text:
Talk:Trans-Canada Highway

Rename
Shouldnt this be Trans-Canada Highway, which is the official name of it?

Show multiple routes?
Since the trans-canada actually seems to follow a couple routes in some parts of the country this article may need some division between following these different paths. But it also needs a route explained that travels through TO, Montreal, Quebec City etc. I will probably add this during the summer as I travel it. Anyone have suggestions on how to organize it?

 * If this article were written properly (which it likely won't be anytime soon, as it has only received relatively minor changes since 2010 despite being woefully incomplete)? It would have to be split into regions, much like New York City starts with a main article and splits into boroughs. Glancing at this after expanding the 1150km Windsor-Quebec corridor I'm pretty much shaking my head... no, a treatment of everything from Victoria to St. John's at even the "overview" level currently in the Windsor-QC itinerary would create something too large to be manageable as a single unit. The descriptions would have to be dumbed down to the level of "Montréal, smoked meat, bagels, Habs game, hein?" and skip directly to Ottawa or Québec City with an equally minimal description just to get through it all... for an entire nation.
 * The only way I can see this being manageable is for this page to be an overview, then break out the mainline West (TC 1, Victoria-Winnipeg), Ontario (17/417/QC40, Kenora to Montréal), Québec (mainline 40/20 to NB), Maritimes and Newfoundland (mainline, NB2 NS104/105 NL1 bypassing PEI). These four pages would be the core route; there are also multiple routes that branch from this as a loop or spur.
 * West (north alternate, TC 16)
 * Ontario 11 (south alternate, 11/71 Fort Frances)
 * Ontario 11 (north alternate, 11 Cochrane)
 * Ontario 7 (south alternate, 7/12/69 Peterborough)
 * Québec (north alternate, 117 road to Rouyn)
 * PEI (NB/PEI/NS north alternate, to pick up 1 Charlottetown)
 * Total would be eleven pages (one overview, four mainline sections, half a dozen alternates for individual pieces) - ten if the two ON 11 loops are listed together. The total length of Trans-Canada Highway should be about six times the text that's in Windsor-Quebec corridor - most of it mainline TCH - so four main sections plus the overview fits. K7L (talk) 04:27, 4 November 2012 (CET)

 * Take a look at Route 66 for a comparison. It lists only a handful of the absolute highlights and classic stops per state, leaving all the rest to city articles.  The level of detail currently given in Windsor-Quebec corridor would be excessive.  -- D. Guillaume (talk) 05:29, 4 November 2012 (CET)
 * Even with the shortened descriptions Route 66 is geographically less than half as long as the mainline Trans-Canada Highway, covering three time zones instead of six. It also doesn't have the lengthy alternate routes (just a few short pieces where the road was re-aligned over the years). TC has one branch through Regina and Calgary (1) and another through Saskatoon and Edmonton (16), each spanning four western provinces. Those branches alone (Winnipeg-Victoria and Winnipeg-northernBC) could likely be an itinerary each, crossing three time zones (CT, MT, PT... same as US66). Take all of it and you'd have almost simply created Canada as an itinerary (or at least Canada minus Toronto-Windsor, Halifax, the high Arctic and a few sparsely-populated areas off the beaten track) as the idea is that this passes through every province in the land in some form.
 * wikipedia:Trans-Canada Highway is one page only because it does not list landmarks at all (except for a few illustrations) and any km/mileage info is split out into the individual constituent highway articles (such as BC 1 or NB 2). It's in better shape than this page, although it would be marginal for having enough info to be an itinerary. K7L (talk) 17:20, 4 November 2012 (CET)

TCH 16
Should we have a Highway 16 splitoff? I know most of the route pretty well and I could make a dandy itinerary of it I believe. What do you think? (WT-en) edmontonenthusiast [ee] .T.A.L.K. 15:23, 23 December 2008 (EST).
 * Yellowhead Highway is a valid topic should someone ever bother to create it. K7L (talk) 17:10, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Map
Is there any way to show more cities on the map? Should the map, perhaps, be divided into three maps or so?

I guess the other thing this article really needs is some nice photos. Then it could probably be a Guide. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:48, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

 * It would also be great if alternate routes could be detailed the way the Main Line is. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:51, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

A fine grey dog's breakfast
Here's what appears to have replaced Greyhound on the Vancouver-Calgary-Winnipeg-Sudbury-Ottawa segments of the Trans-Canada mainline: A dog's breakfast, indeed. Best to leave sleeping (or dead) grey dogs lay? K7L (talk) 03:44, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/rider-express-greyhound-routes-western-canada-1.4792562
 * https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-bay/greyhound-departure-white-river-ontario-1.4840297
 * https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-bay/kasper-transportation-manitoba-expansion-1.4740987
 * https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudbury/ontario-northland-expanding-service-area-1.4488216

New banner
I've made a couple of banners. My personal picks are 3, 2 and then 4, then 0. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 07:09, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

 * The only one like better than the current one is 3. After 0, there's 4, then 2. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:08, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Also 3, 0, 4, 2 for me. Ground Zero (talk) 10:41, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I also vote for #3. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 14:28, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 07:04, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Trans-Canada Highway


text:
Talk:TransMékong

Um. I wouldn't object to a synopsis of this being placed under Mekong Delta#Get Around, but this is just way too close to advertising now... (WT-en) Jpatokal 00:24, 9 April 2006 (EDT)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:TransMékong


text:
Talk:Transnistria

Infobox
I'd suggest restoring the infobox -- regardless of legal niceties, Transnistria is as de-facto independent as, say, Northern Cyprus. (WT-en) Jpatokal 10:04, 2 July 2006 (EDT)

isIn
Currently, this article is not listed on the Eastern Europe page, but is listed under Moldova as a "territorial unit" together with the explanation "...break-away region east of the Dniester River, on the Ukrainian border, where Russian forces are supporting the Slavic minority population, mostly Ukrainians and Russians, who have proclaimed a unrecognized "Transnistria" republic."

So I changed the isIn back from isin: Eastern_Europe to isin: Moldova for hierarchical (and geographic?) consistency - if this isn't appropriate, maybe Transnistria could/should be added to the Eastern Europe page. ~ 203.144.143.8 06:28, 21 December 2006 (EST)

 * Mf. I hate issues like this, but my thinking is that while some Transnistrians would violently object to being "in" Romania, pretty much everybody can agree that it is in Eastern Europe. De facto, for the traveller, it is a separate country — but as Moldova claims it, it should also be listed under Moldova. (WT-en) Jpatokal 10:03, 21 December 2006 (EST)

I just performed a very lengthy update of the entire page. I'm a volunteer with an NGO stationed in Moldova, and I travel to Transnistria quite a bit. It's a great place, but it also presents a lot of problems for travellers. I've added quite a bit about the border crossings to the page, and have fleshed out many of the other sections based on my experiences and on the experiences of others foreign nationals who have attempted to travel in Transnistria. I don't normally edit Wikipedia, so I have no account. But you can check this IP! It's Moldova! 83.218.213.6 08:37, 5 February 2007 (EST)

 * I hope you (or someone else) can update the article again. The following sentences are contradictory — it's a strain to see how both quotes could be true: "Due to the ongoing hostilities with Moldova proper (since July 2004), it is generally not advisable to travel there," and "And despite the political situation with Moldova, there is essentially no threat of being caught in a military action. As of this writing (Feb. 2007), there has not been fighting in Transnistria for almost 15 years."  68.127.171.94 00:37, 21 September 2007 (EDT)

Trains; bribes
Hello, I have travelled three times to Transnistria and I have always used the train Odessa-Tiraspol, which runs frequently. I have heard of infrequent disruption of trains between Moldova and Transnistria, but as far as I'm aware the trains between Odessa and Transnistria run.

About bribes: During my time in Transnistria (altogether more than two months) I had never needed to bribe any policemen, soldiers etc. The situation is much worse in Ukraine or Moldova. 84.171.201.175 April 2008

 * I have travelled to Priednestrovie about five times, crossing the border pretty much every way that is possible, and I never paid a bribe or heard of someone paying a bribe. If anything I was met with more respect and professionalism by the border police than in Ukraine and Moldova. This article is full of prejudice, russophobia and unnecessarily scares tourists. (Unregistered User, February/2022) —The preceding comment was added by 79.136.41.98 (talk • contribs)

 * Dear Mr./Ms./Mx. Unregistered User: Would you like to complain about an article on a Wiki that anyone can edit, or would you like to edit anything in the article that is inaccurate? Though having established already that you have a chip on your shoulder, it would be better for you to itemize the things you consider inaccurate and get a consensus behind changing them. You have to be willing to respect consensus to participate on a Wiki, and you've already insulted what the preexisting consensus has written in this article and established that you have a motive to scrub anything remotely negative from the article even if it were accurate. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:24, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I removed the parts about bribes at border crossings -- I crossed the border without any hassle, and I take the anon editor's statement about border crossings at face value. I ignored the rest of their rant as there was nothing specific in question. Ground Zero (talk) 19:17, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Problems with missing Moldovan entry/exit stamps due to entry/exit through Transnistria
I could not find any reports people have ever had problems because of this. If there are, please point them out! After all, there will be an entry/exit stamp from Ukraine, containing date and name of the Ukraine/Transnistria border crossing so it is obvious how the passport holder has entered/left the country. I have traveled UA-PMR-MD-UA this January (2011) and wasn't even asked any questions on leaving MD. That said, I'd like to remove/rephrase this "warning" accordingly as it'll only worry people needlessly. (WT-en) T 18:05, 15 January 2011 (EST)

Next Russian-occupied area to be absorbed by Russia
Reports state that moves are now afoot to make Transnistria part of Russia, just like Crimea. We need to watch and act accordingly. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:44, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
 * We keep on watching. Ibaman (talk) 20:03, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
 * As of 2020, we keep watching. Ibaman (talk) 17:18, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 * ... still watching. Ibaman (talk) 20:11, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Russia's a bit busy lately, as I think you've noticed. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:15, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
 * yeah, but not in this region, so far, contrary to many expectations, including mine (Donetsk and Lugansk have been claimed to be officially annexed into Russia but Transnistria has not; I was kinda expecting some such military or official action since 2014, actually but, alas, nothing has happened). Let me also express my happiness about the Pridnestrovie name-pushing by anonymous IPs being long inactive here AND in Wikipedia. Ibaman (talk) 20:26, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
 * You were hoping for death and destruction (military action)? Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:58, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
 * oh please IK. You know me. I would never "hope" or "cheer" for something like this, I was aware of the possibility and vigilant whether it might or would happen. Listening closely for news and their ramifications. Ready to replicate here any official statements or developments relevant for travellers.
 * I'm actually glad to mark the time that the war never came close to Transnistria, hopefully it never will. Just look at this timeline, since 2014 we were FEARING for something like this to happen. Yet, it didn't, and this, yes, makes me glad. At a personal level, my main hope is that the conflict be over and the region can be safe for travel and tourism again. Ibaman (talk) 21:23, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I know you, but I also know you're pro-Russian and anti-Ukrainian. But in this case, you misused the word "alas." Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:31, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
 * For Geographical hierarchy, we should follow the principles of The traveller comes first, with regards to transportation, immigration rules, and other practical concerns. Transnistria has no land connection or scheduled transport to Russia proper, and will probably remain as such. Kaliningrad is an exclave, but is an integrated part of Russia, and still has scheduled transportation to Russia proper, though the sanctions have complicated the situation. Crimea is a similar case, though the Russian occupation violates international law, but this can change on short notice. /Yvwv (talk) 21:59, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Safety
Any information on how safe it is to visit this area in 2018? Marathonian (talk) 19:07, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I visited in September this year, and it felt as safe as other European countries. Ground Zero (talk) 20:07, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

 * Mostly safe. Be careful with taking pictures of administrative buildings, police, military, and anything related to that (Moldova is even more paranoic, so Transnistria may feel more relaxed if you go there after Chisinau). You may encounter youngsters who roam around and sometimes approach strangers in a rather annoying manner, but they should be harmless unless you provoke them. And they probably won't be able to speak English.
 * Do not overstay. Better ask registration for a longer period than you actually need, or make sure that you leave on time. --Alexander (talk) 20:47, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

See section
Why doesn't this article have any, unlike other country or region level articles? 147.147.52.22 22:10, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

 * Because no-one added one, I guess? Perhaps you'd like to add one and add content to it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:44, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * There are only three city articles for Transnistria. Why would it be subdivided? Unless, of course, more content were added, which would be supergood. Ground Zero (talk) 06:39, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I think you misread the thread-starter's question, which is why there's no "See" section in this country-level article. There should be one. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:50, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, I missed the point entirely. Thanks for pointing that out. Ground Zero (talk) 07:06, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Pridnestrovie
Every once in a while, since the beginning of this community, the occasional complaint about using the Latin or the Russian term for this region comes back again. I hope the newly-written "Respect" section is enough to keep everybody happy about this subject matter. Ibaman (talk) 20:55, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 * If "Transnistria" is so offensive, someone should tell the country's biggest tour operator, Transnistria Tour. Ground Zero (talk) 21:26, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

What does Krasnoselsky have to do with it, when a tourist can simply be beaten up by random people because he said this "transnistria" just by negligence or ignorance? 31.31.13.73 21:56, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Can you provide evidence that this has happened? A link to a news report, for example? That would help. Thanks. Ground Zero (talk) 22:03, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

 * I'd like to elaborate on this discussion, as I happen to be Brazilian, speak Portuguese (that derives from Latin) as my mother tongue, and also happen to enjoy studying Russian language, history and culture. The standard term in Portuguese for the country is "Transnístria" (that is, "beyond the Dniester river"; from the geographical point of view of every Latin-derived language spoken inside Europe, it is indeed). Brazil's political situation right now is well-known on world news, with a right-wing government keen on spreading biased information through Twitter. There's a lot of misinformation going on about Ukraine and Syria et cetera. When I discuss world politics (which I do very often), I like to ask the interlocutor "Ever heard about Transnístria? (hardly any bolso-hooligan has ever. That's when I explain geography and history and language and present situation) By the way, don't use this name to their face, they call their land Pridnestrovie ("at this side of the Dniester river", the Russian geographical point of view)." I reckon it would be futile to dream the Latin term will become obsolete in a foreseeable future, specially when it comes to the Latin linguistic branch. I say this as a polyglot student. Speaking as a traveller, I hope I can one day get to know Tiraspol, preferably on a road trip from Kishinev to Odessa. Ibaman (talk) 23:03, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm fortunate to have been to Tiraspol, and really enjoyed my visit. I recommend the tour company that I linked above as they gave me great perspective on how people live in an unrecognized country. Also I recommend trying the Kvint brandy. It's really good. Ground Zero (talk) 02:08, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * This is actually not a Latin term, but a Romanian one ("Nistru" is the Romanian name for the Dniester River). It really literally translates as "through the Dniester", "on the other side of the Dniester" - of course, from Romania. And this term appeared as a designation of the territory of the modern Odessa region of Ukraine occupied by Romania during the Second World War, where they committed genocide of the civilian population, killing more than 300 thousand people. This term has nothing to do with the PMR, especially since this region lies on both sides of the Dniester River and even less so not "beyond the Dniester" (because it is not Romania). Local residents remember and know this very well, which is why I say that tourists should be warned not to offend people, because this word is an extremely rude and derogatory insult for the inhabitants of this country who suffered from the Romanian aggression in 1918-40, 1941-44 and in 1992. It can sadly end for them, then they will whine on the Internet in their stupid blogs, that Pridnestrovie is a barbaric country and what kind of evil and inhospitable people are there. I wonder if you, as a native speaker of the Portuguese language and a polyglot student, know where this word came from in your language? I understand that saying that this is an established term is stupid, because not even a fraction of the percent of native speakers have heard about Pridnestrovie, but you used exactly it. 31.31.13.73 08:11, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Sure, we should clearly state that this term can offend, and I think a brief version of why also provides a useful context, but what is the likelihood of a foreigner who in most cases wouldn't know any better being physically attacked for using that name? The point really is to provide as strong a warning as necessary, but not to overstate things. If it's not likely for ignorant foreigners to be assaulted, what is likely? For them to be yelled at? Stared at hostilely? Or simply requested to use the other name, which will be harder for non-Slavs to pronounce but which they should certainly try saying? Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:20, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * 1234. Of course, no one was killed or crippled here to write about this in the news, but I have come across such conflicts more than once personally: today these ignorant "tourists" travel to Tiraspol with whole buses. And the reason is precisely in such articles on the Internet, which not very smart people perceive as common truth that does not need to be checked. 31.31.13.73 08:22, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I've moved your reply to the bottom because it was the last reply. I understand why you put it where you did, but it's easier to follow discussions in a straight chronology. That said, please describe the conflicts you've witnessed. What happened? Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:33, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * The biggest tour operator? All local tour operators work for the local population, organizing trips abroad. This is a small individual entrepreneur who advertised himself on the Internet. There are actually several of them, among the local population they are known for being associated with the organization of gay tourism. What else to expect from gay prostitutes, other than "transnistria"? 31.31.13.73 08:30, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * If you're trying to establish credibility by insulting people and making apparently anti-gay remarks, try a different method. I suggest you state very clearly what the consequences have been for foreigners using the term that a local travel agency - however you want to characterize them - also uses. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:37, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * By the way, this is also an important note: in Pridnestrovie one should not openly declare non-traditional sexual addictions and orientations, here such behavior is not understood; in general, sexual licentiousness is highly discouraged. However, this is characteristic of all countries of Russian culture. 31.31.13.73 08:55, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * In fact, the locals are quite friendly if they do not see malicious intent. Most likely, using their school knowledge of English, they will simply correct it: "Not transnistria, but Pridnestrovie". But if this tourist will be stubborn, even worse, if he starts to talk about Romania or Moldova, then it all depends on who he is talking with. People here are different too. Incidentally, I doubt that "Pridnestrovie" is more difficult to pronounce than the ugly Romanian word "transnistria" for any speaker. 31.31.13.73 08:40, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Alright. So what do you think needs to be changed in the article? Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:45, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * The smartest thing is to correct the title of the article by setting the name of Pridnestrovie as title, to remove all references to "transnistria", with the exception of the comment about the insulting words. Although I understand that the local lobby of the Romanian nationalists will not allow this, so decide for yourself. 31.31.13.73 08:55, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * There is no such lobby at Wikivoyage. I would like you to read Naming conventions. As long as Transnistria is used more often in English than Pridnestrovie, we are duty-bound to use that as the title of the article, per site policy. So in view of that, what else do you think should be changed in the article in the interest of travelers? Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:09, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * It exist at least in the English Wikipedia, and very aggressive. I’m here for the first time, so I don’t know yet, but I suspect that no discrepancies with Wikipedia are expected.
 * As for use: in English there is no established designation for Pridnestrovie. Just for the reason that almost none of the native speakers have even heard of this country. The term used is determined solely by context. You tell the common man Pridnestrovie or Transnistria - without explaining what you talking about, he simply won’t understand in any case.
 * The name "Transnistria" appeared in 1992 during the Moldovan-Pridnestrovian war, when the aggressive nationalists who came to power in Moldova needed to somehow name the breakaway state. It was then that they recalled the term of Romanian Nazi criminals, because they could not use the "Russian" name. Then it leaked to the West, because (for obvious reasons) the Western media broadcasted Romanian and Moldovan sources in connection with this war.
 * Over time, this word was almost forgotten: official sources used either "Stînga Nistrului" if it was about the administrative division of Moldova, or "PMR" if it was about the breakaway state itself. It received a “new life” with the spread of the Internet and the advent of Wikipedia, which became the main distributor of the term in the Internet environment. Refer to Wikipedia to confirm the meaning of the term in Wikipedia itself? It’s ridiculous.
 * In English, the most common name of the subject now is "Stînga Nistrului" or "Left bank of the Dniester", as follows from official documents of Moldova. This is natural, given that the main area where English is used in relation to this subject is the issue of resolving the frozen conflict and the diplomatic relations of the participants in the negotiation process, including EU and USA. All the use of "transnistria" comes down to Internet dumps, the source of which is Wikipedia, nothing more. To declare on this basis that the subject under discussion, which almost no one had ever heard of outside of ex-USSR, has some kind of an established designation in the language, it is simply meaningless. A designation may appear only with recognition of the independence of this state and the inclusion of its name in official norms and standards. Today we should be guided by the official documents of the state that is described here, and the self-name of the people, and not engage in promoting biased and offensive terminology.
 * While I await your reply: I think we can make the language in "Respect" a little stronger. How's this?
 * The term "Transnistria", with its Latin etymology, evokes memories of the brutal Romanian occupation during World War II and the Holocaust. According to president Vadim Krasnoselsky's statement in 2019, the Latin name is "unacceptable for Pridnestrovie", and "foreigners should get used to saying its true name".
 * I repeat: the etymology of this word is Romanian, even the prefix "trans-" is not Latin, but Romanian, borrowed from Latin. And in content, this term expresses the claims of the time of the Antonescu regime. We should indicate to travelers not only how this term is treated in the country, but also that it should not be used at all. 31.31.13.73 10:42, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * About LGBT folks being discreet: Sure that should be mentioned, but that doesn't mean people should be making anti-gay remarks on talk page threads. Is it better to add a caution for LGBT people in "Respect" or "Stay safe"? Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:21, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I don’t think that fagots are so stupid as to go to Pridnestrovie and arrange gay parades. In my opinion, we can skip information about it, it’s better just about the inadmissibility of sexual licentiousness. 31.31.13.73 10:47, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * You are participating on an international board now. Continuing to use bigoted language will not be tolerated and could get you blocked from posting here. Keep your hatred and bigotry to yourself. And I studied a year of Latin. "Trans" is Latin for "across" and is indeed used as a prefix in Latin. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:12, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * And I've never heard of "Stînga Nistrului", so that's obviously not the term most often used in English. And please just post each new remark at the end of the thread, because it's hard to see your posts, otherwise. Wikivoyage explicitly does not use official names unless they are the most often used in English. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:15, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

 * At this point I think it's useful to remember the example of Hungary, which in their own language is called the "Magyar Republic", and in every other language "the land of the Huns". They would like to correct this, and have been trying for more than a hundred years, unsuccessfully. I also have never heard of "Stînga Nistrului" and can testify that "Transnistria" is a very natural word in Portuguese, as it is in Spanish and Italian, as is "Transnistrie" in French. It's pure lingustics, nothing to do with any political bias whatsoever. Ibaman (talk) 11:24, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I've been to Hungary, and I didn't know about this campaign. It's strange because Magyars clearly consider themselves in some ways a continuation of the Huns, in spite of the fact that the Huns were a Germanic tribe and the Magyars are not Germanic. Whereas Attila is a fearsome name outside of Hungary, Magyars consider him a national hero, and Attila is a very common man's name in Hungary. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:31, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I've never been to Hungary; my road trip took me from Bratislava to Vienna, Zagreb and Ljubljana, I passed along. So it seems I have just repeated a hearsay, and the Hungarians don't mind being called Hungarians. I'm glad to have brought up this example. Ibaman (talk) 11:59, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

After seeing the unregistered user's hateful comments, I no longer care what he thinks on this or any other topic. His comments show that he is just some ignorant bigot with an agenda to push. He should not feel welcome here. He should move on to some dark corner of the web where where his/her hatred will be acceptable. It isn't here. Ground Zero (talk) 12:19, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Agreed, but with one caveat: The traveller comes first remains the guiding principle of this site, so if that means a slightly stronger caution about the name and a caution for LGBT people to be discreet, that's what should be in the article. So let's just agree on a form of words. I think you're the only registered user on this thread who's actually been to Transnistria. What do you think? Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:39, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I've changed it a bit:
 * "The name "Transnistria", while commonly used in English, evokes memories of the brutal Romanian occupation during World War II and the Holocaust. President Vadim Krasnoselsky, in 2019, said that the Latin name is "unacceptable for Pridnestrovie", and "foreigners should get used to saying its true name". Calling the country by this name could avoid giving offense, and may win you friends."
 * What do you think?
 * As far as LGBT people, I don't know if there is any more concern there than any other country in the region. I wouldn't take the bigot's word for it. I was only there a couple of nights, and the issue didn't come up, but then husband and I don't wear rainbow-flag t-shirts when we travel. Ground Zero (talk) 17:49, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm good with this. Thanks! Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:05, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Although I haven't been there, my understanding is that homosexuality is not as well-accepted in Russia and some of the former Soviet Union countries as it is in Western Europe. If people who are openly gay are likely to face harassment from locals, that is something we should state. That said, I highly doubt that the situation is as bad as in a place like Uganda, where most of the population wants to rape all lesbian women and kill all gay men.

 * As for the unregistered user, perhaps we should extend the ban to a permanent one, just as we did for ArticCynda. I think we should definitely make a strong statement that bigotry is not tolerated on this site. The dog2 (talk) 18:38, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * In Russia, there have been lots of cases of egregious attacks on and government persecution of LGBT people. Our article goes into some detail about this, appropriately. With this country, we have no reliable information. I don't think we would want to go much further than saying, "Like other countries in the region, there is less acceptance of LGBT people than in many developed countries." Ground Zero (talk) 18:59, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * The dog2, I don't think we can permaban an IP. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:28, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * The user in question is registered on Wikipedia, and tried to do the same exact additions to w:Transnistria and w:Names of Transnistria. So far, he's been | rolled back on all edits except his own talk page. I'm vigilant, and shall report any situation that might deserve some actoin from our part. Ibaman (talk) 19:36, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

July 2020
Here's a travel vlog from an English tourist in the area:. It doesn't look like using the name "Transnistria" got him assaulted by locals. The dog2 (talk) 21:07, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
 * He was told this directly at 5:00, what are you talking about? Further, he did not dare to publicly use this word. 217.19.215.63 16:34, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

 * The person above is wrong. I work as a journalist for a local media outlet and have access to Pridnestrovian police reports. So, in the center of Tiraspol near the central square there is a "flea market" where the local population, mainly pensioners, sells all kinds of household items, souvenirs and the like. About a year ago, a tourist came there and asked for "symbols of transnistria" or "flag of transnistria", I don't remember exactly. As a result, one salesman smashed his face. Then the police decided to quietly hush everything up and simply sent this narrow-minded tourist out of the country in order not to make the case public. This is just one of the cases that recently caught my eye. I really do not recommend provoking the local population, especially the elderly who remember the Romanian occupation. 217.19.215.63 16:29, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Do you think this was one isolated incident? It's OK with me if you think that it's in the interests of travelers to warn them that using the name Transnistria while in the country could possibly provoke a violent reaction, but I wouldn't go overboard based on a single incident. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:10, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
 * No, this is not an isolated incident, but it is that I can personally vouch for this case, since I am directly acquainted with it. Besides I can say about the attitude of people to such a careless attitude towards their feelings and the history of their country, which is extremely negative, therefore I am sure that the case is not single case of provoked abuse. But the local government prefers not to advertise this cases for not create a negative image of the country for tourists. 217.19.215.63 18:15, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
 * More importantly, is this the same person again that posted earlier in the year and was blocked for incivility? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:28, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Are you surprised that Pridnestrovian monopolist Internet provider has the same IP range for all ADSL connections for one city or region? By the way, just about the disagreement with him I wrote above, because he did not report that a more serious conflict could arise. 217.19.215.63 18:15, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

 * I reckon the IP range is identical. If I was to bet money, it'd be on a Yes option. Ibaman (talk) 17:31, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
 * The linked video tells us that Pridnestrovia is the preferred term. It does not tell us that it could "provoke a violent reaction", so we have no evidence of that. I am opposed to adding such a warning on the basis of an unsupported claim by an abusive jerk. I think it more likely reflects his own violent feelings on the issue than any actual threats. I took tours with two diffent guides, and I do not recall either of them mentioning any problem with using "Transnistria ", and I am sure than neither of them corrected my use of Transnistria — I would remember that and use the "correct" term if I were told to do so. To be fair, both of them work for Transnistria Tour, the largest tour operator to the country. Ground Zero (talk) 18:08, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I just told what I know and see, because I live here and work with public opinion professionally (unlike a foreign tourist that stayed here for several hours). By the way, this is the first time I've heard about the mentioned "largest tour operator", here are the sites of local travel operators: niagara-pmr.com, intour-travels.ru, bon-voyage-pmr.com, vladora-tour.com, elittur-travel.com, poehalisnamipmr.com that actually work in Pridnestrovie. 217.19.215.63 18:25, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
 * The tour companies you listed do not have English-language webpage, so they can't tell us anything about what the country is called in English. If you look at TripAdvisor's "Best Tiraspol Tours", you will see that they refer to "Transnistria", including those by a company called "GoTransnistria"], and those leaving from Ukraine. Ground Zero (talk) 19:03, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
 * You can see this on the official websites of Pridnestrovian state authorities or news agencies, which are translated into English. 217.19.215.63 23:07, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
 * The "official name argument" has already been addressed above. Ground Zero (talk) 00:49, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

 * Since you are asking what can be useful for tourists to know, I consider it necessary to mention one more point. You probably know that WWII Victory Day, May 9, is widely celebrated in Pridnestrovie; this holiday is even higher in importance than Republic (Independence) Day. This is not an element of state propaganda: in every Pridnestrovian family without exception there was or is a person who fought or died in this war, or worked in the rear, or suffered in the occupation or concentration camps.
 * So, in the Criminal Code of the PMR there is article No. 242-1 "Insulting the memory of the Great Patriotic War":
 * Public actions or statements expressing clear disrespect for society and aimed at distorting reliably proven information about the Great Patriotic War, or belittling the merits of the participants in the Great Patriotic War, as well as persons who died in the fight against fascism - shall be punished with a fine in the amount of 500 (five hundred) to 1000 (one thousand) calculated levels of the minimum wage, or correctional labor for a term of up to 2 (two) years, or imprisonment for a term of up to 5 (five) years.
 * The use of the terminology of Nazi war criminals in relation to the modern Pridnestrovie directly falls under this article. I suppose a tourist would not like to come here for a few hours, but stay for 5 years, and in a prison. 217.19.215.63 11:53, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Is this law ever applied to tourists? If it were, you'd think that tour companies like Tour Transnistria and GoTransnistria would warn their customers in order to avoid problems. If the law isn't applied to tourists, then we don't need a warning here. The existing wording is sufficient Ground Zero (talk) 12:45, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
 * The law applies to everyone (articles No. 4 and 10). Think for yourself: if you come as a tourist to a foreign country and you kill a person there, then do you really think that you will not end up in jail just because you are a tourist and do not know local laws? Apparently, the PMR Government decided to deal with this issue more thoroughly than before, if even the President of the PMR himself made a speech on this matter. I am not aware of the companies mentioned, because I have never dealt with them: how they earn and how responsibly they treat their clients is exclusively their business. I do not work in the tourism sector, but for professional needs as a media representative I have close contacts with law enforcement agencies, courts and parliament members, so I know what I am writing about. 217.19.215.63 13:29, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
 * People expect governments to prosecute tourusts for murder. Prosecuting tourists for using the common English name of a country instead of the government's preferred name would be a hostile way of treating visitors, lead to international ridicule, and destroy what tourism there is in the country. So I don't think that the PMR government is going to prosecute tourists under the stupid law. If you cant provide evidence that it is a credible threat, we don't need a warning. Ground Zero (talk) 14:08, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I doubt that the claims about "common English name" and "stupid law" will be taken in court as arguments in favor of the accused. Especially if this case is not dealt with by the police, but by the Ministry of State Security. I warned that I know; if there is other information, I will provide it if it will be possible.
 * Note: the share of tourism in the GDP of Pridnestrovie is ~0.03%. This includes domestic tourism and Russian-speaking visitors. So think, what is more profitable for the Pridnestrovian authorities: to anger their own population or to rein in fools who have not even familiarized themselves with the name of the country to which they have arrived. 217.19.215.63 14:46, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm here to build a travel guide; you're here to push your agenda on the name of this country. The official name is included here, along with advice on not giving offence. That's enough. I'm going back to building a travel guide. Please take your campaign elsewhere. Ground Zero (talk) 15:20, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Did you expect me to register and participate in writing an article titled Transnistria? No thanks. I have already shared with you the first-hand information that I saw fit; how to use it, decide for yourself. 217.19.215.63 17:25, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

 * Yeah, speaking for myself as a traveller, my touristic interest about Tiraspol is getting smaller and smaller, every time this purely linguistic bull is ressurected in this article. Ibaman (talk) 16:39, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I laugh, no one is waiting for you there. 200.73.131.84 18:36, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah yes, discouraging tourism! Since you're not here to serve travelers, best to go elsewhere, and have a good day. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:42, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * During my brief visit to PMR, I found people to be pleasant and welcoming. I don't think that this unhappy, cranky dude is representative of the people of the country. Ground Zero (talk) 19:46, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I can't exactly be quite sure exactly what name you should objectively use to locals. I'm getting conflicting reports from all types of people. I can recall a video made by a Romanian travelling couple on Youtube (you know, the stereotyical kind) where they used "Transnistria" in front of a lady selling meat in the market in Tiraspol (most prominently at 26:30). I don't believe that you shouldn't use Pridnestrovie in the country itself. In fact, you really should, because it's respectful to the people there, but I don't quite believe you will be beaten up when you made a mistake as an obvious tourist. TheElectrifiedFreak (talk) 19:26, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Commonly used name in English
For anyone who still has concerns about the name of the country commonly used in English, I will note that the foreign affairs ministries of the five English-speaking countries cited in the Warning Box — UK, USA, Canada, Australia, and Ireland — all call the country "Transnistria". Ground Zero (talk) 20:01, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
 * It is called Transnistria by the Moldovan government, too. It is internationlly recognized as being part of Moldova. Ground Zero (talk) 16:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Part of Eastern Europe?
Currently, Transnistria is categorized as part of the Balkans. I would argue that it should be categorized with the new region Eastern Europe. Transnistria i culturally East Slavic and post-Soviet, more than Moldovan or Romanian. We already make a stretch of the word Balkans by including Moldova. /Yvwv (talk) 21:07, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
 * You started this discussion at Talk:Eastern_Europe in July. I think it is best to continue the discussion there so that I don't have you repeat what I wrote there. Ground Zero (talk) 21:15, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Bender or Bendery?
Hey there, you might've seen me edit this page a lot. No reason other than being very bored, but I've come across a difficulty, and that is: is the name of the city on the right bank of the Dniester weirdly belonging to Transnistria (formerly called Tighina) called Bender or Bendery? I know in Russian latinization the letter ы in English is y, but on the other hand most English and non-Russian or Ukrainian foreign sources also call it some variation of Bender without a drop-off like sound ы makes. A lot of instances of Bender and Bendery are found on the page, so I just want to make this clear for further simplification. Thanks. TheElectrifiedFreak (talk) 19:32, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Our friends at Wikipedia have concluded here, that "Bender" is the common name in English, and that "Bendery" would be the Russian version. Wikivoyage uses English names over others, so we should stick with Bender, unless the common English usage has changed since Wikipedia considered it last. Ground Zero (talk) 21:46, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Any problems with the correct/native name of the region?
? 2A03:F680:FE04:1696:E5C8:5B76:C313:AD2E 14:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * as you would note in Talk:Transnistria, there is consensus about this issue, if you care about this subject, you are welcome to join the discussion there, in its appropriate subtopic. Ibaman (talk) 15:00, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Transnistria


text:
Talk:Trans-Siberian Railway

Transsiberia ticket from Riga
I don't know if this is of any interest to anyone now, but last summer I checked for tickets in Riga, Latvia for Mongolia (Ulanbataar) and it seems that you can actually get a ticket fro transsib in Riga and start from Riga as well. The price they gave me for a onway trip from Riga to Ulanbataar was around 140$ - This seems to be cheaper than the prices avilable online...hope this helps anyone

 * Could you please elaborate further on this? Did you go to a travel agency or just a train station? Also do you have contact information? Thanks. (WT-en) Sapphire 16:45, 9 April 2006 (EDT)

Sure, I can:) No, I didn't go to an agency. To my knowledge there are no agencies in Riga selling these tickets - you can get them at the train station. You go to the station and find the international tickets desk ("Starptautiskā biļešu kase" in latvian) or something like that, tell them where you want to go and they'll probably spend like a half an hour calculating your itenerary station by station (I don't know why they have to do that, but it was like that when we went to ask about going to Mongolia). And you can buy the ticket's there in advance - we asked in april for a ticket in august, if I remember correctly, so they can place all the reservations just fine.

What kind of contact details did you mean? If you need to know more about the train statin or routes from Riga try this: http://www.ldz.lv/en/sarakstsi.htm (some parts of the english site are missing, but anyway)

Also, there is a thing, that from April 2006 a new train route from Liepāja (westernmost coast city of Latvia) to Riga has been opened - this gives eager travellers the option to start from the westernmost part the old USSR railway system - go all the way from the Baltic Sea to Vladivostok or the other destinations on transsiberian if they want to.

I know that the railways in Blatics are not and have never been a part of the transsib, but I've done my owns searching of the net on transsib stories, and I realise that some people actually like to start their journey from the Baltics - maybe to make the trip even longer (for taking the longest train trip in the world anyway), to see the contrasts outside their window and to buy their tickets cheaper than from internet agencies, etc. I don't know the current details about going from Lithuania, but it should be similar IMHO. Hope this helps again:) If you someone is really interested in more details, I could actually go to the desk in the station in Riga to ask them more - I'm commuting frequently though that station...

 * Thanks. I'll add this information in later. Don't worry about the contact details. I was wondering what a phone number would be, but if all you have to do is show up at the train station then it really doesn't matter. What's the name of the main train station in Riga? Thanks. (WT-en) Sapphire 16:03, 11 April 2006 (EDT)

The central station in Riga is just that - in official documents it's sometimes called Rīga-Pasažieru meaning Riga passenger station and you can actually try calling a number given on the Latvian railway homepage for international traffic inqueries +371 7232820, however don't expect them to speak any english by default (although it's possible that someone actually speaks some english there from time to time - international train announcements are given in english as well, as far as I've heard them...)

This link is not working. http://trainline.ru/ 14:09, 30 August 2006 (EDT)

Does anyone know approximately how much cheaper are tickets bought at a station than those purchased online?

Warsaw
I don't recognize the (8-digit) station number currently given for Warsaw in the article.

The 7-digit station numbers for Warsaw used in the Russian timetable and ticketing system are, as far as I am aware:

 * 5100136 Warszawa Centralna
 * 5100138 Warszawa Wschodnia
 * 5199136 Warszawa

-- (WT-en) Picapica 07:16, 24 May 2007 (EDT)

 * Project:Plunge forward. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 07:18, 24 May 2007 (EDT)

City Star Ticket
On this site there is a lot of information about travelling on the Trans-Siberian Railway and also about the tickets which can be used there. I think this could be an interesting source Although it is not a primary source for the Trans-Siberian Railway it is a source for "how to get cheap tickets".--88.117.72.89 10:12, 15 August 2007 (EDT)
 * It's against our external links policy. Please incorporate the useful information into this article. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 10:31, 15 August 2007 (EDT)

Talk: Mention of Lonely Planet
This was recently edited out of the sleep section: many travelers find this class to be much better than it's reputation (especially what is described in Lonely Planet). Holla Tex, not sure I agree on your removal of the Lonely Planet phrase - it might just have been reflex - but I do think it has a place, obviously i can't quote it because of copyright issues, but it's outright wrong what they write, and a subject of much discussion at the hostels i stayed at while i was doing the trip. Personally I avoided Platzkart because of LP's description, until an Aussie dragged me into one. LP has a scary authority considering how loose their research is, and because if this I personally think it deserves a mention (every bloody traveler i met on that trip had a copy of the LP guide). (WT-en) Sertmann 18:54, 29 October 2008 (EDT)

Ideas?
Does anyone have any idea's on how to proceed expanding this guide, I'm really happy with how the station numbers section turned out after a bit of work, truly unique and very very useful, though it should probably be renamed with all the work put into it. But what else needs expansion? what new sections should be added? Just add them on the list below, and hopefully I'll get around to do some of it... --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 02:58, 7 December 2008 (EST)

 * History section
 * See section (short introductions to the major towns and hidden jewels a la the DOTM intros)
 * Map - with destinations from the See section plotted, and very important, time zones!
 * Get Out section, with pointers to stuff like my (Stefan's) Russia to Japan via Sakhalin itinerary.

 * I think you've done a great job with it. Your 'See' idea would be good, especially if it also highlighted anything of interest about the stations themselves. (I remember being interested by the angles of the Tyumen station and getting threatened by police for taking photos of the Novosibirsk station.) My wish list would include a list of which stations get long stops (e.g. ones where a traveler has time to get off the train and pick something up at the station) versus short stops...although I'm guessing that changes a bit between trips, so my experience might not be the same as yours. Distance between the stations would help, which I assume would be covered by your proposed map.

I lost a whole camera memory card of Trans-Siberian station photos and signs...I'm still miserable about it! (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 19:31, 13 December 2008 (EST)

 * VISA INFO...especially with regards to invitation. Do I have to get an invitation through a tourist agency, or can I book several nights in Moscow and then a week later a hotel in Vladivostok? (WT-en) AHeneen 01:39, 25 February 2009 (EST)

 * Hmmm I do think that belongs in the Russia guide, thoughts anyone --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 05:00, 25 February 2009 (EST)

 * I'm bewildered by the tourist visa process for Russia. When I lived there I had a multiple entry resident-student visa, so I never had to deal with any of that. Anything either of you could contribute to the Russia article regarding the intricacies of visa-related challenges in Russia travel would be very welcome. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 05:03, 25 February 2009 (EST).

 * I was there on a business Visa - and it was just as complicated - invitiation required, embassy website said a HIV test was required (and still does), but the travel agency that issued the invitation would have none of it, fixed entry and exit dates (can't enter before or after the dates stated on the Visa). But i suspect the situation is very different depending on where you get your visa. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 06:22, 25 February 2009 (EST)

 * All I can say is that it's a sort of Take That to many western nations, and especially USA. The thing is that by the old diplomatic tradition, visa relations are governed by bilateral agreements, and most important, reciprocality principle. That is, whatever visa requirements one nations has to citizens of another nation, the same stuff the latter nation will require from the former. So, if you find requirements to get a Russian visa overtly complex and bewildering, it means only that your own nation requires the same from the Russians wanting to enter your country. Couldn't say that it's a very smart thing to do (mutual removal of visa requirements between Russia and Iarael in last year already did wonders to the travel intensity and tourism), but it's still the way things done. --77.35.17.137 11:56, 28 March 2009 (EDT)

 * Well, from the way I see it, you need a hotel confirmation for every night...right? So if one takes the T-S train, will simply putting so on your itinerary that is part of the visa application ok? Or do you need to go through a tourism agency for an invitation if you want to take the train?(WT-en) AHeneen 16:36, 25 February 2009 (EST)

 * That's a matter of debate, but in essence the answer is no. In theory you just need to register at every city you're in, The hotel are required by law to do that, only exception is Hostels, which don't count as hotel by law, and as such are not required to do so. It's basically just a photo copy of a form with a stamp, date and signature. Also in theory (and by law) you are only required to register if you stay in a city for more than four days - but in practice this makes you vulnerable to corrupt police officers. And finaly, I was only ever checked once, and that was by a grumpy old lady at Soviet hotel (who'd probably been behind that desk since Soviet times), even though I crossed both the border several times (to Mongolia (exit & entry) and Japan (exit)) --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 18:35, 25 February 2009 (EST)

 * Yeah, I had problems upon arrival in Moscow (fall 2004) because I hadn't registered in any cities since the last time I was off the train. Even though I had all of my train tickets and receipts with me, the Moscow hotel wouldn't check me in. The clerk sent me to a government office to "pay the fine". Fortunately, the administrators at the office semi-apologized for the hotel and registered my visa for free. Basically, as Stefan suggested, you're more likely to run into that nonsense with bureaucracy-obsessed Soviet holdovers. If you stay at smaller, newer hotels, it's less likely to be an issue. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 19:10, 25 February 2009 (EST)

Routebox implementation
I plunged forward and implemented routeboxes for the Trans-Siberian Railway between Moscow and Vladivostok, using an icon I made based on the CIA Factbook flag in the Russia article (I couldn't find a non-copyrighted Russian Railways icon to use). I am not personally familiar with the route, so it would be great if some people could follow up and see if you agree with the control cities I used, etc. After completing it I also noticed that there is some discrepancy between the station list I used (from Wikipedia's infobox here) and the station list on our page. Can someone point me to a complete station list and/or help to hammer this out? Some of the discrepancy may be caused by our page's inclusion of some branch lines (e.g. Tomsk), which I was thinking to include as tertiary entries (see the inclusion of Blagoveshchensk in the routeboxes on the Chita and Birobidzhan pages for an example). Thanks in advance to anyone who can help get this working properly... (WT-en) Texugo 11:17, 26 August 2009 (EDT)

 * Tomsk and Tobolsk are not technically on the line, but on short branches, they are non the less some of the major stops for travellers on the transsib - in large part due to LP touting them as some of the top stops. There are also two places where the line splits in two - Moscow-Kazan/Nizny Novgorod-Ekaterinburg & Ekaterinburg-Petropavlosk/Tyumen-Omsk - though currently we are probably using the "official" definition. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 12:57, 26 August 2009 (EDT)

 * Also, it might be usefull to indicate where the Trans-Mongolian and Trans-Manchurian branches off? --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 13:00, 26 August 2009 (EDT)

 * I'll see about getting icons made for those. Of course it doesn't make sense to use the Russian flag background for them though, but I'll see what I can come up with... (WT-en) Texugo 13:02, 26 August 2009 (EDT)

Hi I'm planning a trip across russia and I want to begin in Eastern europe, and take a train into moscow then onto over to mongolia. I don't know where ot begin with any of this and wiki travel has been amazing so far, but I want to spend several days in mosco and ikutrsk (sorry if its spelled wrong). I was wondering how to go about setting all this up, which is cheaper, and how the whole system works i guess, also any suggestions one where to begin in east europe, based on price and which ones the best.

 * Hi, Please add information about stopping over for a day or two at various intermediate cities en route, say Irkutsk and Ekaterinburg. How to arrange, how many stops, for how many extra days, at what extra costs? Thanks! —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 50.131.220.136 (talk • contribs)

Accuracy of information
Train 100 goes via Yaroslavl, not via Nizhny Novgorod... I think that I have comments to about every paragraph of this nice text. Many things are really odd, outdated, or simply inaccurate from the very beginning. The question is when should I start making edits? And should I (or we keep this article as a foreigner's impression about Russia)? --Alexander (talk) 22:15, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

 * If you can improve the article, by all means go ahead and edit starting whenever convenient for you. It would be nice if it were soon since the article is nominated for Dotm.

 * I wonder about "The further east one comes, the poverty gets more visible and the towns more puritan." First, there's a grammar problem. Either "The further east one comes, the more poverty one sees and the more puritan the towns get" or "As one travels east, the poverty gets more visible and ..." would be OK.
 * Also, what is "puritan" supposed to mean there? Better to say "the people become more conservative", "the towns become more spartan" or some such. Pashley (talk) 23:31, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

 * So...more than half of the text now in the article is translated from the German Wikivoyage by me, and that version is written in a very personal language and many passages there are rather odd. I tried to omit the most personal and odd parts but obviously some of them are still left. I had a suspicion that the German article was to some extent outdated, as they suggested that tickets can be bought just at the stations or in travel agencies! Finally, I was afraid that there would be a couple of literal translations (as the one Pashley spotted) or other funny sounding stuff I've inadvertently introduced as my native language is neither English nor German. Good I did call railway cars "wagons" only once (and now that's fixed). The descriptions of the cities in the tables are basically compilations from Wikivoyage articles, so if they are wrong, so are the articles.
 * In other words, please go ahead and edit anything that's wrong or weird. I've not traveled on the Trans-Siberian but that might change in the future. ϒpsilon (talk) 05:40, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

The road is the life?
What is the source of this being said by the ancient Romans? Not that we need to state the source in the article, of course, but I cannot find any reference to this at all when searching google, and if there were such a saying in Latin, I wonder whether it might have a somewhat different standard translation that might be more familiar? That part appears to have been translated from the German WV article, and is probably not how we usually say it in English, if such a thing exists. Texugo (talk) 14:19, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it's a translation of Schon im alten Rom gab es die Redewendung: „Der Weg ist das Leben“. I can't find it either (and the quote in German is the title of a book by some sculptor...), so maybe we should just remove it. ϒpsilon (talk) 16:45, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Stereotypes?
Is this really useful information for the traveller?

''It seems like the Russians are still trying to cope with the new situation of capitalism. As older people seemingly for the most part crave for the old times, young people welcome the new liberty with open arms.''

''Many Russians may seem dismissive and introverted, but if you get to talk to them, they will tell you their life story. Alcohol and some Russian knowledge are very helpful in breaking the ice.''

''The nomadic lifestyle of the Mongolians has made good hosts out of them. Foreigners are welcome guests. However building up a personal connection to them is somehow a work of art.''

''In China the family is very important. Encounters are characterized by mutual respect and the people are usually very helpful.''

First of all, does Russia really experience "liberty" today? Second, isn't building a personal connection with anyone from anywhere a "work of art"? Third, is it only in China that the family is very important? Just how helpful are these generalizations? Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:27, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

 * Delete. This stuff isn't really helpful at all, when I now look at it; I'd even say it sounds pretty idiotic and it's not completely correct English either. I translated the whole German version of the article a few months back (fourth language to third language late at night...). That particular section is translated from this. There were many awkward sounding parts in German version that I left out but it seems that some of that still followed along. :P ϒpsilon (talk) 08:48, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

 * Glad you agree. I'm going to plunge forward and delete this section; I doubt anyone will miss it, but if they do, it's right here for them to pick whatever they think is somehow useful (if anything) and reinsert it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:04, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

 * Actually, your solution was better. Thank you. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:05, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Hilarious squirrel picture
I was looking at the content of external pages that this article links to and ran into this (you have to scroll down a little bit). ϒpsilon (talk) 18:31, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately that weblink has since died :-( Hobbitschuster (talk) 10:52, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Added routes

 * I added the other 3 routes for the mapframe, also you can click on the lines and get the title and description as well -- hopefully there will be an easier and less problematic way of doing this in the near future. Cheers! -- Matroc (talk) 00:51, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

bi-monthly; bi-weekly and less ambiguous terms
So this edit changed "bi-weekly" to "bi-monthly". Now it may well be that the frequency has been reduced, but more likely people disagree what the term means. It can be understood to mean twice a week/month or every two weeks/months. Why don't we use an unambiguous wording? Hobbitschuster (talk) 10:52, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

 * Semi-weekly means twice a week. Bi-weekly means once every two weeks. These shouldn't be ambiguous in English? K7L (talk) 13:06, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

 * Please remember that many of our readers are not English native speakers and the terms are not self-explanatory or very common. I think we should use the more straightforward "x times every interval of time" or "on Mondays, Wednesdays and Saturdays" or the likes. Hobbitschuster (talk) 13:09, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Some people use biweekly to mean twice a week. Even if they are wrong, it happens, so unambiguous terms like "twice a week/month" should be used. Ground Zero (talk) 13:14, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Touting?
I am removing a paragraph from Fares:
 * There will be a new connection from Moscow to Beijing starting October 2016 for as little as €294, including reservations and couchette supplements but you have to change the train twice. Sold by Transsib Reisen at original Russian fares with a tiny extra. sites.google.com/site/transsibirischeeisenbahn

It may very well be that this is valuable information, so I put it here for easy reinsertion, but it was placed as the opening paragraph, which to me looks like touting. Hopefully somebody who knows the line can put it in context if it is a good deal. --LPfi (talk) 07:04, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Platform sellers
The info on platform sellers should be consolidated. Now we say
 * "Everybody can get out of the train, and there are often people on the platform that offer a variety of fresh local food"

but also
 * "Between Beijing and Novosibirsk, platform vendors were observed only in Choir, Mongolia, and Mariinsky, Russia."

Date was removed from the latter ("June 2017"), has the observation been confirmed later? A "vendors were observed" sounds odd without a date.

--LPfi (talk) 14:01, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

DBS ferry?
tried to read the site via google translate and it warned me that the site was being deceptive. visiting it without going through GT doesn't trigger this. somebody with more knowledge of this sort of thing than me should make sure the link isn't up to no good. --174.74.56.57 19:22, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

 * The site looks odd (what has Turkey presidency to do with Vladivostok ferries?). Perhaps Google checked something. Anyway, I assume the site has expired and got bought by somebody else, as a redirect to a blog doesn't seem sensible for a ferry company. Can somebody find a working link for the ferries? –LPfi (talk) 22:09, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Trans-Siberian Railway


text:
Talk:Transylvania

the regions
I have removed Maramures and Crisana, because these are separate regions in the main Romania article, should be treated as such. I have thought for a long time about how to divide Transylvania. I decided to use a cultural criterion on this multicultural area of Romania, so that I put Mures together with Covasna and Harghita, due to the strong Hungarian influence in all of this region. Sibiu and Brasov are strongly Saxon influenced. It was not so easy with Hunedoara and Alba, but I considered that compared to other regions in Transylvania, these have a greater relevance for Romanian culture. Cluj and Bistrita do not really have a predominant culture, I think. However these two counties have very strong ties and exchanges of population so they belong together. I am open to other ideas or arguments. (WT-en) Deni120 07:30, 10 August 2008 (EDT)

Sinaia is NOT in Transylvania

City names
Why do all the city names listed here have other names attached?: --(WT-en) Burmesedays 11:59, 2 April 2010 (EDT)
 * Braşov / Brassó / Kronstadt
 * Aiud / Nagyenyed / Straßburg am Mieresch
 * Cluj-Napoca / Kolozsvár / Klausenburg
 * Sibiu / Nagyszeben / Hermannstadt
 * Sighişoara / Segesvár / Schässburg
 * Sfântu Gheorghe / Sepsiszentgyorgy / Saint George / Sankt Georgen
 * Targu Mures / Marosvásárhely / Neumarkt

 * it's the Romanian, Hungarian and German names. The area used to be Hungarian and part of the (German-speaking) Austro-Hungarian Empire. That's why all the towns have three names. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 06:20, 13 July 2010 (EDT)

 * Obviously, they way they are listed at the main page now is not ideal (just like the double regions we use now). This page needs some desperate clean-up. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 19:34, 7 August 2010 (EDT)

Edits not showing
I have added some points about the getting around on bicycles and about the Armenian minority, but they don't show up in the article. Can anyone help me out? Thanks —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 88.134.17.199 (talk • contribs) 22:08, 12 July 2010

 * As far as I can see from the revision history of the page, your edits are still there. Wikivoyage has a caching problem lately, that's likely why you cannot see your edits (or the most recent edits for that matter) in the article page. To solve this, you can force purging cache by going into the edit window, scrolling to its bottom and then clicking the "Purge Cache for this page." link. Or you can simply click here, which will provide the same action. – (WT-en) Vidimian 05:16, 13 July 2010 (EDT)

 * And don't forget to refresh your browser window ;) --(WT-en) Peter Talk 18:49, 13 July 2010 (EDT)

Regions
The regionalisation of Transylvania is right now a mess. According to this article and the map, it is split in South-east, East, South-west and North-west. But no articles are made for these subregions. Instead, it is actually done as follows:

Romania
 * Transylvania
 * Alba County (empty article, 3 linked cities)
 * Bistrita-Nasaud County (empty article, 1 linked city)
 * Brasov County (empty article, 5 linked cities)
 * Cluj County (empty article, 4 linked cities)
 * Szeklerland (almost empty article)
 * Harghita (almost empty article, 1 linked city)
 * Covasna County (almost empty article, 1 linked city)
 * Mures County (empty article, 1 linked city)
 * Hunedoara (almost empty article, 14 linked cities)
 * Sibiu County (empty article, 3 linked article)

I suggest we change this in order to accomplish (1) that the map corresponds to the regional structure and (2) that there is only one level below Transylvania, which should really be enough with a total of 33 linked cities. The question is then whether to split it in the nine administrative regions or in the four as suggested on the map. To avoid having a number of region articles with only one linked city, I suggest we use the latter solution. Comments, please, --(WT-en) ClausHansen 16:56, 5 August 2010 (EDT)

 * Dividing along the lines of regions provided at the map gives us:
 * East (which incidentally is equal to Szeklerland, which I think is a better name since it implies a coherent, culturally distinct region) - 3 cities
 * Southeast - 8 cities
 * Southwest - 17 cities
 * Northwest - 5 cities
 * Not bad, although Szeklerland is below and Southwest is way above 5-9. Attaching Alba to Northwest gives us 8 cities, and Southwest (which then equals to Hunedoara) would have 14 cities. Still over 9, but better. However, naming Bistrita-Nasaud, Cluj, and Alba as "Northwest" would be a stretch, and "West" isn't much better either, since then Hunedoara (or "Southwest") would actually be more western than "West". A quick read on Transylvanian/Romanian geography and history at Wikipedia didn't yield better names for these regions, either. – (WT-en) Vidimian 04:40, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

Restarting this discussion
I think should merge the county articles into the subregion articles as they remain largely empty. I propose a five sub-region approach: Ground Zero (talk) 02:56, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * East Transylvania (Covasna County, Mureș County, Harghita County) — 11 cities with articles (according to Szeklerland, the modern definition of Szeklerland does not include all of Mures County, so I don't think we should use that name)
 * Southeast Transylvania (Sibiu County, Brașov County) — 14 cities with articles
 * Alba County — 6 cities with articles
 * Hunedoara County — 12 cities with articles
 * Northwest Transylvania (Bistrița-Năsăud County, Cluj County) — 6 cities with articles
 * Or, should we cut to the chase and eliminate the subregions, leaving only the 9 county articles? That might be a better idea. Ground Zero (talk) 10:58, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

 * I think it's better to leave only the 9 country articles. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 11:00, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Done (a while ago). Ground Zero (talk) 11:53, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Transylvania


text:
Talk:Transylvania triangle train tour

So, I really like this itinerary, and I think it was a good idea to link it from the Main Page. I have one question, though: I don't think TTTT agrees with our article naming conventions on capitalization. I think it should either be "Transylvania Triangle train tour" (if we're talking about the Transylania Triangle) or "Transylvania train tour". You can just mention that it's triangular, although it's a catchy name, too. Another option is "Transylvania triangle train tour". We just tend not to capitalize things if we don't have to. -- (WT-en) Evan 15:57, 7 Nov 2003 (PST)

 * Concerning the capitalization, I don't really mind how it's capitalized or not. The reason why I made it "Transylvania Triangle Train Tour" was due to the TTTT and also the fact that it looks better with all caps - consequently, I'd prefer it like that. There is no defined "Transylvania Triangle", it is simply a term that came up due to the fact that the tour is triangular. Consequently, I think "Transylvania triangle train tour" is best if you really don't want it to be capitalized, although I still think that Transylvania Triangle Train Tour gives it a better edge and corresponds with the other Romanian tours i'm in the process of doing. By the way, see my talk on Romanian Wikivoyage - I've posted a query there about the PHP file for the interface localization. And, again by the way, I think the phrasebooks and itineraries list linked from the front page is getting a bit too long. Should we have a specialised list of itineraries that is linked under "more..." from the Main Page, or should each itinerary just be linked from their country page... (WT-en) Ronline, 8 Nov 2003

'''Why is this page protected after it's been moved to the new name??? '''(WT-en) Ronline, 9 Nov 2003

 * Sorry, slip of the mouse. Not on purpose, I assure you. -- (WT-en) Evan 15:45, 8 Nov 2003 (PST)

 * That's alright! -- (WT-en) Ronline, 16:13, 9 Nov 2003

The first two paragraphs of the "understand" section are much nicer than the "Understand" of the main Transylvania article. Maybe they should be moved there. The Tour page - in my opinion - shouldn't replicate region/country/etc general information anyway. Anybody who takes the tour will also check out Transylvania anyway, unless they live on location in which case they don't need it. Any objections? -- (WT-en) Nils 05:37, 6 Apr 2004 (EDT)

Removing merge notice
is what I'm going to do very shortly if nobody objects - 18 months without any discussion whatever is more than long enough! --210.246.47.134 06:19, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I tend to agree, but maybe it wouldn't hurt to wait another day and see if anyone objects. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:26, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure, no worries - that's actually what I meant by "very shortly"... --118.93nzp (talk) 07:31, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Guide, personal itinerary?
The article is a Guide and as such a possible FTT candidate, at least theoretically. Likely just a dynamic map, markers, some photos and an update of the train schedules would be necessary.

But before doing any of that, do you think this is a "personal itinerary"? I suspect it is, but I'd like to hear other peoples' opinion as well. If you think this is the case, we can't feature it, otherwise let's plunge forward, fix the issues and feature the article sometime next summer. --ϒpsilon (talk) 20:44, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Anyone? --ϒpsilon (talk) 21:37, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Transylvania triangle train tour


text:
Talk:Trashigang

Same place as Tashigang?

Usable?
I changed the status of this article from usable back to outline. Are there no places to eat here? Also, any contact info for Druk Denjung Hotel? (WT-en) Fastestdogever 13:41, 18 February 2007 (EST)

title: Talk:Trashigang


text:
Talk:Trat

Comments
Both the town and the area around are much more interesting than described in the page. No time now, but will try to add some stuff later.

 * Plunge forward! (WT-en) Jpatokal 08:28, 14 January 2008 (EST)

An information source about Trat
This is a shameless plug, but http://tratmap.com contains quite a lot of information about Trat. For example - the fact that you can NOT get transportaion from Trat airport to Trat (only to Ko Chang).

If anyone here thinks it's alright, please add a tratmap link to this page.

Also - feel free to use any text or photos you find there. It's all creative-commons.

title: Talk:Trat


text:
Talk:Trat Province

TAT listings
Moved a wide array of TAT listings to Talk:Trat Province/Listings for future reference. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 01:41, 3 February 2010 (EST)

title: Talk:Trat Province