 13:56, 11 February 2016 (GMT)

At the top of the page there is a small triangle between Read, Edit, Add topic, View history and a search box. When you hover over it you'll get Delete, Move, etc. --Vadim 14:04, 11 February 2016 (GMT)

You are of course right. Did not notice it. V


Vadim, after the last edition to clarify the doc both {{wikipedia}} and {{wikiyoage}} do not work without a parameter, they just go to the corresponding main page. --Istioploos 20:16, 20 February 2016 (GMT)

Fixed. Thanks for letting know. --Vadim 09:17, 21 February 2016 (GMT)

All these curly brackets in templates do make it ten hard to develop. They remind me when 30 years ago I was doing some programming in Lisp also a very powerful language but very error prone. --Istioploos 12:55, 21 February 2016 (GMT)

Yeah, Lisp was a tricky one --Vadim 12:38, 21 February 2016 (GMT)

Future of the Wiki - a viewpoint

Please have a look at World Cruising and Sailing Wiki#Future of the Wiki - a viewpoint.

Link to Google Maps

Vadim, see if this works for you: [1]--Athene of Lymington 18:08, 18 March 2016 (GMT)

Thanks Gordon, see my answer at Talk:World_Cruising_and_Sailing_Wiki#Map_with_location_pins --Vadim 18:49, 18 March 2016 (GMT)

Lipsi, Leros etc.

Vadim, I have made [[Lipsi] to conform User:Vadim/Chios. Also I have coalesced the 3 Leros pages back into Leros (same layout).

Please take a check these and then we may also want to the same to Chios & Lesvos.

After that I want to start on "help" template help, and "Stub Island page" --Istioploos 18:09, 29 March 2016 (BST)

My only concern is that the thumbnails on the right are too big, while you have better ones at the "tourism" section --Vadim 13:01, 30 March 2016 (BST)
I guess you are referring to all (Lipsi, Leros, & Lesvos). My rationale is that pictures about ports, anchorages, islands) are of primary interest to a cruiser and aesthetically at 345px line up with the infobox. The "Tourism" section on the other hand is of secondary (at least for some cruisers) interest and aesthetically some distance down from the infobox. --Istioploos 15:27, 30 March 2016 (BST)
I look for your "tourism" section and see that there is more balance between text and graphics there: it's easier to read even at a small screen. Have a look at "Chart of the Makris Yialos" at Lesvos# Anchorages: it is simply oversized, while "Chart of Sigri Region" looks much better, even "Chart of Mytilene Harbor" looks OK.
One more important thing: bigger thumbnails took more bandwidth, hence time to download over a mobile connection. Which I've checked right now: these pages a quite heavy. On the other hand a smaller size of thumbnails is compensated with lightbox feature we have now on this wiki.
By the way, some of graphics (chartlets), like "Chart of the Anchorage in Sigri", are slightly wider than 345px, so their thumbnails look blurred then resized just to a little bit, i.e. 345px
I reduced some of the pics in Lesvos.
Also please take look at {{Verified by}} on these pages where I put links to ports etc. visited. --Istioploos 20:46, 30 March 2016 (BST)
I've took quite an effort and edited another 3 articles trying to reduce some inconsistency there. So now there are my version for: User:Vadim/Lipsi, User:Vadim/Lesvos, User:Vadim/Leros and User:Vadim/Chios. A few things I've found eventually:
  • The most of the images should have a similar format
  • Max. width for right-hand side thumbnails -- 250px
  • If there is a gallery then it's usually better to move a respective thumbnail into a gallery
  • secondary POIs mentioned in the article text usually easier to grasp when they are form some sort of a list rather than a narrative text flow
In whole, I reckon, these pages look better connected now, albeit still far from being ideal --Vadim 18:14, 31 March 2016 (BST)
I looked in all 3 of these articles in User:Vadim. I think they definitely have a common good look and mostly agree with the above points. We are converging. But here are some comments:
  1. I see that you have removed the "Port of Entry" from the top Infobox. I think it is important to be there and in addition of the specific ports that it applied. The reason is that the ports are further down on the article and when some one is planning a trip it would be useful to have this info up in front.
    Perhaps in this case infobox for an island should have something like: "Has port of entry", otherwise it's a bit mesleading. Actually, islands should use "infobox island", ports -- "infobox port", etc. Currently they are all the same, but in future we could, for example, add some specific features for islands, and some other features for ports. --Vadim 20:30, 1 April 2016 (BST)
    Yes, "Has port of entry" would be ideal. --Istioploos 20:50, 1 April 2016 (BST)
  2. I too, had followed your example and reluctantly moved the section "Islands" high up in the page. But now I come back to original position. This is secondary info and it belongs in the group of ports, marinas, and anchorages.
    The thing is that "islands" section should be very short: 1 line per island, just like at "passages section". So the island-related content needs to be moved to a separate page. So my example is not correct in this sense. --Vadim 20:30, 1 April 2016 (BST)
    For large island (Offshore Islands as Lighthouse called them) one line is no problem because it is a bullet to a reference. The problem is small islands which need a few lines and possibly a picture if they have a good anchorage. --Istioploos 20:50, 1 April 2016 (BST)
  3. I have no problem with your choice of eliminating some admitently old and not so good photos. But we should keep a list of them and eventually delete them.
    No problem. I know how difficult to select an informative photo among the ones I took myself. When I show some photos to my guests they do not find a number of them particularly nice. The reason is that besides over factors I have also some memories of a place where I took a picture while the others don't --Vadim 20:30, 1 April 2016 (BST)
  4. In Xerocambos I would like to put back [[File:Leros_Fresco1.jpg]] because it and several others make it worth while of someone to take a hike up the hill to see the abandoned WW II Italian house with its frescoes.
    Should it go to the "tourism" section in this case? BTW I wonder is it rather a graffiti that a fresco? --Vadim 20:30, 1 April 2016 (BST)
    Yes, it could go to tourism. And it and others in that house are frescoes, some in color and detailed. --Istioploos 20:50, 1 April 2016 (BST)
  5. In User:Vadim/Leros the section of Vromolithos is missing.
    It didn't have closing }} -- fixed --Vadim 20:30, 1 April 2016 (BST)
  6. Should User:Vadim/Chios#Verified_by have links to the specific sections as the other 2 articles or none of them should?
    That's fine --Vadim 20:30, 1 April 2016 (BST)
Finally, since all these articles have very different layout from other pages if we do adapt this layout for the new "Stub (Prototype?) island page" what kind of a bot do we need to change all pages?
Yes, I do argee --Vadim 20:30, 1 April 2016 (BST)

Chios & Lesvos

Vadim, could you please move User:Vadim/Lesvos and User:Vadim/Chios to the main pages? I believe that we have finished with these 2 islands. --Istioploos 18:34, 15 April 2016 (BST)

Done --Vadim 19:10, 15 April 2016 (BST)

OK. I removed the orphan pages (ports & anchorages) and fixed referred links.--Istioploos 19:37, 15 April 2016 (BST)

Island Stub

I have made a new "Island Stub" (template) in User:Istioploos/Island. Please take a look and give me your comments before we use it to replace the old Island Template page. --Istioploos 14:10, 17 April 2016 (BST)

For "islands" section it looks like it's better to use template:mark, see User:Vadim/Samos.
For User:Vadim/Samos it is fine, but for more then 1 island mark will use not add these islands in the TOC. That is why I used poi.--Istioploos 22:00, 17 April 2016 (BST)
A suggestion: what if all green text to turn into comments. This way this text could stay inside an article for future reference? -- Vadim 20:25, 17 April 2016 (BST)
The intention was the Green text to be instructions that once a page is realized are to be removed. If we were convert these to comments pages will be rather large. Also being green they stand out so a new user who may overlook comments (<!--xxx-->) will definitely see them. On the other hand comments will be more permanent and less obtrusive. In the spirit Magenta text is to be replaced. --Istioploos 22:00, 17 April 2016 (BST)


I have been using for several months now the horizontal TOC. I agree with you that it looks better. Maybe we should leave one skin with a vertical TOC for users that prefer it, but I do not feel strongly about this. So, if you want to change all the skins go ahead.

Navionics Chart Symbols

The symbols in the Navionics charts (the charts you get when clicking on the infobox coordinates) are now very large, so large that one does not see the chart.

Please see Kythnos.

--Istioploos 23:08, 25 January 2017 (GMT)

Fixed. Thanks for letting know! --Vadim 08:43, 26 January 2017 (GMT)


Last year you proposed to modify "Yacht Services and Repairs" to a new section "Facilities". I then started modifying a number of island pages to reflect this. Few months ago you introduced an equivalent Amenities section that uses a table. I like this but for some pages it is too simple and the Facilities is more appropriate.

I propose to modify the "Template:Island/Preload" that now contains "Facilities" to also indicate the alternative, table based "Amenities". Change the instructions to favor "Amenities" for most cases but for more elaborate pages to use "Facilities". What do you think?

Also, I suppose, we should settle for a single name either "Facilities" or "Amenities". Either one is fine by me. Which one do you prefer?

--Istioploos 20:45, 1 February 2017 (GMT)

Hello Vasilis! The idea behind is that Facilities/ Supplies/ Services sections looked too sparse and difficult for "dissection". By combining them into a single table their content looks more compact, "watchablbe" and it's easier to digest that information at once. Facilities is just that case it's a sort "amorphous".
"Amenities" does not replace Facilities/ Supplies/ Services -- these subsections continue to exist as separate parts of a table otherwise the information there would lose its structure and become a messy list. The older arrangement -- Facilities/ Supplies/ Services -- was my attempt to enhance readability of an article, so I'd consider "Amenities" as a development of this idea
By the way, I'm going to take a pause on my activities here, as I'm getting ready for some other trips, but I'll be back. --Vadim 18:47, 2 February 2017 (GMT)

Hi Vadim! First of all I want to wish you a good time on your forth coming trips.

Your reasoning parallels mine on most points. That is why like the "Amenities" table. But if it is to replace the "Facilities/ Supplies/ Services" for pages that have a lot of material in these sections I have 2 possible reservations:

  1. "Amenities" headlines do not enter (at least as it is now) as headers and so they are not shown in the TOC.
  2. Several pages have a number of distinct entries under the "Facilities" headers. These lines, if entered in a "Amenities" table will make their boxes and the whole table rather large.

I have changed Patmos (a rather large page) to use "Amenities". Please compare it to its previous version. What do you think?

--Istioploos 14:00, 3 February 2017 (GMT)

Patmos with "Amenities" looks more readable for me and there is no need for separate TOC entries as the whole section could be looked through at once. I would rather to remove category icons from there as they look a bit distracting provided that each row already has a respective caption. Perhaps some sort of the "telegraph style" wouldn't hurt there, so see if you like my version of this section: User:Vadim/Patmos.
Yes, it does look better. Will use it. If you agree, I will modify "Template:Island/Preload" to reflect this. Then, after some testing will modify the corresponding port template.
Please do --Vadim 16:53, 6 February 2017 (GMT)
If an article has lots of stuff there perhaps it needs a split into a few smaller articles. At the top article you mention, for example, fuel in such port, repairs in another. Then at respective articles you put some finer details.
I think that it's not only a marina which deserve a separate article, but any berthing option (including a village harbour) which has accumulated some decent amount of information. By my experience with this wiki smaller articles are more convenient to navigate and consult with than bigger ones --Vadim 13:16, 5 February 2017 (GMT)
In general, I agree about this for large pages. But it does depend on the contents. For instance the Patmos page has only one port and a non-functioning marina but it does have many small anchorages. None of these justifies a separate page.
On the the other hand Leros has been split to separate marina pages. The 2 oorts do not have enough material so, I did not make them into separate pages as I had done for Samos but theoretically they can be spit. What do you think?
--Istioploos 13:55, 6 February 2017 (GMT)
Quite right, it depends on the amount of information gathered on a specific location.
By the way, there is a tendency here that only a private establishment for yachts is counted as a marina, but in fact a marina is "a dock or basin with moorings and supplies for yachts and small boats". So if a municipal harbour provides some facilities for small craft it is also a marina --Vadim 16:53, 6 February 2017 (GMT)
Not always. There are several municipal marinas in Greece. My criterion is not who runs it but if they do provide "marina" services i.e. moorings, attendants, and other amenities. Ports that you have to anchor and fend for yourself are not counted as marinas in my book. The exception is newly constructed marinas that are not in operation yet. By the way in Greece some of these have languished like this for over 10-15 years. --Istioploos 19:58, 6 February 2017 (GMT)


Vadim Chartlets have stopped displaying labels etc. I suspect a problem with the Navionics licence. Since you have done several layers of the chartlets couls you please take a look?--Istioploos 15:23, 13 June 2017 (BST)

Vasilis, it looks like you're quite right: CruisersWiki:ChartletNavionics page follows their examples, but currently it doesn't show their charts. Could you please try to contact Navionics on this matter? You can give them this address to have a look at --Vadim 16:02, 14 June 2017 (BST)
Do you remember where we have the licence?
Personal tools
Friends of Cruisers Wiki