Maybe the OP or the makers of this website don't know, but there is a definitive source of visa, passport, and transit permission info that the IATA already publishes to help airlines determine whether they should allow you on a flight. It's called Timatic.
It includes such detail as country of travel origin, country of passport issuance, nationality, duration of stay, country of transit, visa/papers held.
I would go to that source first than any other cobbled together fancy looking website that someone is hawking as a advertisement. And I don't know why someone would bother trying to duplicate Timatic by gathering their own info, which is guaranteed to be out of date. Honestly I don't even know how some small team could keep up with the 100x100 combinations of country/destination paperwork requirements.
Fwiw even timatic is wrong. I visited your link and entered India and Turkey as departure and arrival for Indian nationals.
The system advised me to apply for an eVisa, however eligibility criteria for eVisas is exclusive to folks who have a valid EU Schengen visa. Someone who casually relied on the result without reading further would have missed this.
The bottom line is travel is expensive and visa rejections have long lasting consequences. It is foolish to rely on anything except the official immigration department website of the country in question, or an official third party who is appointed by the government.
Apologies for negativity in my post. I did not realize that OP him/herself had made this website and might have been a first effort.
Still, I think my points are valid. Unless this is a personal hobby or tinkering effort, I would advise the OP to invest his/her time on something that is sustainable and not already covered at 10x the expertise by an existing service (in a relatively stable industry, more importantly).
The country content pages contain 6 lines that look like the OP wrote them personally. That is not something that smacks of reliability.
I agree on most of your points but just because there's a hard to use sub site on some airlines dealing with that doesn't mean there can't be an alternative. This site is probably not it based on the comments about the accuracy but there might be others available or coming in the future.
On top of that if people travel by train or other means it's not that obvious to look on the website of some airline.
Also it's someone sharing their site in a Show HN, constructive feedback (missing data, wrong information) would be helpful but "Why was this even a website worth posting about?" is not.
I don't think Timatic is foolproof either. It seems to work fine as long as the requirements are basic (have visa/duration of stay/visa on arrival) but it (or the people using it) seem to break down as soon you add any complexity.
I was travelling to a country which provided visa on arrival for 14 days, but my return ticket had a 1 month stay because I had a different ticket from that country to India after a week. Delta denied checking me in (took them more than an hour to solve the issue) at SFO and then Air France denied boarding me in Paris for my connection (took them 30 minutes to solve the issue).
I really don't see the why the negativity. While I agree that there's Timatic, there is nothing wrong in making something else that serves the same purpose. By your logic, every duplicate service in this world can be questioned.
> It includes such detail as country of travel origin, country of passport issuance, nationality, duration of stay, country of transit, visa/papers held.
Would have been nice had you commented this as a suggestion without that bashful tone, just my 2 cents.
Where did you get these phone numbers (for the United States)?
> Police - 999
> Ambulance - 997
> Fire - 998
> Traffic police - 993 Mobile phones - 112 or 911
> Non-emergency ambulance - 1777
> Police hotline - 1800 255 0000
> Traffic police - 6547 0000
None of them seem to be correct, except for 911. In the United States, 911 is the same for police, ambulance, fire, and "traffic police". Also, non-emergency ambulance/police are all varied depending on your current location and are usually administered by the county/city/district that you're in. There is no global number (that I'm aware of) that is the nearest non-emergency police/ambulance line.
I will submit my user story as an attempt to offer feedback on the site. I live in the United States and am traveling to Mexico next week.
I put in from: United States to: Mexico. The information I received begins with "Visa Required: Yes". This is news to me, as I have traveled in this manner several times and never had a visa. I don't have a visa for next week, and so I am now worried that I won't be allowed in to Mexico.
The next text presented is "Mexico city is the capital city of Mexico. Mexico is found in North america. Citizens from United states need visa to enter Mexico. In the Mexico country page you can find more tourist information about infrastructure and attractions." I do not think this text was written by someone who is a native English speaker. Some tells include not following English rules for proper noun capitalization, missing articles, and weird diction. This makes me less likely to trust the information. Is that fair? Maybe not. But it suggests the page has not been copy-edited or checked for accuracy. This text also reiterates that I would need a visa.
Then the next text says: "If you have a valid Canada, Japan, Schengen, United Kingdom, United States visa or are permanent resident you do not need visa to enter Mexico for up to 180 days." I do not understand what is being claimed here. If I have a US visa for Japan I can enter Mexico without a Mexican visa? I think what it's trying to say is if I carry a Canadian, Japanese, Schengen (EU), United Kingdom, or United States passport (not the same as a visa), I can enter Mexico without a visa for fewer than 180 days. But this is in contrast to the above text and header which claim I do need a visa.
Finally, I clicked on the Mexico page and saw that although it was missing a lot of essential information, it did tell me it's OK to possess marijuana in Mexico. A brief Google search does not make it clear if this information is correct -- I see a lot of information about how they're going to legalize but haven't yet. I am extremely concerned that this website is making a claim that, if incorrect, could get someone in serious legal trouble.
I then clicked "Visa information". This gave me a list of countries that require and do not require a visa to access Mexico. The list of countries that do not require a visa is enormous, far larger than the number above. What explains the inconsistency between the lists above and the list I'm looking at here? Even more baffling, immediately below this list of countries is text repeating the claim above that people with Canada, Japan, Schengen (EU), UK, or US "visas" do not need a visa for Mexico.
I am not trying to be negative. I am simply sharing my experience trying to use this website for a very simple use case as an actual user. After using the website, I am more unclear and concerned about my upcoming travel than I was when I started, and now I need to seek out external information to find out what is true and what is false.
The part about people with a visa for Canada, Japan, Schengen area, UK or US is just as the website says. It is not about passports. A person from a third country who holds one of above visas can enter Mexico without a Mexican visa.
I don't know if the site uses "mail city" as an equivalent to capital, because it also says "Hanoi is the mail city of Vietnam" (it's the capital but the largest city is Saigon/Ho Chi Minh, so it's debatable which one is the "main" one).
It's also full of other typos and badly formatted text, which I think is due to the data coming from a quick scrape of a source of dubious quality.
Your data is wrong. I put in from "United States" to "Israel", and it said a Visa is required, which is not true unless the visit is longer than 3 months.
Also, the very first time I used it, I typed in "USA" to "Germany", and it treated the unknown string "USA" as a country, and told me a visa was required, which is also not true.
I think this is a very though subject and cannot be treated so easily.
Visa policies might be very different from one country to another, updated quiet often etc.
What you believe to be the source of truth on the internet might not be the actual truth. For personal reasons I recently had to know whether or not a Visa was required for a personal short travel to Russia for a Mauritius citizen. Various information can be found on the internet, some says yes, some says no. Your website says a visa is required. However, a visa is not required in this case.
It's very tricky to get the correct information, always up to date, and your website can lead to people having issues entering a country.
Furthermore this website is dangerous. People travelling you thailand are advised by their embassies to bring 20,000 baht. It’s often not checked on arrival but people have been thrown in jail cells and deported because of this.
Visa information is no joke. You should always get it from the local embassy website.
Very misleading b/c layman may think just b/c you're travelling from A to B, you're required/not required to have visa, which is not true, it depends on the passport you hold regardless of your origin of your trip. For example, if you are travelling from Canada to the US, the site says you don't need a visa, but in fact if you do not hold Canadian passport, you may need to apply for ESTA.
Thanks for the info, I thought the process of A: home country, B: destination country.
If you go on the site and check, going from the US to Canada the meta title is: Canada visa for United States citizens but I get your point, will make it more obvious. Thanks, good feedback!
Small usability tip: When you specify your source/destination country and submit the form, the countries you entered should ideally still be in the form on the results page.
As it is, I'm from United Kingdom, checking out a country to go to, I see and read the visa information. If I want to check out another country, I have to enter I'm from United Kingdom again.
And I always feel the question of "what am I looking at?" is best answered by looking at the form. I know the information is displayed in other places on the results page, but still, the form is the part of the page the user has already interacted with, and are familiar with.
Wife is from Philippines living in Denmark and we had to go to Jordan, Aqaba. Your page will say I need Visa which is true but it’s given on arrival because of the entry point. Wife is another matter, she has to get it in the Jordanian embassy in Berlin as Denmark only has a consulate. The Jordanian webpage information has not been updated for ages and is wrong. The embassy is somewhat helpful but it took me several calls to figure out how to do the return postage for the passport as danish mail had discontinued this product a year earlier. Also first thing wife will usually do is google visa <country> and end up on a advertisement with a high premium on the visa and a crazy fee when you realize the mistake and try and cancel. Would be great with a place to get a quick overview of the normal price and a place to comment and discuss the challenges you sometimes run into.
Exactly - visas aren't quite as black and white as the website appears to make out. There's visa on arrival vs having to go to an embassy/consulate (and there might not be one in the country you're currently in - it's not impossible to get yourself into a state where you have to travel back to your home country to be able to apply for a visa to your intended destination). Plus certain visas actually give you right of entry to other countries (for example if you have a US visa, you can enter nearly forty countries visa-free, some with caveats).
I wouldn't recommend this website for visa information. For example, I put in "United States" -> "Peru" - it says visa is required and when clicked on more information it takes me to a page where it lists which countries require visa for traveling to Peru. In that list among the visa required countries, it shows "united states" and in no visa required section it has "united statesa"
Yet another issue: Hong Kong and Taiwan are not listed as options.
No matter what your political views are about the situation, the fact is that they have separate visa rules from mainland China and should definitely be listed.
>We warmly welcome you, our dear client! If you read these lines it means you have a concern, or you just want to know who is behind this site. And we want to know so let’s get together!
(follows a lenghty explanation of how to use Iavisa and on what is a Visa)
So they don't even know who they are?
Yet in the "Terms" page there is this little pearl of wisdom:
>Thirdly, it’s time to talk about protecting your data, a very special topic nowadays. It is your responsibility to keep your phone and access to the web app secure. It is not recomended to jailbreak or even root your phone, which is the process of the removing software restrictions and limitations imposed by the official operating system to your device. If you do this, it could make your phone vulnerable to malicious, viruses and malware programs, compromise your phone’s security features and it could meant that the web app won’t work properly or at all.
I clicked on this to use it for the exact use case I posted elsewhere in the thread (US to Mexico). The website loaded faster -- maybe because it is faster, maybe because no HN hug of death -- but more importantly, the information was presented in a clearer and more efficient way. I especially appreciated that the data included "Visa free", "Visa on arrival", and "E-Visa", since these are not the same thing and the distinction is useful. I've been to a number of visa on arrival countries and typically all I need to remember is to have a payment method to pay the entry fee, versus "Visa required", which would imply needing to go to a consulate or embassy in advance.
The site seems to aim at providing a quick and easy way of accessing this information that is lower reliability than say, going and looking for each bit of info yourself.
So I see the value.
What I think you need to clarify and improve on is:
1- Making sure people understand that your info might not be perfect/100% accurate.
2- Provide links for people to verify any data points that are of particular value to them.
For example, on the US, there is a point about weed with the following answer: "In some states you can, in other it is illegal."
To be clear: even in states where it is legal, the Federal government considers it illegal, and your use of the substance even in a legal state will disqualify you from Visa eligibility. If you buy it and then lie, you are also breaking your Visa eligibility.
So, while your offhanded answer can be great for gathering a birds eye view on a lot of data points, users can't really place too much trust in the completeness or accuracy of any one answer.
Explaining this and linking to other sites for more in-depth info, like in the case of the USA VisaJourney.com - would great improve the usefulness of your site.
Basically, don't try to be an authority when you are not. Instead provide something that is missing; a better connection of high level, low accuracy info.
As it stands, I feel your site is more a danger to others for relying on it, than it could provide benefit.
There's some search/replace issues in the text. For example, it seems 'us' was replaced with 'United States' which results in India's visa info having this sort of text: "You mUnited Statest apply at least 4 days".
A good, friendly site for this info is much needed. But, as many have pointed out, this is a particularly tough problem to solve as the source of info is itself unreliable.
I checked India to eSwatini and was not surprised to find that the country was still listed with its old name, Swaziland. The visa situation for this pair is complex with a visa preapproval that's needed and a visa to be obtained in eSwatini not at the border but at an office in the city (which you are allowed to go to). And, naturally, none of this is documented anywhere.
First search and already wrong. I, as a Pole, don't need a visa for Malaysia. How do I know? I entered the country just a few months before without any problems.
I feel compelled to point out that, with respect, all you really know is what the situation was at the time you entered. Not only are visa/entry requirements complex, they are also fluid - adding to the chorus of reasons why this is not a subject that cannot be approached lightly. There really is no such thing as an MVP when it comes to what is essentially legal advice. You're either accurate or you're dangerously wrong IMO.
The title of the post says "explore visa requirements". So I go to the site, select "travel from USA to France" and hit the button. The only thing I see about visa requirements is "Visa Required: Yes". Nothing else. Not much to explore. The fact that a US citizen does not need a visa to travel to any Schengen country is besides the point.
Can’t use their contact form - it’s just not working, so posting it here:
Hey there,
Tested your website - putting travel from Ukraine to Switzerland and Germany and your website says visa required, however it is not for 90 days for Ukrainian citizens holders of the biometric passport. Please update.
Also your website is really slow. Let me know, if you need hints on optimization for loading.
I use https://www.viselio.com/. They take it a step further and offer a fully automated visa application form. Just enter the country you want to travel to and they take care of the visa.
Uh, it says people drive on the left side in the United States. Also, there's some weird caching artifact. When I repeat the search for a different pair of countries, it takes me back to the results of my previous search
supernova87a|6 years ago
It includes such detail as country of travel origin, country of passport issuance, nationality, duration of stay, country of transit, visa/papers held.
I would go to that source first than any other cobbled together fancy looking website that someone is hawking as a advertisement. And I don't know why someone would bother trying to duplicate Timatic by gathering their own info, which is guaranteed to be out of date. Honestly I don't even know how some small team could keep up with the 100x100 combinations of country/destination paperwork requirements.
It's found through the airline websites themselves, as they have to subscribe as a service, like: https://www.united.com/web/en-us/apps/vendors/default.aspx?i...
Edit: The OP's website is already so slow and low in info content, and Timatic while ugly, works. Why was this even a website worth posting about?
fareesh|6 years ago
The system advised me to apply for an eVisa, however eligibility criteria for eVisas is exclusive to folks who have a valid EU Schengen visa. Someone who casually relied on the result without reading further would have missed this.
The bottom line is travel is expensive and visa rejections have long lasting consequences. It is foolish to rely on anything except the official immigration department website of the country in question, or an official third party who is appointed by the government.
supernova87a|6 years ago
Still, I think my points are valid. Unless this is a personal hobby or tinkering effort, I would advise the OP to invest his/her time on something that is sustainable and not already covered at 10x the expertise by an existing service (in a relatively stable industry, more importantly).
The country content pages contain 6 lines that look like the OP wrote them personally. That is not something that smacks of reliability.
dewey|6 years ago
On top of that if people travel by train or other means it's not that obvious to look on the website of some airline.
Also it's someone sharing their site in a Show HN, constructive feedback (missing data, wrong information) would be helpful but "Why was this even a website worth posting about?" is not.
Scoundreller|6 years ago
There’s a big open space in « How to achieve those requirements ».
And Timatic mostly concerns itself with entry. The requirements to work is another big open space.
dhruvrrp|6 years ago
I was travelling to a country which provided visa on arrival for 14 days, but my return ticket had a 1 month stay because I had a different ticket from that country to India after a week. Delta denied checking me in (took them more than an hour to solve the issue) at SFO and then Air France denied boarding me in Paris for my connection (took them 30 minutes to solve the issue).
compilers|6 years ago
> It includes such detail as country of travel origin, country of passport issuance, nationality, duration of stay, country of transit, visa/papers held.
Would have been nice had you commented this as a suggestion without that bashful tone, just my 2 cents.
sirmoveon|6 years ago
Do I have to subscribe and make an account just for that simple information?
sirfz|6 years ago
iamgopal|6 years ago
keehun|6 years ago
> Police - 999
> Ambulance - 997
> Fire - 998
> Traffic police - 993 Mobile phones - 112 or 911
> Non-emergency ambulance - 1777
> Police hotline - 1800 255 0000
> Traffic police - 6547 0000
None of them seem to be correct, except for 911. In the United States, 911 is the same for police, ambulance, fire, and "traffic police". Also, non-emergency ambulance/police are all varied depending on your current location and are usually administered by the county/city/district that you're in. There is no global number (that I'm aware of) that is the nearest non-emergency police/ambulance line.
unknown|6 years ago
[deleted]
delfinom|6 years ago
[deleted]
notafraudster|6 years ago
I put in from: United States to: Mexico. The information I received begins with "Visa Required: Yes". This is news to me, as I have traveled in this manner several times and never had a visa. I don't have a visa for next week, and so I am now worried that I won't be allowed in to Mexico.
The next text presented is "Mexico city is the capital city of Mexico. Mexico is found in North america. Citizens from United states need visa to enter Mexico. In the Mexico country page you can find more tourist information about infrastructure and attractions." I do not think this text was written by someone who is a native English speaker. Some tells include not following English rules for proper noun capitalization, missing articles, and weird diction. This makes me less likely to trust the information. Is that fair? Maybe not. But it suggests the page has not been copy-edited or checked for accuracy. This text also reiterates that I would need a visa.
Then the next text says: "If you have a valid Canada, Japan, Schengen, United Kingdom, United States visa or are permanent resident you do not need visa to enter Mexico for up to 180 days." I do not understand what is being claimed here. If I have a US visa for Japan I can enter Mexico without a Mexican visa? I think what it's trying to say is if I carry a Canadian, Japanese, Schengen (EU), United Kingdom, or United States passport (not the same as a visa), I can enter Mexico without a visa for fewer than 180 days. But this is in contrast to the above text and header which claim I do need a visa.
Finally, I clicked on the Mexico page and saw that although it was missing a lot of essential information, it did tell me it's OK to possess marijuana in Mexico. A brief Google search does not make it clear if this information is correct -- I see a lot of information about how they're going to legalize but haven't yet. I am extremely concerned that this website is making a claim that, if incorrect, could get someone in serious legal trouble.
I then clicked "Visa information". This gave me a list of countries that require and do not require a visa to access Mexico. The list of countries that do not require a visa is enormous, far larger than the number above. What explains the inconsistency between the lists above and the list I'm looking at here? Even more baffling, immediately below this list of countries is text repeating the claim above that people with Canada, Japan, Schengen (EU), UK, or US "visas" do not need a visa for Mexico.
I am not trying to be negative. I am simply sharing my experience trying to use this website for a very simple use case as an actual user. After using the website, I am more unclear and concerned about my upcoming travel than I was when I started, and now I need to seek out external information to find out what is true and what is false.
joshuaissac|6 years ago
https://www.inm.gob.mx/gobmx/word/index.php/paises-requieren...
theurs|6 years ago
steffann|6 years ago
I wouldn't trust a website with such low quality text and information, especially not for advice on legal/travel documents.
airstrike|6 years ago
seszett|6 years ago
It's also full of other typos and badly formatted text, which I think is due to the data coming from a quick scrape of a source of dubious quality.
theurs|6 years ago
transreal|6 years ago
Also, the very first time I used it, I typed in "USA" to "Germany", and it treated the unknown string "USA" as a country, and told me a visa was required, which is also not true.
jchampem|6 years ago
Visa policies might be very different from one country to another, updated quiet often etc.
What you believe to be the source of truth on the internet might not be the actual truth. For personal reasons I recently had to know whether or not a Visa was required for a personal short travel to Russia for a Mauritius citizen. Various information can be found on the internet, some says yes, some says no. Your website says a visa is required. However, a visa is not required in this case.
It's very tricky to get the correct information, always up to date, and your website can lead to people having issues entering a country.
deanclatworthy|6 years ago
Visa information is no joke. You should always get it from the local embassy website.
taesu|6 years ago
tjbiddle|6 years ago
theurs|6 years ago
If you go on the site and check, going from the US to Canada the meta title is: Canada visa for United States citizens but I get your point, will make it more obvious. Thanks, good feedback!
adrianmsmith|6 years ago
As it is, I'm from United Kingdom, checking out a country to go to, I see and read the visa information. If I want to check out another country, I have to enter I'm from United Kingdom again.
And I always feel the question of "what am I looking at?" is best answered by looking at the form. I know the information is displayed in other places on the results page, but still, the form is the part of the page the user has already interacted with, and are familiar with.
simonsaidit|6 years ago
filleduchaos|6 years ago
wippler|6 years ago
United857|6 years ago
No matter what your political views are about the situation, the fact is that they have separate visa rules from mainland China and should definitely be listed.
ulfw|6 years ago
https://www.traveldoc.aero
You can input your Origin and Destination, Passport info and select one way or round trip/transit etc and see the relevant information, up to date.
hsson|6 years ago
"A bUnited Statesiness visa requires an invitation from a company..."
seszett|6 years ago
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/266...
jaclaz|6 years ago
>We warmly welcome you, our dear client! If you read these lines it means you have a concern, or you just want to know who is behind this site. And we want to know so let’s get together!
(follows a lenghty explanation of how to use Iavisa and on what is a Visa)
So they don't even know who they are?
Yet in the "Terms" page there is this little pearl of wisdom:
>Thirdly, it’s time to talk about protecting your data, a very special topic nowadays. It is your responsibility to keep your phone and access to the web app secure. It is not recomended to jailbreak or even root your phone, which is the process of the removing software restrictions and limitations imposed by the official operating system to your device. If you do this, it could make your phone vulnerable to malicious, viruses and malware programs, compromise your phone’s security features and it could meant that the web app won’t work properly or at all.
maybeiambatman|6 years ago
notafraudster|6 years ago
craze3|6 years ago
Since then, he went on to launch a crypto trading tool that is making him $2k/month: https://www.indiehackers.com/interview/how-i-built-a-cryptoc...
olivierkaisin|6 years ago
1hakr|6 years ago
4ntonius8lock|6 years ago
So I see the value.
What I think you need to clarify and improve on is: 1- Making sure people understand that your info might not be perfect/100% accurate. 2- Provide links for people to verify any data points that are of particular value to them.
For example, on the US, there is a point about weed with the following answer: "In some states you can, in other it is illegal."
To be clear: even in states where it is legal, the Federal government considers it illegal, and your use of the substance even in a legal state will disqualify you from Visa eligibility. If you buy it and then lie, you are also breaking your Visa eligibility.
So, while your offhanded answer can be great for gathering a birds eye view on a lot of data points, users can't really place too much trust in the completeness or accuracy of any one answer.
Explaining this and linking to other sites for more in-depth info, like in the case of the USA VisaJourney.com - would great improve the usefulness of your site.
Basically, don't try to be an authority when you are not. Instead provide something that is missing; a better connection of high level, low accuracy info.
As it stands, I feel your site is more a danger to others for relying on it, than it could provide benefit.
raverbashing|6 years ago
Also a good disclaimer to add is that this concerns visa for short visits.
corn_dog|6 years ago
marcinzm|6 years ago
thejosh|6 years ago
https://iavisa.com/fast-united-states-visa-for-australia-cit...
> In order to United Statese
astatine|6 years ago
I checked India to eSwatini and was not surprised to find that the country was still listed with its old name, Swaziland. The visa situation for this pair is complex with a visa preapproval that's needed and a visa to be obtained in eSwatini not at the border but at an office in the city (which you are allowed to go to). And, naturally, none of this is documented anywhere.
odiroot|6 years ago
darrenf|6 years ago
fishywang|6 years ago
theurs|6 years ago
fareesh|6 years ago
A product like this is conceptually flawed, because it is defeated by better judgement.
MadWombat|6 years ago
leshkanyc|6 years ago
Hey there,
Tested your website - putting travel from Ukraine to Switzerland and Germany and your website says visa required, however it is not for 90 days for Ukrainian citizens holders of the biometric passport. Please update.
Also your website is really slow. Let me know, if you need hints on optimization for loading.
Alex
geeku|6 years ago
alexxxyz|6 years ago
I use https://www.viselio.com/. They take it a step further and offer a fully automated visa application form. Just enter the country you want to travel to and they take care of the visa.
deepspace|6 years ago
1. When I click on a country name, I see country information and have to click on a tab to see visa information. Poor user experience.
2. The "visa required" list for a country is not sorted alphabetically. It's just an unusable mess, really.
wingworks|6 years ago
sombremesa|6 years ago
Edit: it doesn't. Just incorrect.
aloknnikhil|6 years ago
alexxxyz|6 years ago
I use https://www.viselio.com. They take it a step further and offer a fully automated visa application form.
adamc|6 years ago
cnxhk|6 years ago
joegahona|6 years ago
mshockwave|6 years ago
kalleboo|6 years ago
charlesdm|6 years ago
pyryt|6 years ago
huhtenberg|6 years ago
Erm... :)
29athrowaway|6 years ago
squanch|6 years ago
theurs|6 years ago