text:
Talk:Minneapolis/Eat Street

vfd discussion

 * Delete. Good content, but I am not convinced that we should have an article on just one street. Should move the content into Minneapolis/Downtown, perhaps creating an infobox or special sub-section within "Eat". -- (WT-en) DanielC 08:10, 29 August 2006 (EDT)
 * I think it would be better to discuss this at Talk:Minneapolis/Eat Street so that those who know Minneapolis can contribute to the discussion. I agree that this probably isn't a good district, but if we decide to move the content this article should become a redirect, not be deleted. -- (WT-en) Ryan 13:50, 29 August 2006 (EDT)
 * Agree with Ryan. If this is a commonly used name for the district, it should at least be serviced via a redirect rather than simply having the page deleted. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 15:40, 29 August 2006 (EDT)
 * Other articles do exist on single streets:
 * Toronto/Yonge Street - most of it would perhaps fit in an article on Downtown Toronto as a whole?
 * Sydney/Castlereagh Street
 * London/Bond Street - almost no content
 * London/Regent Street - almost no content
 * London/Oxford Street - a little content; I suppose Oxford St is noteworthy enough to warrant it's own article. That, and I can't think of what district article it would fit into.
 * San Francisco/Castro Street - also noteworthy enough, but perhaps the article should be moved to "Castro District" or "The Castro"?
 * I would argue that the Eat Street article should stay. If not, I would maybe suggest an an article covering Uptown and the areas around it (e.g. Uptown proper, Lyn-lake, Eat Street, etc). There is an article on South Minneapolis, but I feel that South Minneapolis is too vast to be considered a district; the land area of "South Minneapolis"  takes up over half of the city as a whole! Certain areas on the south side may warrant seperate articles. -- (WT-en) Eco84

Redirect
Alright, this article will now redirect to Minneapolis/Southwest, where the majority of the information was moved to. The small number of establishments listed here that were located north of Interstate 94 have beem moved to Minneapolis/Downtown. (WT-en) Eco84 02:26, 21 September 2009 (EDT)

title: Talk:Minneapolis/Eat Street


text:
Talk:Minneapolis/Northeast

Closed listings
This place closed several months ago, but "might" open up somewhere else in the city sometime in the future. If they ever do, here's the listing:
 * Small vegetarian Indian restaurant with rotation of 3 different curries every day. Closed Monday and Tuesdays. (WT-en) Eco84 10:04, 29 August 2009 (EDT)

Their website indicates that they closed in March:
 * A highly creative French inspired chef-owned and operated restaurant. (WT-en) Eco84 14:41, 13 September 2009 (EDT)

A couple sources say it's closed :
 * Excellent family run Ecuadorean and Mexican restaurant with a huge menu with many types of items. The menudo is perhaps the best in the area. (WT-en) Eco84 18:36, 23 September 2009 (EDT)

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

title: Talk:Minneapolis/Northeast


text:
Talk:Minneapolis/Southeast

Hard Times Cafe
The description on the Hard Times Cafe has been moved to Minneapolis/South, as it is not actually located in Southeast. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) Eco84 (talk • contribs) 21:22, 16 May 2006

Closed listings
Two seperate listings for the Dinkytowner, which closed earlier this year:
 * An up-and-comer for breakfast and lunch. Better greasy spoon food and more relaxed atmosphere than Al's, but without the history. Free pool during happy hour.
 * Bar located in a basement, features sparkly red vinyl booths, decent food. Happy hour 4:00pm-8:00pm Tuesday-Saturday (drink and appetizer specials, free pool). DJ's and/or live music later in the evening. (WT-en) Eco84 12:35, 13 September 2009 (EDT)

title: Talk:Minneapolis/Southeast


text:
Talk:Minneapolis/Southwest

Closed listings
November 1 was their last day of business. They might be looking for a new location, but don't hold your breath: Closed in May: Closed August 8. The owner opened a new restaurant Downtown: Closed: Closed sometime in May:
 * Live music most nights; there may or may not be a cover charge depending on the show. (WT-en) Eco84 23:52, 5 November 2009 (EST)
 * Collectively-run all-volunteer radical & progressive bookstore and infoshop. (WT-en) Eco84 19:30, 3 June 2010 (EDT)
 *
 * Sushi restaurant connected to Azia Restaurant & The Caterpillar Lounge (WT-en) Eco84 13:02, 18 August 2010 (EDT)
 * The clothes are fitted and range from hip hop to techno-industrial wear. (WT-en) Eco84 00:31, 22 August 2010 (EDT)
 * A local favorite with ever-changing specials. Classic greasy American(/English) breakfasts complemented by some vegetarian and Mexican-influenced dishes. Their "Benedict" specials are almost always excellent, even if they stretch the bounds of the normal understanding of eggs benedict. (WT-en) Eco84 13:33, 3 June 2011 (EDT)

title: Talk:Minneapolis/Southwest


text:
Talk:Minneapolis St Paul

Reason for creation
Creating as major "wanted" link. Is airport name, so redirecting to Minneapolis page

title: Talk:Minneapolis St Paul


text:
Talk:Minnesota

Regions
The current regions and their names don't make sense to me. For example, why "North Central"? Doesn't that imply there should be a "North West"? If the "North East" doesn't include the, um, northeast shoreline of the state and its most northeasterly cities (e.g. Grand Portage), then isn't that "North Central"? The "Gunflint Trail" seems less like a region than an itinerary. And if there's a "Southeastern", doesn't that make the other part "Southwestern" (not "Southern")? It's almost as if someone's hidden the entire western portion of the state. Is that the part of Minnesota where all the children are "below average"? :) Plus there's the inconsistency between "North East" and "Southeastern".  The Minnesota Tourism people  divide the state into Northwest MN, Northeast MN, Twin Cities, and South MN.  Any reason this wouldn't work? - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 12:52, 8 May 2006 (EDT)
 * I've merged Southeastern into Southern, renamed North Central and North East, and made North Shore and Gunflint Trail subregions of Northeastern. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 17:34, 16 May 2006 (EDT)

-I live in Minnesota, and I think some of the "Minnesotan" vocabulary posted is a little exaggerated. I've never heard most of the words/phrases. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 66.188.210.98 (talk • contribs) 15:39, 24 December 2007

-I lived in Upper Michigan and would get over to norther Minnesota (Duluth, Bemidge, Aitkin, others) at least once a month. The listed phrases were very prominent in the northern region (and in northern Wisconsin and Michigan too). Now when I get back to Minnesota, it's usually in the Minneapolis area, and I haven't noticed the accents or stereotypical vocabulary as listed in this article. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 204.15.87.226 (talk • contribs) 15:59, 2 April 2008

Talk
Aside from the list of vocabulary, the 'Talk' section of this article strikes me as ridiculous - over-generalized and far more than the traveler needs to be prepared for. Am I off-base? (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 23:01, 24 December 2008 (EST)

 * No. I had no idea that any of the stuff below (now cut out) is "Minnesotan", or even unusual. (WT-en) Jpatokal 02:08, 25 December 2008 (EST)

 * Much of the time, words are used differently than in the rest of the continental United States. "Anyways" is often used instead of "Anyway" even though the latter is correct. "Bring" and "Take" are often used interchangeably. When people "bring" something home, they often really mean that they are "taking" something home. The words "borrow" and "lend" are also used interchangeably, with the former being used often for both meanings.

 * "There you go!" means "here it is" usually when someone is giving you an item such as a cashier handing you change. She will say to the customer, "There you go."  Another use of it is to give praise for attaining a goal or a level of understanding.  A teacher might praise the effort of a student upon their success with "there you go."

Map typo
The map has Northwest Minnesota twice ... the one should read Northeast. Simple mistake and obvious. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 173.86.152.51 (talk • contribs)

 * Fixed. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 23:37, 23 July 2009 (EDT)

Lutefisk
Is it really appropriate to put lutefisk as a "eat" dish? While lutefisk is a dish primarily eaten in Minnesota, in most areas of the state, it is an uncommon dish, eaten occasionally by some and often by even fewer. I'm unaware of any restaurant serving lutefisk, it's more common at specially designed lutefisk dinners, normally held in Church basements or otherwise organized by an organization.Ryan Vesey (talk) 21:04, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

 * It's probably worth mentioning just because it's a dish that's fairly unique to Minnesota, but some of the disclaimers you've mentioned (not generally available in restaurants, etc) might be worth including. -- Ryan • (talk) • 21:23, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Pipestone or Pine City? Which should be in the Cities list on the Minnesota travel guide?
Let's build some consensus. Pipestone National Monument is already featured on this page in the next subsection, and other than that and a historic hotel, is there really much tourism in Pipestone? On the other hand, Pine City is showcases a small town with a lot of tourism, encircled by six lakes (Cross, Pokegama, Squaw, Kick, Devils and Rock), trails of all kinds, a State Historic site, the North West Co. Fur Post and a number of other museums and attractions. It is an arts destination as well, with theare, galleries and other opportunities to experience art.

I agree there should be a small town or two on this list among the bigger cities, but take a look at the travel guides for both Pipestone and Pine City and see for yourself which one you think deserves placement on the list. Besides, it would be good to spread out the cities across the state some more, with at least one city from East Central Minnesota. I believe it is nine (9) cities maximum that can be listed. I'm interested in others' thoughts. —The preceding comment was added by 24.111.45.78 (talk • contribs)

 * I think Pine City would be the best choice of the two. Other cities worth consideration include Red Wing, Fergus Falls, Redwood Falls, International Falls and Austin. —The preceding comment was added by John2690 (talk • contribs)

 * Pine City is my vote. —The preceding comment was added by 2600:1014:b012:ab07:907e:a7f8:83ba:51ba (talk • contribs)

 * Hi, everybody. I'm not familiar enough with Minnesota to have an opinion, but please sign your posts on talk pages by putting this at the end of your comment: ~ . Thanks a lot. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:56, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

New banner candidates

The current banner has good photographic quality, but is a bit too urban to represent this wide-stretched state. In my opinion, the Minnesota banner could be used for the Twin Cities, which has a rather repulsive banner today. /Yvwv (talk) 18:42, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Minnesota


text:
Talk:Menorca

Menorca or Minorca
Any particular reason this page was moved? The Getty Thesaurus of Geographic Names gives "Menorca" as the preferred spelling, not "Minorca". --(WT-en) Evan 18:07, 7 Feb 2006 (EST)
 * Just over twelve years later, I have moved it back. Selfie City (talk) 20:31, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I always thought Minorca was the English spelling, much like we use Turin, rather than Torino. No longer, eh? Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:32, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Content from Wikitravel
I created a big part of the content for the Menorca article in Wikitravel and I would like that this is also available in Wikivoyage. According to this article, this is not encouraged. Is there going to be a problem even if I was the one who wrote the text at Wikitravel? --MontanNito (talk) 18:32, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

 * It's a problem if you want this page to come up in Google searches. If you care about that, you may want to try rephrasing a lot of the text. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:40, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Mapshapes
So it appears whoever drew the municipal boundaries had the good grace to make large entities, would it be a good idea to include those mapshapes in the overall map, maybe color them in different colors and give the individual city articles similar colors? Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:18, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a great idea, and this would allow this region article to give links to the individual municipalities, but I don't have a clue how to do it. Auldhame (talk) 07:19, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I've done some research: do you think that Template:Regionlist would work? Auldhame (talk) 07:26, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Page Status
I've changed the status of this region page to usable, because it meets the criteria listed on Usable_articles, but the individual city articles - Maó and Ciutadella still need work.

Auldhame (talk) 07:16, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
 * a region can only be useable if most cities in the region are at least at usable. Also there are many listings in the region that should be in city articles. --Traveler100 (talk) 20:50, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Sleep listings
Moved from the article. All three of these are in towns that so far don't have their own articles. However, the first one links to a general rental site for Son Bou, the second has a generic name and no URL and is a bit touty, and the third has a generic name and a dead link. I should add, I moved everything else out of "Sleep" that was in a town that already has its own article.

Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:07, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Please see this discussion
At Talk:Maó about reorganizing our information about the eastern end of the island. Ground Zero (talk) 15:13, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Menorca


text:
Talk:Minot

So, this is turning into a really good article. The only thing I'd say needs work is the "By car" directions. They're way too detailed. --(WT-en) Evan 13:27, 21 Apr 2004 (EDT)

I suppose you're right... but I don't quite feel comfortable just deleting them. Some of this information will probably be ported to the North Dakota article when I get to it. In regards to the artcile as a whole, Most of I can think of off the top of my head is in there, further development is going to take some digging, though. --(WT-en) Alexwcovington 23:35, 21 Apr 2004 (EDT)

 * Yep. Well, we can start looking up some of the restaurant info on yellow pages sites, that kind of thing. I have to say again, great job. --(WT-en) Evan 00:41, 22 Apr 2004 (EDT)

Featured article?
What does this article need to be nominated at dotm? /Yvwv (talk) 01:14, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

 * A lot, actually. Eat and sleep need coordinates and descriptions, respectively (though the latter also needs coordinates too). SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 01:17, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
 * A few of the listings haven't been updated for almost five years, others don't have a date at all, which means they were likely added before the lastedit field was added to the templates.
 * Are any of these places still, open? Ground Zero (talk) 01:58, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Minot


text:
Talk:Minsk

Not widely known, but there is free wifi at the train station... -Raffikojian

Go next
''Regional trains are also cheap. A trip from Minsk to Gomel (5h) with a cabin for 4 cost 20000 rubles and the train is almost never full.''

Can anyone confirm the price? I wouldn't consider ~600 dollars to be cheap. - Pedro de Quadros (talk) 14:19, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The price is quoted in Belorussian roubles. --Alexander (talk) 15:32, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Spelling
The article, as of 3 May 2017, uses geographical names transliterated from Russian. These forms have been removed from usage gradually over the last ten years or so. See Назвы населеных пунктаў Рэспублікі Беларусь dictionaries. —The preceding comment was added by Nieszczarda2 (talk • contribs)

 * Please edit accordingly. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:09, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:53, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Minsk-Metro-Uruch'e-04.jpg

The letter "č"
Belarusian is written in Cyrillic letters, so "č" is not a letter you're very likely to see there, is it? In which case, Nieszczarda2 and anyone else, please explain why it's helpful to our readers to use such an obscure transliteration. Thanks. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:20, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

 * Correct - the main Belarusian alphabet is Cyrillic. Incorrect - ""č" is not a letter you're very likely to see there", see this article in Wikipedia. See the Minsk metro map in every its carriage and station; try booking a train ticket on the English version of the Belarusian Railway website; check street name signs in central Minsk - there are plenty of č, ń, ǔ, š etc. there. Maps published in Belarus use this transliteration standard for years now. --Nieszczarda2 (talk) 18:49, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

 * Alright. I guess they're catering to Czechs or something. I have no idea what ń or ǔ would sound like. Would you like to explain these transliterations in the Belarusian phrasebook? Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:18, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

 * I've updated the Belarusian phrasebook to reflect the current official Latin transliteration standard. I suggest we consider using the correct forms for Belarusian geographical names, cities in the first place. --Nieszczarda2 (talk) 09:49, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

 * Thank you for updating the phrasebook! I've supported you at every turn on these renaming suggestions. Everything needs to be done on this site in the interest of the traveler. So if they need the standard transliteration to get where they want to go, we need to provide it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:27, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item is missing permission
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item is missing permission information and may be deleted: You can see the details at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:36, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Kolobike.jpg

title: Talk:Minsk


text:
Talk:Miramar Beach

Miramar Beach
A beach of the state capital Panaji shouldn't get its own article per Project:What is an article?.
 * Delete (WT-en) Texugo 06:20, 10 December 2007 (EST)
 * It does not rate its own article unless, as on other Goan beaces, there are accomodations. I'm OK with a delete, but we should redirect to Panaji if the name is well enough known people that people might search for it. That seems somewhat likely to me since people navigate Goa by beach names -- Calangute, Anjuna, etc. Whether or not we redirect, the info on this beach goes in the "get out" section of Panaji. (WT-en) Pashley 08:09, 10 December 2007 (EST)
 * Redirect seems right. We should probably codify guidance (if it's not out there already) to do redirects for non-destinations with famous/well-known names. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 11:28, 1 January 2008 (EST)
 * It is out there, last paragraph of Project:What_is_an_article%3F. Is that the right place? (WT-en) Pashley 23:53, 1 January 2008 (EST)
 * Yup, I just missed it. Redirect coming, and we'll close this. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 15:00, 2 January 2008 (EST)

title: Talk:Miramar Beach


text:
Talk:Miri

''This page is for discussing the corresponding article or guide. For more about using talk pages check out Project:Using talk pages.''

Comments
I think it is not appropriate to comment certain restaurant with negative remarks, especially using capital letters. Anwarul 02:28, 29 August 2008 (EDT)

Sorry.. I have accidentally put "Vote For Deletion" on "by Plane" section. It has been removed. Anwarul 02:32, 29 August 2008 (EDT)

title: Talk:Miri


text:
Talk:Miskolc-Tapolca

Actually Miskolc-Tapolca is not a village but a part of Miskolc, connected to the city by bus lines.

title: Talk:Miskolc-Tapolca


text:
Talk:Mississippi

Links
A WikiTraveler left the following links that someone might unpack and use.
 * http://www.gulfcoast.org
 * http://www.vicksburgcvb.org
 * http://www.visitthedelta.com
 * http://www.natchezms.com

Region names
Are the most common name really "Mississippi Gulf Coast" and "Mississippi Capital-River"? I'm not as sure about Capital-River, but I've always heard the coast referred to as just the "Gulf Coast", which for our purposes would get the name "Gulf Coast (Mississippi)". -- (WT-en) Ryan 21:24, 12 July 2006 (EDT)
 * To be honest, I find the recent fashion of using "Generic Name (Location)" for region names both unintuitive and awkward to link to, so I avoid it whenever possible. But "Gulf Coast (Mississippi)" wouldn't be as bad as all the horribly-named "North (Somewhere)" articles that are popping up (just for the sake of looking cool in the breadcrumbs), so I wouldn't object if you want to rename it. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 21:44, 12 July 2006 (EDT)

 * I'm also not a fan of the "East (Foo)" article names, mostly because they're boring and the more common name is usually "East Foo". In the case of the Gulf Coast, the normal naming standard would be "Gulf Coast", and a disambiguator is needed since there is more than one, which gives "Gulf Coast (Mississippi)".  I'll update that one, and leave any other changes to those who know the area better. -- (WT-en) Ryan 23:50, 12 July 2006 (EDT)

Nine cities
I'd swap out McComb for Starkville. McComb isn't a city of much significance; by contrast, Mississippi State is in Starkville Pur ple back pack 89    01:05, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Fine with me; I mainly went with cities I've heard of. Looking at Wikipedia, I suspect I've only heard of McComb because Britney Spears grew up there.  LtPowers (talk) 01:52, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd strongly recommend adding Clarksdale, which would give representation to the Delta Region, and is IMO pretty easily the most important cultural destination in the state. --Peter Talk 05:03, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. Shall we remove McComb and Hattiesburg, perhaps, for Starkville and Clarksdale?  If you guys get a chance, these cities could use descriptions.  LtPowers (talk) 14:37, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I think Hattiesburg's a city of some significance, I would recommend against its removal Pur ple back pack 89    17:55, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * All of the cities have some significance. If we want to add both Starkville and Clarksdale while removing McComb, we've got to find another one to remove and Hattiesburg looks like the least significant of the remaining cities.  But I'm not super familiar with Mississippi.  Maybe Vicksburg instead?  But what's in Hattiesburg besides Southern Miss?  LtPowers (talk) 14:09, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not familiar enough with Mississippi to offer an opinion on which cities should and shouldn't be included, but the Battle of Vicksburg was very significant in the Civil War. By the way, the Vicksburg article's photos are currently all red-linked. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:28, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * We could put Vicksburg National Military Park under "Other Destinations". LtPowers (talk) 01:29, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * True, and a good solution if a decision is made to exclude Vicksburg from the list of 9 cities. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * My two cents: swap out McComb for Starkville and leave the rest as is. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 02:15, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * After doing some research, prompted by Peter's comment, I think Clarksdale is more important than Starkville. Clarksdale is the birthplace of the blues!  LtPowers (talk) 15:26, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I replaced McComb with Clarksdale and added Starkville to the Other Destinations behind an MSU link. We could consider doing the same for Hattiesburg and Oxford, but they (especially Oxford) seem like bigger cities to me. But I don't know the area. LtPowers (talk) 21:25, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mississippi


text:
Talk:Mississippi Capital-River

This region contains the following counties:

 * Adams
 * Amite
 * Clairborne
 * Copiah
 * Franklin
 * Hinds
 * Jefferson
 * Lawrence
 * Lincoln
 * Madison
 * Pike
 * Rankin
 * Simpson
 * Walthall
 * Warren
 * Wilkinson

-- (WT-en) Fastestdogever 23:03, 16 May 2007 (EDT)

title: Talk:Mississippi Capital-River


text:
Talk:Mississippi Delta

This region contains the following counties: -- (WT-en) Fastestdogever 23:10, 16 May 2007 (EDT)
 * Bolivar
 * Carroll
 * Coahoma
 * Holmes
 * Humphreys
 * Issaquena
 * Leflore
 * Quitman
 * Sharkey
 * Sunflower
 * Tallahatchie
 * Tunica
 * Washington
 * Yazoo

Clarify "less expensive live bands"
Unable to compete with [casinos], the holdout juke joints have turned to...less expensive live bands and more cheap DJs....

Does this mean live bands that are less expensive than the previous live bands, or fewer live bands, because they are more expensive than DJs? Lee Choquette (talk) 18:50, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mississippi Delta


text:
Talk:Mississippi Hills

This region contains the following counties:

 * Alcorn
 * Benton
 * Calhoun
 * De Soto
 * Grenada
 * Itawamba
 * Lafayette
 * Lee
 * Marshall
 * Panola
 * Pontotoc
 * Tate
 * Tippah
 * Tishomingo
 * Union
 * Yalobusha

-- (WT-en) Fastestdogever 23:23, 16 May 2007 (EDT)

 * Also Prentiss County. —Granger (talk · contribs) 02:10, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mississippi Hills


text:
Talk:Mississippi Pines

The following counties are in this region:
 * Attala
 * Chickasaw
 * Choctaw
 * Clarke
 * Clay
 * Jasper
 * Kember
 * Lauderdale
 * Leake
 * Lowndes
 * Monroe
 * Montgomery
 * Neshoba
 * Newton
 * Noxubee
 * Oktibbeha
 * Scott
 * Smith
 * Winston
 * Webster

-- (WT-en) Fastestdogever 23:16, 16 May 2007 (EDT)

title: Talk:Mississippi Pines


text:
Talk:Missouri

Regions
It seems to me that the following region names are rather pedantic. Is the word Region actually used for these areas or would be better? Even the Missouri article hints that the region version is not the most common usage for these areas. I am thinking of moving the regions and wondered if anyone else had any comments about these names. -- (WT-en) Huttite 06:43, 9 Jan 2006 (EST)
 * Central Region (Missouri)
 * Northeast Region (Missouri)
 * Northwest Region (Missouri)
 * Southeast Region (Missouri)
 * Southwest Region (Missouri)
 * Central (Missouri)
 * Northeast (Missouri)
 * Northwest (Missouri)
 * Southeast (Missouri)
 * Southwest (Missouri)

 * The shorter the better if you ask me... (WT-en) Jpatokal 08:47, 9 Jan 2006 (EST)
 * My bad... sorry about that... (WT-en) Xltel 09:10, 9 Jan 2006 (EST)
 * I have made this change. (WT-en) Xltel 14:24, 10 Jan 2006 (EST)

Comment from Missouri
I have lived in Missouri all my life, and not to make a rude comment or anything, but this article is truly bad. Someone put Bolivar and Bowling Green as major cities. Bolivar's population is about 5-7000. Cape Girardeau, St. Joseph, and Hannibal (home of Mark Twain, one of Missouri's most famous residents) aren't listed. I rewrote the cities.

Also, Jefferson City may be on the edge of the Ozarks technically (so is St. Louis), but I don't know anybody who lives here that would call it "in the Ozarks". I think the whole region thing needs to be scrapped and started over again. I know this is what's on the state's tourism website, but to me:
 * Northeast Missouri – includes Hannibal and Kirksville
 * Northwest Missouri – includes St. Joseph
 * St. Louis Area – St. Louis metro area including St. Charles
 * Kansas City Area – Kansas City metro area including Independence
 * Central Missouri – includes Jefferson City and Columbia
 * Southeast Missouri – Includes Ste. Genevieve and Cape Girardeau
 * The Ozarks – includes Springfield, Joplin, Rolla, West Plains, and Poplar Bluff.

This actually leaves a small area south of Kansas City unclassified (it's not part of the Ozarks), maybe all of that could be called "Western Missouri"? If possible, I'll borrow a map from Wikipedia and see if I can do this on a map.(WT-en) Rt66lt 13:36, 12 Jan 2006 (EST)

 * Hello Rt66it, thank you for helping to add content and make the Missouri article better. I don't see a problem with adding regions for Kansas City and St. Louis. Again thanks (WT-en) Xltel 13:52, 12 Jan 2006 (EST)

I went ahead and changed that section to the areas listed above. When I can get a map done, I'll add that. I thought I would comment on it before I went and made a change like this. Also, since the northwest Missouri, etc. have links, should "St. Louis Area" and "Kansas City Area" have a seperate article from St. Louis and Kansas City?(WT-en) Rt66lt 13:58, 12 Jan 2006 (EST)

 * I will go ahead and create the new regions and move St. Louis and Kansas City. As far as the Ozarks, there is a Ozarks article that covers four states, so we might want to change that back to Southwest and indicate it is in the Ozarks or as an alternative we could create a new region that is Ozarks (Missouri) which would be unique for Missouri. (WT-en) Xltel 14:08, 12 Jan 2006 (EST)

 * This discussion looks to have died long ago, but hopefully someone knowledgeable will be able to look over the regions map I have added, especially to make sure the counties were sorted appropriately by region. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 09:43, 15 May 2009 (EDT)

Branson Claim
I'd really like to see a citation on this: "Branson - 2nd most visited place in the U.S."; I have a very serious disbelief in this. Thanks! Ray

Missouruh
No. Just no. I live here, and it is most definitely Missouri. Only the uneducated say Missouruh. Not only was the change reverted, but my comment on the talk page was erased. That's absurd.

50.83.171.4 09:11, 15 January 2013 (UTC)ganthetjr

 * Take your jabs at the "uneducated" elsewhere. It's pronounced both ways. --Peter Talk 08:40, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Get In section
This feels too specific to the entire state of Missouri, and most of the content fits on the individual city pages? Not sure what the convention is, but I don't think updating that info to bring it inline (as in, there are intl flights from more than CA and MX, but that has little to do with this state page)? --GW

 * "Get in" is a required section, because if you don't get in, you can't do anything. However, I agree that there's too much local detail, so feel free to summarize. For example, major airports should be mentioned, but how to get from those airports to center cities is not relevant to this article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:07, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:08, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Kansas City Montage.jpg

title: Talk:Missouri


text:
Talk:Mitaka

I would provide an argument Kichijoji should be merged with this article. For all intends and purposes, the only place you are likely to visit within Mitaka is Kichijoji, the city's cultural and tourism suburb.(WT-en) Snave 08:43, 23 July 2010 (EDT)

 * In terms of geopolitical boundaries, most of what is commonly called Kichijoji is located in Musashino, not Mitaka. And technically speaking, Kichijoji is a political entity within Musashino.  So probably it is best not to merge this page with Kichijoji.  Also, Kichijoji is a destination in its own right, so even if we merged Kichijoji with Musashino or Mitaka we'd just end up creating subsections for the Kichijoji-specific sights, restaurants, bars, etc, and that would make the page unwieldy. --(WT-en) Orcrist 00:29, 18 June 2012 (EDT)

It should be noted that you cannot buy tickets at the Ghibli Museum but have to buy them before somewhere else.

--84.152.142.106 08:24, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mitaka


text:
Talk:Mitchell Prehistoric Indian Village

Comments
I believe this attraction to be too small for its own article and suggest it be redirected to Mitchell (South Dakota). (WT-en) OldPine 16:11, 30 October 2006 (EST)

I updated the outline for Mitchell (South Dakota) with information about the attraction and a few other details I have for the town. (WT-en) Lather 17:10, 30 October 2006 (EST)

Redirected as suggested. (WT-en) Lather 17:01, 31 October 2006 (EST)
 * Thanks. Looks good. (WT-en) OldPine 17:19, 31 October 2006 (EST)


text:
Talk:Mitrovica

Should this article be merged with Kosovska Mitrovica?

 * I merged the information there to here. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 14:47, 8 October 2009 (EDT)

Real name is Kosovska Mitrovica
This is town real name per wikipedia all other relevant sources. --(WT-en) Blurey 18:24, 25 July 2010 (EDT)

title: Talk:Mitrovica


text:
Talk:Mitzpe Ramon

I made the article status "outline" since we probably need an address, phone, or other locator for the Eat and Sleep entries for it to be usable. --(WT-en) Evan 19:17, 16 Feb 2006 (EST)

The "Crater"
Makhtesh Ramon is *not* a crater. This is a unique geological phenomenon, and it's scientific name is actually "Makhtesh", as it is unique to the Negev desert and northern Sinai. There are probably only 6 known "Makhteshim" is the world, including the 3 larger ones (Ramon, Hagadol and Hakatan) and two tiny ones in mount Arif, and another one (who's name I don't know) in northern Sinai, close to the border with Israel.

It is not a crater because it is not man-made or created by an impact - but through slow erosion in unique conditions. I found this article in Wikipedia, and this in the Hebrew Wikipedia. None are very informative.

If there are no objections, I will try to fix the article later. --(WT-en) Shahar 06:15, 23 December 2006 (EST)

 * Well, unless you're a geologist crater just means "a big hole in the ground", which is what Makhtesh Ramon certainly is. But I think the term "erosion crater" is the easiest way to get the point across. (WT-en) Jpatokal 03:24, 24 December 2006 (EST)

 * I'm not saying we should insist on scientific geological terms - my point was that Makhtesh Ramon as well as the other Makhteshim in the negev are a unique phenomenon, which doesn't exist anywhere in the world, and as such it is not comparable to other "craters". (WT-en) Shahar 16:22, 24 December 2006 (EST)

 * No, it's comparable, because it's a big hole in the ground. But please explain the makhtesh thing in an infobox. (WT-en) Jpatokal 07:38, 25 December 2006 (EST)

Black Hebrews
Aren't they in Dimona, and not Mitzpe Ramon? (WT-en) Shahar 16:22, 24 December 2006 (EST)

Remaining tasks
Tamuz has done a wonderful job adding content to this article, and I'd like to nominate it for an Off the Beaten Path feature on the front page. I don't think it's quite ready yet, however. The article has to be completely wiki-listified, and if there are any more good photos to come by, it would be wonderful to have a couple more. Anything else you can think of? I love the very clear map. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:55, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot. Another issue I see is the placement of the map. Initially I center-aligned it so it doesn't interfere with text flowing. Later it was right-aligned, which might be problematic for screen resolutions under 1280 pixels in width; however, I do agree that the center-aligning doesn't look so attractive. Is there any way to make the text behavior (either wrap around or skip the image) be determined by the window width? If not, I think the best solution would be to put the map in a hide-able box. At any rate, these are the issues I think need handling, and I'll try to finish up anything I can:
 * Fill up missing data on lists ✅
 * Add photos from commons:Category:Mitzpe Ramon and commons:Category:Makhtesh Ramon ✅
 * Placement of the map I see that's what they do with maps in all other articles, so it's OK
 * Proof-reading and article organization by experienced users, since I wasn't sure whether some items should be put in the See, Do or even sometimes Eat&Drink sections I think it's all OK now Tamuz (talk)
 * The Mitzpe Ramon section may also need to be reorganized, maybe place some of it under See. ✅ Split the Do section into Town and Wild and organized them
 * Finding price ranges for all listings
 * So, good luck to us all. Tamuz (talk) 11:22, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

TOC in banner?
Should this article have the short table-of-contents in the banner, or the full one? My opinion is that it should have the full one, since it has a lot of subsections, mainly under the Do and Sleep sections. Readers might not know where to find what they're looking for unless the headings are shown in the TOC. Tamuz (talk) 15:26, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

 * All articles get the TOC in the banner. Some subsections can't be directly accessed, but that's true for all articles. Maybe a solution should be found for this issue. Globe-trotter (talk) 16:23, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

 * I tried adding a sub-TOC for the Do section, but it's not really a conveniently-sustainable solution. Any ideas how to make one? Tamuz (talk) 16:51, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

 * Wikivoyage talk:Banner Expedition would probably be the best place to discuss changes to the banner TOC since the problem is not specific to this article. I know the issue has come up before, so there is probably an existing discussion on that talk page. -- Ryan • (talk) • 17:02, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Star Nomination (Slushed)
I'd like to nominate this article, of which I'm probably the main contributor, for a star status. Note it's also an OtBP candidate. The only thing I can think of that is currently missing in the article are price ranges for most of the listings, which I do intend to add in coming weeks. I believe the English is just fine, but it'd also help if anyone thinks they can add some flourish. I'd be happy to get feedback about it. Tamuz (talk) 14:31, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Almost . Attractive article that makes me want to visit (despite the terrible things I see and read in the news) with an easy tone.
 * It'll be very nearly there when you've added those prices (don't forget to put the shekel symbol (₪) before the amount, contrary to usual Israeli practice but according to our current $ style guide). One thing that did jump out was the very heavy use of emboldening in the Makhtesh Ramon section.
 * The other thing I'd like you to consider is that, if people view your article on-line (rather than printing it out,) there is less ability for you and other editors to micro-manage the appearance of articles with exact image placement and widths or how text appears because of the different computer systems and screens (and for registered users, what skins and other user preferences they may have chosen). Many of our most experienced editors have not yet taken on board some features and facts about our operating software and platform. --W. Franke-mailtalk 15:01, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and duly noted. I'll work to improve the points you've outlined. One question, if anyone has any idea, about the static map there: users with a screen resolution of up to 1280 pixels in width will see the page a little messed up around the map image. Is there anyway to make the text wrap around the map when in higher resolutions, while skipping it for the lower resolutions? Maybe align=center for small and align=right for large resolutions? Tamuz (talk) 17:59, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * There are HTML tricks you can use to stop text wrapping around images at all (and MediaWiki image display syntax to achieve very similar effects - the big drawback is that you lose the ability to click on the thumbnail image blow-up icon in the bottom right of your lovely static map). However, I don't think they're worth employing here to remove an artefact that only occurs at certain screen size and zoom combinations. --W. Franke-mailtalk 18:40, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

 * Support now that $, tdf, units, etc have now been fixed.--W. Franke-mailtalk 18:44, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Almost. A few non-standard formatting issues, such as the table at the top of the Do section, which is not something we've ever done before to my knowledge (and on my browser, the bottom outline of the table is partially missing).  The bullets under "See" are not organized properly, resulting in the double bullet on "The Albert Promenade".  I can't view the in-article dynamic map at the moment due to a bug, but it seems superfluous with the good-quality static map already in the article.  There are an unusual number of internal (and even intra-article) wikilinks in this article; that's not necessarily bad, but it is different, and we should evaluate whether it's excessive or not.  LtPowers (talk) 17:42, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I think you know that you can't view any in-article dynamic maps at the moment due to the way certain browsers refuse to display any non-secure content when you are using a secure (https) connection. However, if you click the (currently) horribly placed and entirely un-intuitive icon placed above the top right of the "banner" you'll be able to see it in a new (insecure) window or tab: Map mag.png. This, of course, is no reason to delay this article's promotion. Using Firefox 23.0.1 under Windoze XP SP3, I also don't see the bottom right-hand outline of the helpful table. --W. Franke-mailtalk 18:23, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Regarding the shape of the table, the central column is intentionally longer than the other two, since it has more bullets. If you think this unaesthetic, it can easily be changed. Generally, I'd be happy to find a better solution than this table, but as LtPowers pointed out, there's nothing of the sort in any other article right now, so I just improvised something. I do believe that something of the sort is necessary, since the Do section over there is pretty complex and needs some internal TOC. By the way, about the map, the static one is mainly for the wilderness attractions while the dynamic is for the stuff inside the town. And, LtPowers, I'll look over those things about the See section and the links and re-edit them. Thanks for your comments. Tamuz (talk) 19:06, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, the table problem is obvious from the code: You have a rowspan=2 on the middle column. That doesn't make the column any longer; all it does is cause the browser to expect an additional row underneath it that doesn't exist.  Since it's expecting the cell to extend down into a non-existent row, it leaves off the bottom border.  As for the necessity of the table, I don't think that Do section is particularly long or complex, and since it's not obvious that the table is an index or ToC, I think it causes more confusion than it resolves.
 * W. Frank, I'm well aware that I can view a dynamic map by clicking on the link, but that tells me nothing about how it appears in the article, which is of paramount importance. If it does indeed show a different view than the static map, then I would also need to see it to determine if it meets our map requirements for star status.  LtPowers (talk) 19:51, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * LtPowers: you may make your assessment by logging out and then choosing a non-secure connection to display the entire article. Alternatively, you might accept that since currently, both the Mapframe and Geo templates have been given the same parameters of latitude, longitude (for the map centre), zoom level and layers that are shown, looking at a full screen map gives you sufficient idea of what the embedded map would look like if you don't want to go through that rigamarole while we are (hopefully) waiting for that bug to be fixed. --W. Franke-mailtalk 21:20, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

 * That "missing line" thing in the table was known and intentional, but it was just an aesthetic decision so nevermind it. However, I still believe in the necessity of that sub-TOC, because different people would want different things: parents with children would probably want the Town attractions and the lookout points, hikers take more interest in the Wild section, and some of the tourists would stick to the Guided Tours. If the entire section fit into one screen-size there was no problem navigating it, but even with my 1080-pixel-high resolution it takes about 2½ screens (and there're a lot of people with smaller screen resolutions) of sub-sections and sub-sub-sections, making navigation a little hard. By the way, I do believe the same goes for San_Francisco/Golden_Gate, Yosemite_National_Park and probably other articles; the fact it hasn't been done till now doesn't mean we shouldn't start; and since I probably haven't found the ideal way to do it, we can check and see if some other designs work better. (All that said, of course I won't object if there's consensus that it should still be removed) Tamuz (talk) 15:18, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Good points; I think your solution works and effective innovation that is not directly contrary to established policy should not be a bar to star status. More thought definitely needs to be devoted to how different travellers will see and use our articles. --W. Franke-mailtalk 15:29, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

 * Question: I'm seeing the dynamic maps (both the internal and external ones) with only Hebrew captions. Is it just me because of my IP location in Israel? Do you see them in English (or your local language)? Tamuz (talk) 15:26, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * A: I'm in Glasgow, Scotland (and almost invariably use a Scots IP) and I'm sorry to say that I also only see Hebrew captions. Bit of a bummer, eh? Are the local street signs bilingual? --W. Franke-mailtalk 15:33, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It has nothing to do with your location. The map material comes from from OpenStreetMap, whose maps in many cases are only available in the local script. However I've understood that OSM is a kind of a wiki, so the Latin transcription of the captions will probably be added by someone in the future. I just went and looked at Beijing and now some streets there do have their names romanized, while absolutely everything was written only in Chinese characters about a year ago. ϒpsilon (talk) 17:06, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * No biggy, I just wanted to know. As it is, I'll gradually get around to translate the street names in OSM, which indeed is a wiki. Anyway, roadsigns in Israel are always in Hebrew, Arabic and English, as are the street signs in almost all cities, Mitzpe Ramon included I think. Tamuz (talk) 18:24, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Frank, I'm thinking of undoing some of your changes to See to make it look more or less like this version, for two reasons: (a) The crater itself (#4 on the list) isn't exactly a See item per se (being a large area, not an exact one-point attraction), however numbers 5 & 6 (the viewpoints) are definitely See items, directly related to #4, and therefore should be its sub-items on the list; and (b) The current phrasing makes it appear as though the Desert Sculpture Park and the Observatory are also viewpoints for the crater (they are in fact not far from the ridge, but aren't particularly good viewpoints, and I hadn't intended these items to appear as such). Any objections, anyone? Tamuz (talk) 23:05, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries, you're the local expert and it's "your baby". I only changed the formatting because I assumed (wrongly?) that there was a distinction between "Prominent viewpoints from Mitzpe Ramon" and "Additional viewpoints outside of Mitzpe Ramon" (my italics added). It's looking good, eh? --W. Franke-mailtalk 23:30, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, there is a distinction, only that the previous wording made it look like the Sculpture Park & Observatory were also considered "viewpoints", while in fact they are unrelated attractions. Anyway, I looked it over again and realized that this confusing wording actually came from my earlier edits, so now I changed it. And yup, I really think we're putting the final touches needed for Star status. Tamuz (talk) 23:51, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

OK, I'd like to ask your opinion on several subjects regarding that page, some of which were pointed-out in the above discussion. If you have any opinion, please write it here, even if your opinion is that things should stay the way they are now. Tamuz (talk)

Pictures
Do you think there too many? Too few? Or is it good now? I've also looked in my smartphone and I think it's OK as it is, but I'd like to confirm that.
 * Personally, I think you're pretty much atthe "Goldilocks point" for a "...small, somewhat remote town..." --W. Franke-mailtalk 01:08, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Links
LtPowers pointed out there's an unusual abundance of links. I've looked it over and removed a few, but not many. Regarding the section-links, I believe they make this article much more easy to use. Anyone thinks I may have overdone it?
 * Not me. --W. Franke-mailtalk 01:08, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Any notes about formatting

 * Support I'm happy with any edits that further improve the article, but I'd like to go on record as supporting the star nomination. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:11, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Support • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 06:50, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Support with no reservations whatsoever. Ibaman (talk) 13:40, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

 * For this one, there seems to be a broad consensus about promoting. Please speak up if anyone has any outstanding objections. If not, I will promote this in the next day or so. — Ravikiran (talk) 08:29, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but it's still not ready. There's no "Wikivoyage-style map" of the settlement (just the crater) and the second item in the "Go next" section lacks a link to another article. See, Do, Eat and Drink, and Sleep all need introductory paragraphs providing an overview of the offerings, including highlights. There's a "See map below" link in the "Get in" section that's broken. And I'm afraid the language in the article is a bit stilted and doesn't meet our requirements for star. There's no doubt this is a Guide, but Stars have higher requirements. Powers (talk) 19:44, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Slushing this then. Thanks — Ravikiran (talk) 08:57, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Tour companies
Some touting by Desert Prime was reverted by Ibaman. Unfortunately, it turned up again immediately and no one really cared about it.

But in general, do we not have that rule that we do not list specific tour companies? So, the whole Mitzpe_Ramon should actually be remove, shouldn't it?

As a trade-off I would still retain the specific activities, if not already mentioned before.

Cheers, Ceever (talk) 10:52, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mitzpe Ramon


text:
Talk:Miyajima

Huge structure on the hillside of the mainland facing the island of Miyajima
There is a huge structure on the hillsideof the mainland facing the island of Miyajima - does anyone know what this is?

 * I've wondered about that myself. One person told me it was a hotel, another told me it was a convention center, and a third person told me it was a religious building. Dunno who (if any) was right. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 00:48, 9 January 2007 (EST)

 * Either way, it appears to have been built intentionally to lie directly within the torii gate when people take a tourist photo on the end of the platform within the Itsukshima shrine. Free advertising I guess, but personally I think its an abomination. --113.34.159.89 11:05, 27 June 2010 (EDT)Snave

 * Apparently it is the books museum of a buddhist organization: https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%B5%B7%E3%81%AE%E8%A6%8B%E3%81%88%E3%82%8B%E6%9D%9C%E7%BE%8E%E8%A1%93%E9%A4%A8 Syced (talk) 13:13, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

 * @Syced, hello, thank you for the link, and traced it to Wikidata for that building, named the Umi-Mori Art Museum:
 * built by a chief of a modern sect of Buddhism;
 * not a hotel, nor a library, but a private museum of art (per jawp);
 * among its Japanese art collection, good numbers date back to the era between 1185 and 1573;
 * the other pieces are by those Kyoto school Japanese painters of traditional style, who were financially supported by the chief of the sect, including Seiho Take'uchi (竹内栖鳳) and his group. That part of the holdings is said to have expanded through acquisition from Shibunkaku collection along with sketches, photographs in 1985. The museum also holds ukiyo-e woodblock prints, with Utagawa Hiroshige's flower and bird prints, and they collect Chinese prints which had inspired ukiyo-e artists. Perfume/sniffing bottles are what they appeal to the visitors.
 * Omotecho (talk) 13:58, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Omotecho Thanks! Surprisingly I could not find any media article talking about the impact of that structure on the view, only non-reference posts such as https://ameblo.jp/shi48/entry-12376722448.html or https://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q10130439800... if you find any media article or research paper about this, please let us know. :-) Syced (talk) 02:16, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Good point, @Syced, and well, as Japanese culture tolerates religious offerings of this kind a bit more.
 * I found the following is a bit tarted with Wikiedic style.
 * An argument that a building making a nick in the panorama, or sticking out on landscape was not much cared about, before 1971 when the first Right of Panorama Act came into action (Showa 44th, Keikan Jōrei 昭和44年景観条例).
 * Academic paper.
 * The view control at the Ohno district, Hatsuka'chi city is discussed by two students at a local chapter of the Architectural Institute of Japan. On its paywalled e-journal, issue 24, pp.755-758, March 2001 by Hirata, Yoshi'hide ; Sugahara, Tatsuyoshi (平田嘉秀, 菅原辰幸) both at Hiroshima_Institute_of_Technology.
 * Hiroshima prefecture.
 * The Basic Plan for Designated Landscape Area, Notification No. 1423, Miyajima/Ono as Landscape Designated Area, dated December 25, 1991.
 * Voices on the web.
 * a personal view on WordPress expanded thoughts from 2020 Torii-gate repair, suggesting there are like-cousin facilities by the sister sects across Japan and near Mt.Fuji, too (another story /: );
 * a travel/gourmet guide encourages people to enjoy the French dishes at the restaurant, where an entrance ticket to the museum is required to be seated;
 * I understand that that building was very cautiously avoid on the official site: the best view on Miyajima you are proud of and wish to hand down (literally to your great grandchildren: in Japanese "みんなが選んだ 後世に残したい 知ってほしい景観") (see pp.7-8 for Ohno District where the museum is located.)
 * The third site is maintained by the Construction Planning Office, local government of Hatsuka'ichi City (廿日市市 建設部 都市計画課), dated March, 2019 (Heisei 29th) E-mail：toshikeikaku@undefinedcity.hatsukaichi.lg.jp.
 * FYI, when the museum was built, Miyajima and Ohno used to be independent towns in 1978, before merger into Hatsuka'ichi City (Shōwa 53th). --Omotecho (talk) 04:21, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Itsukushima Shrine Picture
I'd like to generate some discussion on a "most useful" photo for the Itsukshima Shrine. I think a more descriptive and characteristic photo exists, which shows more of the "red-lacquered complex of halls and pathways on stilts." Do others think that the picture on the right gives travelers a better idea of what the Shrine is, and why they should visit it? (WT-en) Jtesla16 11:57, 9 January 2009 (EST)

 * Thanks for initiating discussion. You might have been a little more direct in your opening, though — come right out and say that you took the photo! I took the photo on the left, so I'm as biased as you are. I think the one I took is more compelling because it shows action and something more unique to Itsukushima — I've seen no shortage of wooden orange rails while temple-hopping in Japan, and it's the water more than the stilts that sets Itsukushima apart. That said, your photo is more typical of the shape of photos on this site, so it fits into the article better. I wouldn't be offended if others want to swap it in for mine. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 18:56, 9 January 2009 (EST)

 * I think Gorilla's is more attractive and unique, but Jtesla's is more informative, so why not use both? (WT-en) Jpatokal 23:19, 9 January 2009 (EST)
 * Funny, we were told to put away our cameras in the actual temple grounds... Personally I believe Jtesla's picture better demonstrates the actual temple. Maybe some information about the 'Ceremonial dance' could be included in the See section? (WT-en) Iciac 23:44, 9 January 2009 (EST)

 * If I may weigh in, Gorilla's photo is nice, but would prefer a higher resolution image (if available?). The framing of the photo on the right doesn't seem quite right, with a lot of darkness on the top of the image and on the right side.  That said, either or both would be okay.  I can offer additional options, if interested, on my Flickr page.  or the many hundreds of other suitably licensed Miyajima photos on Flickr  . (WT-en) Aude 23:45, 9 January 2009 (EST)

 * Given the choice, I'd pick a photo taken at high tide to best show off the construction - something like this photo of Aude's, perhaps. - (WT-en) Dguillaime 00:03, 10 January 2009 (EST)

 * Liki Jani said, why don't we just use both, there are no rules that you have to have pictures of attractions right by the text. Also I have some pictures lying around from the summit, if anyone would find that interesting, unfortunately it was overcast though. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 01:05, 10 January 2009 (EST)
 * I think some photos from the summit could be very useful, especially in the "Do" section where it recommends climbing Mt. Misen.(WT-en) Jtesla16 17:02, 11 January 2009 (EST)

It seems like the general consensus is to use both pictures, which I agree is probably the best solution. I will take a stab at placing the second photo in the article; all feel free to move it if you think it would work better in another spot.(WT-en) Jtesla16 17:02, 11 January 2009 (EST)

 * Looks good to me — thanks for the feedback, everyone. Miyajima is so photogenic, it's hard to be selective. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 17:18, 11 January 2009 (EST)

 * I actually think that the ceremony photo is still out-of-place. I feel what is needed is an "Events" section or something where information about this performance and other celebrations on the island is given. So, by no means am I suggesting the photo be deleted, but I do think it has yet to find its home.

I will say that, because the article is small, there does appear to be too many pictures, although I kind of like most of the pictures. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 22:28, 28 June 2009 (EDT)

 * I like that we can see the ceremony pic immediately. If anything, I'd prefer to move it to lead over the standard o-torii pic that everyone uses—it's an exciting shot. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 22:35, 28 June 2009 (EDT)

Map mistake
I was just in Miyajima the other day, and a mistake on the map threw me off a bit-- On the second map (Itsukushima area), there are two See #9s and no #10. The 9 on the left side of the map is supposed to be a 10. I would fix it myself, but my Inkscape is out of order. Could someone take care of this simple fix for us? The original map creator seems to have been absent since March... (WT-en) texugo 00:51, 18 August 2011 (EDT)

Phrase list for tourists
You can download a handy list to converse, which is originally intended to service staff on premises: by the local Tourist’s bureau. If you find it useful, kundly add it on the page. --Omotecho (talk) 06:11, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the link, which would seem most relevant to Talk:Japan, but do you think this link is OK under this site's what not to link to policy? I doubt it. And note that we have a Japanese phrasebook. Would you like to check it and see if anything should be edited? Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:36, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Ikan Kekek, thank you for kind reply and pointing me to Japanese phrasebook. Well, the link I added above is more for etiquettes/manners that you will find in any travelers’ guide, and I am guessing that adding such link to phrasebook won’t fit. I agree we won’t need for “what no to link to”. Cheers, Omotecho (talk) 12:11, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

 * If there's any content in it that should be summarized in Japan, feel free to add it there but cite your source in edit summaries. Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:15, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Miyajima


text:
Talk:Mobile

Deutsch Wikivoyage
Anyone else find it curious that DE Wikivoyage has a better, more complete guide to Mobile than the EN site? Guess it's time to break out my rusty German. - (WT-en) Andrew Haggard (Sapphire) 22:22, 13 June 2006 (EDT)
 * You have a "rusty German"? I'm imagining you activating a tin man named Helmut. :) What's really humbling is the fact that the German article – extensive as it is – is still labeled a "stub". - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 22:43, 13 June 2006 (EDT)
 * Actually, his name is Hans. :) - (WT-en) Andrew Haggard (Sapphire) 22:49, 13 June 2006 (EDT)

title: Talk:Mobile


text:
Talk:Mogadishu

Left side of the road? I thought Somalia drives on the right side of the road? (they can't even agree on that!!!)--71.237.244.146 00:55, 19 September 2008 (EDT)

Pointless commentary
So I'm not really the edit war type, can you stop re-adding the part about "you shouldn't even be here in the first place"? It's irrelevant to the article, this is a guide for those that are going or are there now. Advice in the "Stay safe" section about how to get around, etc safely is appropriate, silly comments in the "get out" section like yours, not so necessary. – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 22:58, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

 * This is also an article for people who might be thinking of going there. I mean, let's face it, some people like the thrill of taking their life into their own hands. (WT-en) Grimlock 05:22, 16 December 2008 (EST)

Driving
Having read both articles, Mogadishu and Somalia, they seem to contradict each other. The Somalia page mentions that it is generally accepted that you drive on the left, the Mogadishu page disagrees with this and states that it is agreed that you drive on the right. Although fairly amusing I think it would be more useful if one could be chosen over the other. --(WT-en) Breenie 09:04, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

 * Feel free to update as you see fit... better yet, maybe word it somehow that one should expect the left/right rule to be thrown to the wind, and be prepared for anything, since that sounds more like the case – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 17:35, 1 October 2008 (EDT)

Black Hawk Down
Yes, it could definitely use a rewrite... btw, you have contacted Wikivoyage directly :) And you can be a part of it as much as anyone else, feel free to plunge forward and rewrite the section in a more balanced and accurate tone. But please don't delete it all together, there's the makings of an interesting understand section if the right person comes and tackles it – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 15:15, 22 January 2009 (EST)

The discussion about the purpose of the movie and the deaths of U.S. soldiers was irrelevant to this article. The tone of the paragraph, describing the bodies of soldiers being dragged bordered on gloating and had no relevance regarding travel to Mogadishu. Accordingly, it was deleted.

Grammar nazi
A well meaning anonymous user changed my text about the Arba-Rucun Mosque from this:
 * Fortunate enough to have a relation to Islam, one of few things the city's warlords can agree on, this 1269 mosque has been more lucky than the neighbouring cathedral, and is one of very few buildings in the historic center which is not a ruin. It's said to have been built by a direct descendant of the Prophet Mohammed.

into this:
 * This building has been fortunate enough to have a relation to Islam, a religion the city's warlords can agree on. Therefore, the warlords have agreed to keep it maintained, one of the few things in the city holding such a status. Dating from 1269, the mosque has been more lucky than the neighbouring cathedral, and it is one of very few buildings in the historic center which is not a ruin. It's said to have been built by a direct descendant of the Prophet Mohammed.

When adding this I had been very careful to try keep in line with the general tone of the article, which I think is wonderful. Does anyone else find the new version dry and encyclopaedic? --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 01:19, 2 February 2010 (EST)

Turkish Airlines to Mogadishu?
I am a Turk who visited Mogadishu in 2012, and am sure that Turkish Airlines do NOT fly from Istanbul to Mogadishu. There are multiple ways to go from Istanbul to Mogadishu, but none include a direct flight beween the two cities. One has to go from Istanbul to Nairobi via Turkish Airlines and then catch one of the local flights to Mogadishu there.

That being said, Turkish Airlines plans to commence direct flights between Istanbul and Mogadishu in maybe late March 2012. That all depends upon the safety of the aeroport which does not meet the international safety requirements yet. However, there is ongoing work as to increasing the safety of the aeroport. Once done, Turkish airlines will be able to fly to Mogadishu.

 * Just try the Turkish Airlines website. Seems there are flights most days. Andrewssi2 (talk) 09:18, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Poor Banner
The Mogadishu banner is very poor! I had a look at the source and the explanation is that someone and stretched.

A quick browse doesn't yield anything on wikimedia that might replace it (I think war scenes from 1992 are not that relevant for a banner)

Should we keep this bad banner or should we leave the default so that this article can be identified easily later for fixing? Andrewssi2 (talk) 09:14, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

 * I'd say return to default, it's very bad. I can also try to crop another banner from the photo on the right but it is old as well (1993). Jjtkk (talk) 09:38, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * It's a bad banner, but I do think it's better than no banner. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:40, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I think the new banner is slightly better than the old one. It's quite understandable that there aren't a lot of great current photos of Mogadishu. Violence is down from its peak, but it is still quite an unsafe city. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:57, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

 * That picture is better, although the name of the original "File:K-4_Circle_outside_of_the_Bangladesh_Army_compound.JPEG" would suggest it was taken around 1992 when the UN troops were still trying to stabilize the country. I would say something a bit more recent would be great.
 * By the way, I disagree on the point that 'a bad banner is better than no banner'. If a page has no banner then it can be easily identified in a template search whereas a page with a bad banner has no chance for the same to happen. Andrewssi2 (talk) 12:31, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Wow, trying to find that perfect snapshot of Mogadishu is a pretty depressing exercise. Some CC images from Flickr:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/104819607@N08/10169198414/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/104819607@N08/10169196754/

Andrewssi2 (talk) 12:42, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Andrew, I wasn't suggesting that in every case, a bad banner is better than no banner. Some banners might be so bad that it would be good to excise them, no matter what. Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:03, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

 * My (purely subjective) opinion was that the original banner was sufficiently bad so as to justify its removal. I guess the 'quality bar' is just a difference of opinion.
 * It is an interesting question though.. for some hard to reach locations (such as Mogadishu or areas of North Korea outside the capital) there is an understandable lack of quality CC licensed content to draw from. I do understand that we need to compromise quality at times. Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:31, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Exactly. That was why I was willing to accept a blurry pagebanner on this page, if that was the best we had. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:42, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Update the warning
The warning was last updated four years ago. Are there government sources we could cite as to a more recent appraisal? Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:51, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

 * For stuff like this, you can always do a web search on "US State Department travel warning Somalia" and similar terms and read through the warning. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:06, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

 * Updated with content from State's latest warning. Add links to other warning sites if you like (UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, France, wherever). Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:14, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

New banner
The current banner is really drab. How about one of these alternatives? One of these could also be used for the Somalia article, which has a somewhat drab banner too. —Granger (talk · contribs) 09:16, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I quite like option 2. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 09:17, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I like 2, then 3. Good suggestions. Ground Zero (talk) 12:24, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
 * 2, and I hope Mogadishu can experience some peace and a decent standard of living in the foreseeable future. Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:59, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mogadishu


text:
Talk:Mohawk

Is this the one in Montgomery County or in Herkimer County? (WT-en) LtPowers 09:03, 29 May 2010 (EDT)

title: Talk:Mohawk


text:
Talk:Moissac

article originaly written as an ad for the "moulin de moissac". I neutered it. (WT-en) Toitoine 14:28, 9 Aug 2005 (EDT)

title: Talk:Moissac


text:
Talk:Mojave

Mojave Desert
I'll take this to the California Desert discussion page; but either we should say part of California Desert and point there, or part of Mojave Desert and point at that (new) page.--(WT-en) Justfred 17:42, 27 September 2006 (EDT)

title: Talk:Mojave


text:
Talk:Moldavia

The romanian region of Moldavia and the country homonimous, in the North of Romania (cap. Chisinau) ARE NOT the same, althought both places share the same culture.

Flight chart
We don't maintain this kind of chart because we don't have the resources to keep them up to date, so I'm putting this here below. Texugo (talk) 14:09, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Connections:

Moldova Moldavia
Does anyone know why, in English, we use "Moldavia" for the region of Romania, which in Romanian is called "Moldova", like the country? Ground Zero (talk) 18:59, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

 * Because that's the term most used in English. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:07, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

I was in both parts of Moldova in September. Moldova is the Romanian-language name. Moldavia is the English-language version. But I guess when the republic gained independence, the world accepted its version of the name without translating it. Ground Zero (talk) 09:29, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

 * Exactly. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:23, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Way too many images
There are 2 images wholly below the end of the article on my browser, and the images form an unbroken column down the right side, which is not Wikivoyage style (see also Image policy). I believe there is room for at most 3 images other than a map. So which ones should remain? I hope for suggestions, but if no-one suggests anything, I will probably plunge forward shortly and delete a bunch of thumbnails. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:07, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

 * Romanichthys Valsanicola, you know this region best. Which images are least important? Or, alternatively, which are the 5 or so more important ones? Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:18, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Regions
This region is kind of messed up. It is subdivided into two subregions: I propose to roll Upper Moldavia into Moldavia region, which would have 8 destination articles. Ground Zero (talk) 11:21, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Upper Moldavia (a skeleton article with 6 existing destination articles)
 * Lower Moldavia (no article)

 * Yeah, I think we should move the upper moldavia article. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 11:27, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

 * Done. Ground Zero (talk) 02:17, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Moldavia


text:
Talk:Moldova

Fourth most interesting sight in Eastern Europe?
This edit removed the link to http://www.lonelyplanet.com/europe/travel-tips-and-articles/67086 where a recent (copyvio?) edit had (correctly) reported that Lonely Planet thought that the Orheiul Vechi Monastery complex was 4th in their list of "...top 10 Eastern European getaways".

I think this mention does meet the test in WV:Don't tout to "Avoid references to third-party ratings and rankings unless they are truly exceptional. For example, "Lonely Planet approved" should be avoided since there are thousands of businesses that are "Lonely Planet approved", but "rated the #2 hotel in the Middle East by Generic Travel Magazine in 2010" might be worth mentioning...".

Does anyone disagree?

I've visited many of these archaic but evocative monastic cells and, along with being driven for several kilometres underground through the largest wine cellars in the world in a smuggler's Mercedes 600, were one of the highlights of my Moldovan visit. --W. Frankemailtalk 14:16, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

 * Yes, I disagree. We don't mention these kinds of results that are strictly the product of anonymous user ratings (Zagat and Yelp ratings for restaurants would be other examples). There should be some other way to indicate how exceptional they are without this reference. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:16, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

 * Have you actually read the link I provided above, IK?
 * The rating for http://www.lonelyplanet.com/moldova/orheiul-vechi was not "the product of anonymous user ratings" but rather the considered opinion of experienced travel journalists from what is currently the most respected travel imprint in Europe. --W. Frankemailtalk 19:47, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

 * No, I hadn't, and I somehow was confusing Lonely Planet with Tripadvisor, probably because I didn't get enough sleep. I don't know what to say about this case. I'd like to read other people's takes on this. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:10, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

 * I know the feeling. No rush. --W. Frankemailtalk 21:26, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Listing more Moldovan cities
For a country with 2.5 million inhabitants and stretching some 300 km north to south and 100 km west to east, it's kinda silly that there are just three entries in Cities. I mean, even articles of European microstates and island nations in Oceania and the Caribbean in general all have more cities and towns listed.

I think we should list, say, the 10 biggest here (just ones that aren't in Transnistria because they're listed in that article). As for now we can have them as redlinks, like e.g. the "cities" listed in Liechtenstein and do some online research to get at least some of them to usable status. ϒpsilon (talk) 19:46, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I really dislike long lists of redlinks... And I'd even argue that we should remove the relinks in the Liechtenstein article, not take them as an example to emulate... Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:07, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
 * So I'm getting started with the articles, by applying User:Ypsilon/Tips for improving articles on unfamiliar destinations, I think they can be brought up to usable status.
 * There were just 4 to add so that we'll have articles for the 10 most populous cities in Moldova (7 in this article, 3 in the Transnistria article, which we treat as a separate country). Sadly Comrat seems to be locked because apparently some vandal one of Libmod's incarnations created it twice last year. Could some admin kindly unlock it, TT maybe who locked it? --Ypsilon (talk) 14:36, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I've unlocked it for you. Ground Zero (talk) 14:53, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks! :) --Ypsilon (talk) 15:07, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, they should call you Ground Hero ;-) --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 15:55, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Also, dear comrades, could someone please also unlock Talk:Comrat, I need to put a "translated" tag there because the Russian version does have a little useful information to bring over. Ypsilon (talk) 16:33, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * ✔. Ground Zero (talk) 16:40, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Seven articles at usable for Europe's least visited country. Yay! Ypsilon (talk) 18:45, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:21, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Aeroport-chisinau 1.jpg

 * Photo changed. There are several photos of the airport on Commons and no particular reason to use the one that is about to get deleted. Ypsilon (talk) 13:28, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:37, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Deplasarea pe bicicleta.jpg

Can Transnistria be considered a "stalinist dictatorship"?
Hi there, I see that in this article's region category, it describes Transnistria as "One of the last places to see a stalinist dictatorship". I know this isn't true, and considering my edit (which I know I should've reconsidered anyway) trying to nudge away the supposed "stalinist charm" to Transnistria on it's page got rolled back right afterwards; I at least want to remove the part of this article where it straight up gives misleading information, but I am writing this just to make sure. TheElectrifiedFreak (talk) 06:27, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Please make an argument. How is it not true? Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:41, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
 * It certainly isn't one if you can freely travel to Moldova (due to the lack of border controls between Transnistria and Moldova). SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 08:12, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
 * People could travel from East Berlin to West Berlin until the wall was put up. That didn't make the East German dictatorship non-Stalinist. Is there any other evidence? Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:18, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Is there any evidence that it is one? -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 08:22, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
 * User:Ground Zero, since you've been there, maybe you would have something to say about this. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:45, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The Transnistrian government is in theory democratic and frankly in practice like the Russian government (aka an authoritarian pseudo-democracy). I don't see the Transnistrian government sending their government compatriots to the gulag like Stalin would've done. Even calling Transnistria communist (like it's flag might suggest) would be a better overstatement than a stalinist government, if still
 * an overstatement.
 * Looking back, it basically is a dictatorship, but far from stalinist. The Transnistrian government is too caught up in corruption to commit to the fundamentals of communism or socialism, and even if they could, they probably wouldn't do it, because they're also commited to uniting with Russia, a feat which can be done only if they are a 1:1 duplicate of it's government. TheElectrifiedFreak (talk) 10:30, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree with the ElectrifiedFreak, "Stalinist dictatorship" is not correct. What draws people are the communist monuments and imagery. The statues are of Lenin, not Stalin, and the government is not ideologically communist, just thoroughly corrupt. We spoke to someone who spoke openly about the government, which I would not expect in a Stalinist state. Ground Zero (talk) 10:54, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
 * If it's really needed I can provide the constitution of Transnistria and frankly even if it may not respect theese opening articles, I don't exactly believe that a stalinist state would phrase it's constitution that light-heartedly. Stalinist states (which really don't exist anymore) would phrase they're breaches of (for example) human rights or freedom of travel a lot more openly and more strong-worded. TheElectrifiedFreak (talk) 11:44, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't know if Stalinist states don't exist. Maybe North Korea. But you guys have convinced me that Transnistria is not one, so please go ahead and re-delete that. Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:55, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
 * North Korea officialy is it's own branch of communism, but ideologically is very Stalinistic so I'm giving you that. Glad that we figured this out! TheElectrifiedFreak (talk) 15:39, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, even modern China is objectively not Stalinist. Other than Tibet, you can go to China today and travel around freely as a tourist, which was not allowed in the Soviet Union. Tourists visiting the Soviet Union were required to join package tours, much like North Korea today. Foreigners need to join a package tour to visit Tibet, but Chinese citizens can go to Tibet and travel around freely as tourists. The dog2 (talk) 17:52, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Moldova


text:
Talk:Monaco

For future reference the Project:CIA World Factbook 2002 import can be found at Talk:Monaco/CIA World Factbook 2002 import.

"Euro" information relevant?
I personally don't see the purpose of describing the Euro in detail at the "Buy" section of Monaco. What do you guys think? --Renek78 (talk) 19:34, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree. In my opinion it should only mention that it uses Euro like most of the European Union, and that there are some commemorative coins that may interest the collectors (it was possible to purchase them when the Euro was introduced, but nowadays I suppose they are hard to obtain). — Fabimaru (talk) 21:00, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The Quickbook information that includes the Monegasque Franc looks inaccurate. That should be edited out, shouldn't it? Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:59, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * It should not be there, but the problem is that the information comes from Wikidata, and there it is mentioned that the Monegasque Franc stopped being used in 2002 (and that the Euro started in 1999). So the Quickbook does not take in account this meta-data. I don't know how to fix that (in Wikivoyage). — Fabimaru (talk) 20:26, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * How would it be fixed in Wikidata? Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:32, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * The information in Wikidata is correct, so it should not be modified. From what I understand, the problem is in the Wikivoyage side: the Quickbook should not take the elements whose end date has passed. I don't understand why the page about France does not behave the same way: the Wikidata for France contains 4 currencies. In fact, it is possible with the template "quickbar" to override the currency coming from Wikidata by just adding a parameter "currency=Euro" (which I just did). But I would prefer to understand why it happens instead of a shady workaround. — Fabimaru (talk) 17:04, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Categorize as region of France?
The categorization of Monaco as a country in Europe is very imprecise. While Monaco is a sovereign and widely recognized country, virtually all foreign visitors arrive and leave through France, and there are no border controls. Most advice for visitors to France also applies for Monaco. We should consider to describe Monaco as a region of France. Compare Vatican City, which is described as a district of Rome. San Marino is a similar case. /Yvwv (talk) 02:27, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

 * Vatican City is quite literally part of Rome, usually accessed by walking from Italian sovereign territory. Monaco is its own city, San Marino is not classified as part of Italy, and neither are usually accessed by walking across an unmarked frontier. My gut feeling is that Monaco is not part of France, doesn't feel entirely like part of France and shouldn't be classified as such, but I'd be willing to entertain arguments to the contrary. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:57, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

 * I really feel that all the countries should be classified as such (excepted the Vatican, because it's so small and quick to visit). — Fabimaru (talk) 17:18, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

 * I generally agree with you, and I also agree specifically on Vatican City. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:06, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you to those responsible for the 'on foot' section - it is indeed a lovely way to get into Monaco, even if it's not entirely clear where the border is when you do so! Lovingboth (talk) 12:34, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

A selection of Page Banner for Moncao

 * All three are beautiful. Why change? Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:28, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Ikan Kekek, I just found a 4th one, which is better than all of them in my opinion. Maybe a bit dark...--Renek78 (talk) 09:00, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * My point is, with a banner this good already, why even consider changing it? Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:27, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I have to say the existing banner reminds me best of Monaco... --Andrewssi2 (talk) 09:42, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Great. Then we leave it. Just wanted to add some options to choose from.--Renek78 (talk) 09:44, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:18, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Monaco Roseraie Princesse Grace.jpg

Bus#100 became bus #600
Recently someone deleted everything related to bus 100. Bus 600 is its predecessor now, thus the deletions might have been too early. Source 2001:818:D8F5:7800:F8DD:699B:6809:4500 22:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

 * Please fix anything you know to be wrong. Thanks. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:21, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Monaco


text:
Talk:Moncton

Understand?
I don't know this town, but I do know that having only a climate chart in "Understand" looks weird. Anyone want to take a stab at an "Understand" paragraph that describes anything interesting or useful as background about the city? Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:35, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I added text adapted from Wikipedia, and based on my own brief visit a couple of years ago. Ground Zero (talk) 15:38, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Moncton