text:
Talk:South Korea

Removed the factbook. (WT-en) Professorbiscuit

War
South Korea is very much defined by the Korean war in the 50's and the continued standoff until today. However it is very difficult to give good travel advice around the risk of war for potential travelers. My own opinion is that all out war is very unlikely, although there will almost certainly be ongoing limited hostilities in future, most of which will not affect any travelers to South Korea. How can we make travelers aware of the risk of war without alarming them with this scenario? --116.48.219.67 04:17, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Films
I saw the book section, so I thought a good way to learn about Korea is to see some films as well. The list is NOT 'best films of Korea' but rather 'Films that will show you some of Korea's history and society'. Please feel free to add films, however please do not add hundreds of films since there are better places on the internet for people to find those. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 06:37, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Pagebanner size & content
This page banner is the wrong size... Texugo (talk) 17:49, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm also not sure about the image itself. The town of Daejeon doesn't really showcase the country. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 02:30, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it's not that attractive. Do you have any images of Jeju that could be good banners? Or an image of a traditional Korean temple, perhaps? Or some more attractive modern skyline, or an image of a night market, showing Korean food? Those are just some ideas. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:42, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

 * I'm not an expert photographer, therefore I rely on images already in Wikimedia and can't find too many. How about this? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 05:44, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

 * GyeongbokgungPanorama.JPG

 * That image looks like it'll be mostly stones. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:16, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

 * There is a full gallery of South Korean Panoramic pictures here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Panoramics_in_South_Korea . Do any appeal to you? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 08:12, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

 * My favorites are these views of Daegu, which remind me of classic Korean art:

 * Countryandcitydaegu.jpg

 * HilltopDaegucountry.jpg.

 * If you'd prefer a city view, this one is a night view of Seoul:

 * Seoul Nightview(2009).jpg

 * And this one is a great panorama of Busan, showing it as an exciting, beautiful city:
 * Panorama view of the harbour from Busan Tower 2.jpg.

 * This is an interesting mixture of the traditional and the modern. I don't like it as much, on the face of it, but I'd be willing to look at a banner version of it, which would probably cut off some of the less-interesting top of the frame:

 * Korea-Seoul-Bukchon-13.jpg.

 * This is a nice beach but not really what anyone would expect of a banner photo for Korea:

 * Korea - Goheung-gun - Narado Beach panorama.jpg.

 * And that's all the photos in that gallery that I think merit comment. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:40, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

 * I reformatted your comment to make the pictures easier to see. I really like the Busan one, which I have already used for the Busan page. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to work so well as a banner. (Please see the Busan page to see what I mean). The Deagu pictures look nice, although for the most part they do not show too much of Korea, just mountains and trees. I'm thinking to look wider on the internet for panorama pictures of South Korea that are under the creative commons license. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 08:48, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

 * The current banner is pretty bad (in my opinion). It is fuzzy and doesn't really give a feel for the country.
 * I will search for a new one, but would be happy to get suggestions in the meantime Andrewssi2 (talk) 08:55, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

 * Ideally a banner for South Korea would have both a traditional element like a palace, temple or shrine and Myeongdong-like modern elements. ϒpsilon (talk) 09:16, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Improving quality of country articles
I've noticed that there are many issues with South Korean articles that I am slowly trying to address:

 * Many cities have been created with OK content, but have not been upgraded from 'outline' to 'usable' categorization
 * Some small towns have articles for the purpose of advertizing one business with no other content
 * National park articles have been frequently created with no content
 * Prices are often not listed in ₩ (Korean won symbol) but written as won or even given as US dollar

Please feel free to add anything else you think needs fixing --Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:57, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Advice on eating moved from Suwon
In case anyone wants to include any of this in the "Eat" section, or perhaps put it in Vegetarian and vegan food.

Vegetarian food is difficult to find without a Korean speaker in your party. Korean food is very tasty, and does have vegetarian dishes, you just need to know how to ask for them. At a pinch, there are always Western options such as baguette sandwiches, Pizzas, burgers etc. where you can point and show how many you want. If all else fails, a big smile and a "ch'e-shik-chuui-jah" (a Vegetarian person) will earn you a selection of veggie side dishes in most of the very many korean restaurants. Korean hosts are very keen to please. Be prepared that it may contain a couple of shellfish thrown in here and there, which you may prefer to leave on the side. Christianity is more widespread than Buddhism, so the usual gambit of claiming to be Buddhist may not help as much as in, say, China, Tibet, Japan, etc.

I'll add that the last sentence is untrue, according to figures given in this article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:23, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

 * Thanks! I will take a look. There is quite a lot of awesome vegetarian food in Korea, although there is a belief that Westerners will only want to eat meat so it will be rarely offered to you. It is something the country guide should cover.
 * The religious aspect definitely is incorrect, since most followers of Buddhism in Korea actually eat meat. That said, some of the best vegetarian food can be found in the remote Buddhist monasteries. Andrewssi2 (talk) 09:20, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

 * After reading through the existing section ("Dietary restrictions"), I believe there isn't any value to add the above text from Suwon. There isn't anything extra that is insightful and the writing quality is lower. Andrewssi2 (talk) 13:56, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Quality of South Korean listings
There has been a discussion started in Talk:Jeonju around the lack of information generally found in South Korean listings.

The points are around the following listing issues we see in WV.

 * 1) Listings with only romanized names
 * 2) Listings with no addresses
 * 3) Listings with broken websites

Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:42, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Korean and Chinese Culture
Perhaps this is just anecdotal, but from my experience in Wikipedia, Koreans get extremely upset if you suggest that Korean culture has historically been influenced by Chinese culture. Previously, when I made such edits in Wikipedia, what I got was a huge bashing from Korean Wikipedians and accusations that I was Sinocentric, biased towards China, anti-Korea and lots of other allegations. Essentially, I became Public Enemy Number One for many Korean Wikipedians. While this may be just an isolated incident, what this suggests to me is that Koreans reject the notion that their culture has been influenced by Chinese culture, and even suggesting that is extremely offensive to a Korean. I just thought I'd mention it so that visitors would not say such things and offend their hosts. The dog2 (talk) 02:18, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Thanks for bringing this to the talk page!
 * I really can't speak for the Wikipedia users that you encountered. I would however suspect that they are perhaps something like second generation Korean Americans who tend to be more sensitive to this kind of thing and often explode with nationalistic sentiment with any comparison to other Asian cultures. Without reference to the conversations you have had I can't say that with certainty, but if it is true then quite often the worst source of national information is from people like that. (i.e. My parents came from Korea, therefore I know much better than you and Korea is much better than China!)
 * In Korea itself, it is really mixed. Buddhist temples in Korea very obviously influenced by Chinese culture, and even today public officials take examinations on Confucius principles!
 * Chinese people themselves actually like watching Korean dramas because they often feel Korean retains a level of Chinese culture that China itself has lost. Everyone takes pride in the Chinese character with which their name is spelt.
 * Honestly, I don't think moderate Chinese comparisons are an issue at all. It is important to bear in mind however that Korean culture should be regarded as indigenous to Korea, with China being an outside influence rather than a defining force.
 * When it comes to Japan, I think there is a stronger case. In reality Korea has copied a great deal of Japanese culture; Korean cuisine and even society is closer to Japan than China and saunas are a definite common interest. However comparisons with Japan are best not discussed to much because of the wartime animosity between the two nations is not repaired even today. (The current Korean president and Japanese Prime minister have not yet met each other, and it seems unlikely they will meet)
 * Andrewssi2 (talk) 03:25, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

OK, perhaps that explains some of things I previously experienced in Wikipedia. To be honest, it was not a very nice experience have multiple personal attacks thrown at me, and perhaps I have been too quick to generalise that most Koreans share those views.

Although I am of Chinese descent myself, I do understand why many Koreans, Japanese and Vietnamese get upset with the Chinese at times, as many Chinese tend to belittle these cultures as nothing more than copies of Chinese culture. Of course, this is untrue and very offensive to people of those cultures (Who wouldn't be offended if anyone tried to belittle their culture?). I certainly recognise that these cultures are unique in their own right, and it is annoying when some of these Chinese tourists belittle the cultures of the countries they visit. Thankfully, it is becoming less of a problem among the younger urban Chinese.

At the same time, most experts agree that China has had a profound influence on the cultures of Korea and Japan. Historically, China has been the dominant power in that region, so it has exported much of its culture to its neighbours. Essentially, the Koreans and Japanese adopted many elements of Chinese culture, Confucianism being the most prominent example, and blended these elements with their native customs, which led to what is today the unique traditional cultures of Korea and Japan. The Japanese typically have no problems acknowledging that their culture has been influenced by Chinese culture, but perhaps the issue is a little more sensitive to Koreans due to the fact that historically, the foreign relations of Korea had been dominated by its two larger neighbours.

The Korea-Japan relationship is a bit complicated, but at least according to my readings, the cultural influences went both ways. Chinese cultural influences first reached Japan through Korea, though eventually, during the Tang Dynasty, the Japanese started sending envoys to China itself to learn the ways of the major power of the region directly from them. Of course, the Japanese occupation of Korea would probably have had some impact culturally (35 years is a long time), though as you said, this is a very touchy subject due to wartime animosity between the two countries. The dog2 (talk) 04:15, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

 * It is actually probably not a good idea in general to use WV/WP contributors as examples of a country's citizens :)
 * But yes, you would have to be pretty ignorant of Korean culture to not know/admit there is a strong Chinese influence. Even the Mandarin and Korean languages share a lot of vocabulary (although the grammar is completely unrelated)
 * Best advice is to be respectful of the distinct Korean culture, which is pretty much the same advice you should use for any country. Andrewssi2 (talk) 05:23, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Usage of public art from South Korea on Wikimedia Commons
I have been alerted to the fact that the image that I used for Chuncheon is in fact not valid for the Wikimedia Commons because it focuses on public artwork in South Korea which is not compatible with their license:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:FOP#Korea_.28South.29

I don't have the required background to analyze this too much. It would be however useful to bear in mind when uploading images for South Korea. Andrewssi2 (talk) 05:24, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

 * According to the page you linked to:

 * Although Article 35.(2) of the Republic of Korea: Copyright, Act of 1957 (Law No. 432, as last amended by Law No. 9625 of April 22, 2009) permits any reproduction of works permanently installed in "open places", 35.(2).4 specifically states that the rule does not apply "where reproduction is made for the purpose of selling its copies."

 * This is a non-profit site that isn't selling anything, so if they are quoting the law accurately, it should be perfectly OK to show pictures of South Korean public art - here and on Commons. Note what the lawsuit was about:

 * "Also pay royalties for architecture in advertisements" about a company which was fined for using a building by architect Min Kyu-am in advertisements for Kookmin Bank without permission from the architect

 * So you can't use pictures of public art in advertisements. What do we do that could ever be interpreted as an advertisement? Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:31, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

 * I made a banner from this image: http://www.flickr.com/photos/thedakotakid/2351223957/
 * And somebody on MediaWiki Commons claims this is not compatible with their policy. You may very well be right, but what is the best way to argue this?
 * I note that recently similar WV conversations were happening regarding images using public art/buildings in the United States. Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:49, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Not buildings: Copyrighted public sculpture. And you'll note that US law on copyrighted public art (not architecture) is different from South Korean law, as excerpted in Commons. I think the best way to deal with this is to upload the banner directly to Wikivoyage, quoting the law excerpted in Commons as legal justification. But I'd be curious to see what argument was made on Commons that led to the deletion of the banner. It seems to me, their "Not OK" determination is wrong, if they are quoting South Korean law correctly. Perhaps an argument in Commons:Commons talk:Freedom of panorama would be appropriate. I think I'll start one. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:04, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Tada! My first Commons talk thread: Commons:Commons talk:Freedom of panorama. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:12, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I imagine one of the issues lies with re-usability. If it's not okay to use commercially, a picture can't be licensed under our licenses, as that dóes allow commercial re-use. JuliasTravels (talk) 09:37, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the initiative Ikan!
 * For the alternative solution, are we able to adapt the existing Banner template to look at WV rather than WM (if specified)? I think that would be a big change? Andrewssi2 (talk) 09:58, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Good that Ikan raised the issue at Commons. I've myself made some banners for South Korean articles and haven't been aware of this problem, luckily I've mostly used palaces and other old buildings.
 * Also, I have a feeling that the photos that are on Commons and are intended for use in Wiki articles are safer to use as banner material than something from Flickr (or even Instagram?). Yes, I know there isn't always good pics on Commons for every destination... ϒpsilon (talk) 10:40, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Yes, although it seems only a percentage of commons pictures are vetted by humans (which I believe is a requirement in order to detect copyright issues). So you could create a banner from an unvetted source on the commons itself.
 * Commons is not so great for Korean pictures unfortunately, although the unique CC license for US Government pictures means that Flickr is awash with pictures of American soldiers in Korea. :) Still I can usually find a landscape that I need. Andrewssi2 (talk) 13:07, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Why does our license allow commercial re-use? That would seem to contradict the spirit of a non-profit organization. If we don't allow advertising on this site, we should disallow people from using our images commercially. That would solve the problem. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:37, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
 * If you put it like that, it almost sounds like a great idea ;-) But it's a complex matter. Firstly, all of Wikimedia uses licenses as free as possible. Yes we're a non-profit organisation, but our principles and goals are about free knowledge - not about making the rest of the world non-profit too. Most of the photographers who upload pictures to Commons are actually very happy when their work is, for example, picked up by a newspaper or magazine with them properly attributed. The non-commercial license would mean a great restriction on re-usability, making both use ánd contributing less interesting for large groups. It's not something we should want, at least in my eyes. Secondly, we can't go back and put restrictions like non-commercial use only on images that have already been given a full free license. It would also be difficult to include new materials with a fully free license for that reason. Well..I'm sure there are many pages worth of discussions about this topic on Wikimedia talkpages which you would probably want to glance through before starting over, but the short answer is, I think, no, it's no easy solution at all :-) JuliasTravels (talk) 22:19, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
 * That's really a pity, because we're seriously limiting knowledge (in the form of images), in exchange for helping people make a profit, with no financial benefit to us. I'd like to see the Wikimedia discussions about this. I think it's a mistake. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:14, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * These explanations seem relevant: commons:Commons:Licensing/Justifications, http://freedomdefined.org/Licenses/NC, and Consequences, risks and side-effects of the license module “non-commercial use only – NC". --Avenue (talk) 03:31, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Hasn't Commons always offered uploaders several different licenses to choose among, including "commercial use prohibited"? ϒpsilon (talk) 05:35, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * User:Avenue: Based on the cartoon in your first link, Wikipedia is publishing DVDs and books to try to make a profit on them? —The preceding comment was added by Ikan Kekek (talk • contribs)
 * They publish DVDs but I don't think they really make a profit on it. A much easier and more visible example would be Google. When you search for something on Google, the first image that pops up is usually from Wikimedia Commons. If all images were under a non-commercial clause, then that would probably not be allowed, and you can argue whether Google is profiting off the back of Wikipedia or whether the free license attached to that photo lets Google add a value-based service. On my part, I feel attribution is messed up most of the time, hence I do it for the fun of it and consider most of my edits to be in the public domain. -- torty3 (talk) 06:21, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * OK, the point about Google is the first one that's really made sense to me. So I guess we're stuck. Too bad. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:26, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Another relevant point is that a non-commercial license would rule out professionally printed Wikivoyage books (as described at Books), as would Korean law on public art (if I understand it right).
 * The main Wikipedia DVD publication I know of is the German one (w:de:Wikipedia:DVD), priced at 19 € (2010 edition).
 * A prohibition on advertising use would also hit the main Wikipedia website, and any other Wikimedia site which runs an annual fundraising banner. --Avenue (talk) 09:23, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't know what else is in South Korean law, but fundraising for a non-profit organization is definitely not the same as selling a product for profit. However, since it's clear (a) that the policy we're discussing won't be changed and (b) that if it were, quite apart from anything else, Google wouldn't be allowed to index Wikimedia sites and they'd become invisible, this discussion, though interesting (and thanks for the additional information), is academic. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:13, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't actually think google wouldn't be allowed to index (indexing and quoting through linking is a different thing from re-using as in printing), but indeed, I don't think this policy is likely to be changed at all. :-) That said, has a solution been found for the particular banner problem? JuliasTravels (talk) 10:31, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I know I am too late, but for your informations; you cannot upload (1: sculptures 2: modern buildings 3: and some more) which author lifetime + 70 years (if company, simply 70 years). It's because basically copyright of building designs are protected, and files of building is derivate work of the building. w:Freedom of panorama will explain more. — Revi 16:31, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Hanja usage in South Korea
I noticed some liberal usage of Hanja characters in the South Korea articles recently. I don't think a formal policy needs to be set up, however it would be good to agree consensus.

Hanja is not used extensivally in South Korea, although most people can read a limited ammount of characters. Typically Hanja is used in addition to Korean in order to write place names (such as a city or a temple) or (less frequently) someone's name. In that sense, if you can write down the location of a place you want in Hanja then it may be more useful than writing in Latin script.

There are other specialized cases as well, such as Korean/Chinese traditional medicine that use Hanja a great deal. Such exceptions are OK, as long as they remain travel related.

Cases where Hanja is not appropriate include (but not limited to):

 * Laws and rules
 * Names of non-famous/non-historical people (The owner of a hostel for example)
 * Objects (Korean food, animals, buildings etc)

Any comments on the ideas above would be appreciated. User:Ypsilon pinged again for Korean perspective :) --Andrewssi2 (talk) 15:22, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

 * Historical documents, inscriptions on temples and such are generally where one would encounter Chinese script. In modern texts like newspapers chances are greater that you would run into an English word written in Latin letters instead. ϒpsilon (talk) 16:29, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Thousands of high quality South Korean images available for use
Korea.net has released around 5,000 high quality images from South Korea under CC-BY-SA, and these are now available for usage on our project. I encourage Wikivoyage editors to take advantage of these fantastic images as many could be put into use on this project. Russavia (talk) 01:25, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

 * Thanks!
 * I would caution that many of the images appear to be of people, and even though they are CC it may not be possible to use on Wikivoyage. Additionally, it has been established that public artwork in South Korea may not be used by Wikimedia, even if again the origional picture was released under CC. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:32, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
 * But photos such as those of Jeju would be suitable. There's plenty of others as well of tourist hotspots and sites in South Korea in this category. It will just require people to go browse through the category. Good luck. Russavia (talk) 08:34, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

New Banner
The current banner is quite blurry, with lots of darkness interspersed with a temple and some modern buildings.

I created a couple extra suggestions. I think the shot of traditional costumes is something we'd expect from a travel guide, as opposed to another generic city scape...

Any thoughts? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 04:52, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

 * Both new banners are better than the existing one, but I find the aerial view the best composition. I judge that based on how it feels to move my eyes around the picture plane, which is the same way I usually look at a painting. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:59, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

 * OK great. The traditional costumes are actually shot in Insadong in Jongno in Seoul, which may make a better banner for that article. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:06, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

 * Cool. It's interesting to read that that's possibly the most touristy place in South Korea, yet it's a place where some Koreans wear traditional clothing. And it's a very appealing banner on that article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:20, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

MERS
For the last week or so, there have been tens of confirmed cases and five deaths of the dangerous Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome around South Korea. So far it has thankfully not spread outside hospitals, or so they think, but should we still add a cautionbox to Stay healthy? Andrew? ϒpsilon (talk) 12:18, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * once it starts killing more people than annual influenza season or the government decides to put measures in place that affect the average traveler. Otherwise: No. Hobbitschuster (talk) 12:29, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

 * Actually, it is significantly affecting travel to and from South Korea. The US embassey has some advice here, which principally is to avoid Korean hospitals as much as you can. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 05:20, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Article content from other Wikivoyage languages
I just noticed that French Wikivoyage has a good number of articles with decent content in them for South Korea (strangely enough the Seoul article is very minimal).

 * Wikivoyage French South Korean Articles - 36 articles
 * Wikivoyage German South Korean Articles - 12 articles
 * Wikivoyage Italian South Korean articles - Only 4 :(

Any others that have significant Korean content? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 10:05, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

UNESCO article for South Korea
I noticed someone put in quite effort in an Italian Unecso listing page for South Korea. Is there a corresponding article for English Wikivoyage?

https://it.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Patrimoni_mondiali_dell%27umanit%C3%A0_in_Corea_del_Sud

Andrewssi2 (talk) 10:34, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

 * Nope, we don't have one. The Italian colleagues actually have a separate UNESCO article for each country in the world, and that would require such a stratospheric amount of work that it's even hard to conceptualize. And I would rather not have UNESCO articles for just one country here and one country there.
 * On the other hand I do think we could have articles for individual entries on the world heritage list that are made up of many components like the Gochang, Hwasun and Ganghwa Dolmen Sites. ϒpsilon (talk) 12:36, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Ansan or Jirisan_National_Park as an 'other destination' ?
User:Ceever would like to have Jirisan_National_Park instead of Ansan as an 'other destination'.

I would agree because Ansan is just a large city and doesn't merit listing in the 'Cities' list. I would hesitate only because Jirisan_National_Park isn't a very complete article yet.

Any views on this? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 20:58, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

 * Go for it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:26, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

 * I introduced Jirisan exactly for the reason that Ansan is not really a touristic destination - you can find many cities like this in South Korea. Furthermore, I added a great deal of relevant information for Jirisan yesterday. It is remote, but definitely a great destination besides all the never-ending city hopping you can do in South Korea. User:Ceever (talk) 07:36, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Linking to local government homepages?
Bilingual websites have long been an issue in South Korea. Most official sites used to have an English (and sometimes Japanese/Chinese) version, but the quality was usually poor and out of date.

Now I note that most of the Government web sites we link to for a destination ( Gimje as an example) no longer bother with non-Korean language, and often there is no official tourism page with English.

Should we still link to these sites even if they are only useful to Korean speakers, or is it better just not to link anymore? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:52, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

 * I would still link them but put "Korean only" in parentheses. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:41, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * If there's no official English-language site with tourist information but one such site in Korean (or some other non-English language), I think it's OK to keep the latter. And readers can of course always resort to Google Translate. Nowadays GT seems to produce palatable text (to some extent) even from non-Indo-European languages. ϒpsilon (talk) 04:30, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Korean student project will be back - any suggestions on how to make it better - and what to edit?
Hey guys. Last year I run a project with several Korean ESL students and we improved/created several Korea related articles (ex. Ansan, Daebudo, Jebudo and few others). The class will start again in few weeks, and I'd very much appreciate suggestions on which articles people would think I could suggest to the students they could work on. The page on the city our university is in, Ansan, looks pretty good, but if you can tell me what can be done to move it towards the Wikivoyage-equivalent of Featured article, it would help a lot. Ditto for what can be fixed with the main South Korea page. As for other topics, I usually let student chose them based on their hometowns/favorite destinations (most of the students are from the Gyeonggi province), but if anyone knows of any big gaps in WV Korea coverage, do suggest it. Perhaps something related to the upcoming Winter Olympics? Our entry on Pyeongchang and Gangneung don't seem very impressive. --Piotrus (talk) 10:03, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

 * One possibility would be a guide (formatted as a travel topic) for players of the oriental game called baduk in Korean. Korean has some of the world's finest players and some major tournaments, and makes equipment for the game that travellers might want. People do go there for classes in the game, e.g. the Go (English name of the game) players' wiki Sensei's Library has an account from two students who spent a month in a Korean baduk school. Pashley (talk) 11:18, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

 * Of course Sensei's Library also welcomes contributions. WV is fine for travel-oriented material, but things like tactical advice or biographies of famous players belong elsewhere. Pashley (talk) 11:53, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

 * Not sure how you are grading assignments but if someone is a little stuck on what to do, he can make sure that listings are up to date--listing templates have a small box for this and it's something that anyone can do by making some phone calls or checking some websites. Not the most fun thing but very useful. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:02, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * There's a diagnostic feature you can turn on in your user profile that will highlight dead links, badly formatted phone numbers, etc. This makes these housekeeping tasks easier. Pashley (talk) 14:45, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, enabled it for my account. --Piotrus (talk) 09:05, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

 * Seoul and its districts could use some more content, especially its peripheral districts. ϒpsilon (talk) 16:26, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

There are some relevant travel topics which could do with improvement. Pyeongchang 2018 is missing several sections (Vancouver 2010 and Glasgow 2014 may be best similar articles to look at). High-speed rail in South Korea could be expanded (see High-speed rail in China or Rail travel in Great Britain). There are also many topics which are lacking any entries for Korea, e.g. Lighthouses, Science tourism or Botanical tourism. Thank you for offering to help. AlasdairW (talk) 21:01, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

 * The main thing I noticed about the ESL articles last year was that they were more Wikipedia style knowledge articles, and not particularly travel related. If your students could consider travel as a guiding principle then that would be great.
 * Also if you take a look at Ansan there are lots of listings (a good thing) but very little description to say why this town is special and why I should visit. They could take a look at the official Korean tourist site for inspiration (not copying!) about how to 'sell' a destination. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 03:45, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
 * The Wikipedia style is probably my fault, as I am much more familiar with that site. Could you show me an on-WikiVoyage example of how to sell a city better? If possible, a Korea destination or another Asian one would be most helpful. --Piotrus (talk) 09:05, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

 * On reflection it was rather unfair to suggest the articles were too Wikipedia like, when in fact only a minority of articles in Wikivoyage are written like true travel guides. I myself have worked a lot on Korean articles and have failed to meet this on most of them!
 * Of the Korean articles perhaps Seoul, especially the 'Understand' section, is the best in terms of prose. Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:43, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

 * Great! This project resulted in several great articles last year. My pet peeves I suggest you ask your student to fill: latitude, longitude, wikidata :-) Syced (talk) 07:46, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Should an article about public bike rentals in Korea be copied/moved from Wikipedia to Wikivoyage?
On a related note, few weeks back some of my students wrote a Wikipedia article that seems to me may be more useful if moved to Wikivoyage: w:Public bicycle rental service in South Korea. Frankly, I am not sure if it meets the Wikipedia w:WP:N requirement. But here it seems to me it would fit more, alongside travel guides like High-speed rail in South Korea you pointed out to me earlier. For now I've added a short note about bicycle rental to Seoul.--Piotrus (talk) 09:05, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, please copy it before the content is removed from Wikipedia (the "Usage" could easily be considered as unencyclopedic). We don't need Public reception/Future development/References though. And the "Usage" section could use more details here, I guess :-) Syced (talk) 07:41, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 * It's maybe not the best idea to copy over the entire article just as it is in one lump; much of it is travel relevant but not everything. IMO it's better to add the city-specific information to the Get around sections of cities and information that applies to all of SK to the country article's Get around section. The few things in that article that aren't of any use to travelers such as the Public reception section should not be moved over (also, remember that WV doesn't use references :)). ϒpsilon (talk) 12:53, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 * At any rate, bikeshare and bike rentals could be better covered on WV. Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:56, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 * It could potentially be within the scope of WV, but it would be odd to have a South Korea-specific article on bike sharing while the more general Bike sharing travel topic doesn't yet exist. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 17:37, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Then how about moving the content to Bike sharing inside a big "South Korea" section? Often articles start in a very USA-centric way and are then "internationalized" by passer-bys, starting from South Korea is unusual but not stranger. Syced (talk) 03:03, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

An Innovation in Auto Traffic
A South Korean company, Evolution in Traffic Innovation (ETI), has designed a rolling guardrail that could save lives in auto accidents. From what I watched and heard from the video, it's been rolled out in at least some parts of South Korea. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 12:33, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Gwangjang Market and Nami Island missing
I've noticed these two popular places are not mentioned in WikiVoyage. Can someone with extensive knowledge about them add them in the correct section?

 * Nami island is under the town of Gapyeong Andrewssi2 (talk) 04:37, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

10 "other destinations"
Apparently it slipped by our watchful eyes that the list of "other destinations" includes more than 9 elements. Which should be removed? Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:55, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

 * I would say Guinsa, since it is frankly on the borderline about being a destination (it is a temple site) --Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:34, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

 * Removed. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 05:24, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Region template headings missing
I just added missing headings to South Jeolla. Looking at the South Korean region articles, almost all seem to lack at least one heading (Quick region article template stipulates what headings should be in a region article), so maybe someone has been removing them from the articles intentionally.

Now in Wikipedia I think the policy is that headings need to have content below them, otherwise they're deleted. But unless some policies has changed as of lately, here on Wikivoyage articles should have a certain set of headings as per the standard templates, regardless if there is some content under them. --Ypsilon (talk) 10:47, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Time formatting
Which is most common in South Korea: the 12-hour clock (e.g., noon-2PM and 6PM-midnight), or the 24-hour clock (e.g., 12:00-14:00 and 18:00-00:00)? Thanks, Ground Zero (talk) 12:48, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Combine history with North Korea
What are two nations today were one nation for most of their history, and their History sections are both pretty similar up to that point. However, they've diverged as they've been maintained separately. Is there any reason not to copy-paste (or use a template) to have the same material on both? --Bigpeteb (talk) 20:56, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Until 1950, sure. Keep SEO in mind, though. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 21:11, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's a good idea. Ypsilon (talk) 21:23, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

[unindent] A unified Korea existed for about 1,000 years. Before that, Korea was disunified for about 1,000 years. And moreover, Korean kingdoms in the past sometimes included what's now Northeast China, or parts of it:

''The Jin state was formed in southern Korea by the 3rd century BCE. In the 2nd century BCE, Gija Joseon was replaced by Wiman Joseon, which fell to the Han dynasty of China near the end of the century. This resulted in the fall of Gojoseon and led to succeeding warring states, the Proto–Three Kingdoms period that spanned the later Iron Age.''

''From the 1st century, Goguryeo, Baekje, and Silla grew to control the peninsula and Manchuria as the Three Kingdoms of Korea (57 BCE–668 CE), until unification by Silla in 676. In 698, Go of Balhae established the Kingdom of Balhae (c.f. modern Bohai Sea) in old territories of Goguryeo, which led to the North–South States Period (698–926) of Balhae and Silla coexisting.''

''In the late 9th century, Silla was divided into the Later Three Kingdoms (892–936), which ended with the unification by Wang Geon's Goryeo dynasty. Meanwhile, Balhae fell after invasions by the Khitan Liao dynasty and the refugees including the last crown prince emigrated to Goryeo, where the crown prince was warmly welcomed and included into the ruling family by Wang Geon, thus unifying the two successor states of Goguryeo.[15][16] During the Goryeo period, laws were codified, a civil service system was introduced, and culture influenced by Buddhism flourished. However, Mongol invasions in the 13th century brought Goryeo under its influence until the mid-14th century.''

Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:10, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

 * Yeah, in my comment above I should've maybe also mentioned we have a Pre-modern Korea article where we can write at length about the history of the Korean peninsula earlier than the 20th century. The North and South Korea articles could have just a short paragraph or two (the current paragraphs in those articles could be shortened). Ypsilon (talk) 14:50, 7 December 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. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:51, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Busan montage.png

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:56, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Daegu montage.png (discussion)
 * Daejeon montage.png (discussion)
 * Gwangju montage.png (discussion)

 * We don't use montages. These were kept, but reverted to an older version as a new version contained an offending image. –LPfi (talk) 10:35, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Suspect typo
from Correct typos in one click palors->parlors? (omit) context: is the same as Japanese Karaoke palors palors, popular and hard to miss

COVID rules for transit passengers
I will likely fly Manila-Incheon-Toronto in March. I'm fully vaccinated & will test before flying. At least 4 hours in the airport (I won't book flights with less) & depending on flight schedules, maybe more. No plan to leave the airport & (at least in normal times) Korea allows sterile transit; you can change planes without going through customs or immigration. Does that hold now?

Neither our article nor the web search results I've had make it clear what COVID requirements are for transit passengers. Can anyone clarify? Pashley (talk) 02:17, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

 * I'm now likely to fly in March 2023. I still have the same questions. Pashley (talk) 12:22, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Seongnam
We don't have an article on this. Before I suggest it to my students next year as high-priority project (en wiki states it is "the 10th largest city in the country", country being South Korea here), I want to double-check with folks here, given we also have entries on Bundang ("a ward in Seongnam") and Pangyo ("a city in Gyeonggi, administratively part of the city of Seongnam"). (Also, one listing in Wonju has the address in Seongnam?). And half of the history of Gwangju (Gyeonggi) seems to be about Seongnam? Seems like a bit of a mess... Piotrus (talk) 11:18, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Go for it, imho. I can't see the big boys arguing much about this one. Brycehughes (talk) 15:56, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Respect section
The Respect section is very long. I haven't been to South Korea, but are South Koreans really so touchy that we have to provide visitors with such a lengthy list of things not to talk about? Or is this the over-enthusuastic work of a single contributor who has a tendency to exagerate sensitivities, and often adds text that is just wrong? Ground Zero (talk) 23:31, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Andrewssi2 seems to be a frequent traveller to South Korea so I'll leave it to him to comment on the details. But Japan is indeed a very sensitive issue for Koreans, and the Koreans made no secret of their distaste for Japan when I visited. There's plenty of articles in the media about cultural and historiographical disputes between China and Korea. Much of it is based on misunderstandings or myths. For instance, many Chinese people think that South Koreans claim that Confucius was Korean, and many Koreans think that the Chinese claim that kimchi and hanbok are Chinese and not Korean. In both cases, they are only true of a small but loud and vocal minority comprising of crazy ultranationalists, but those myths have stuck. In the latter case, I can assure you that most normal Chinese people acknowledge that kimchi and hanbok are Korean, although they also associate them with their own ethnic Korean minority and not exclusively with South Koreans. The dog2 (talk) 00:21, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
 * It is easy to go overboard in the respect section of any country. It is true that South Koreans are particularly sensitive to Japan and can lead to mass demonstrations. Koreans can be occasionally mildly indignant towards China, but it hardly registers for the most part Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:19, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Shopping - music and k-drama?
I not particularly into K-Pop culture, and therefore asking broadly first. Early K-Pop enthusiasts (say around 2005) could travel to Korea and load up on music cds and drama DVDs that were not available in the West, and maybe only as bootleg media elsewhere.

Korean youth adopted digital downloads really early before most places in the world, and CD shops were not that common at all since 2010. Since streaming with Spotify and Netflix became mainstream this feels more the case, and people around the world have almost the same access to K-Pop media as Koreans themselves. As far as I could tell recently, 'Shopping' for K-Pop was more around 'Merch' (merchandize such as posters, clothes, iPhone cases etc) and almost nothing for the physical media (DVD's and CD's) of tv shows and music.

So simple question is that should this section be rewritten to reflect that? Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:46, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

 * I haven't been to South Korea since my high school days, but if most tourists visiting K-pop are no longer looking for DVDs and CDs, then yes, the section should be re-written. The dog2 (talk) 18:26, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:South Korea


text:
Talk:South Lebanon

A Beginning
This page is by no means complete, but at least it's a start. 89.108.144.66 07:33, 8 June 2006 (EDT)

title: Talk:South Lebanon


text:
Talk:South Lombok

Revise the map for South Lombok
South Lombok has clearly defined itself now - with the new airport and new land sales from east to west. The roads are being improved, the infrastructure is being expanded and, of course, the new BTDC project will draw travelers to the south coast. Sekotong is a different world. The offshore islands are projected to be developed as the next growth area after Gili T and sisters fill out.

Now mining is starting to be quietly in the news, but that will impact Sekotong. Check this out if you are not familiar with the issue: And the blue waters and wide areas for diving make Sekotong uniquely different from South Lombok. The harbor plus the road north to Mataram seem to make it distinctly connected to Mataram. Banko-banko seems to be the dividing line between the two areas. The southern boundary of Sekotong should run from Banko-banko, generally east to the new airport. The boundary should then run west, maybe along the new road from the airport, to a point on the coast between Mataram and Sekotong. There seems to be an area in West Lombok where the tourist attractions associated with Mataram (pottery villages, etc)come to an end. Those Mataram tourist areas should be part of West Lombok, and south of that those attractions could be associated with Sekotong.

Labu
This 'listing' was removed from the article on 17 mar 2011 as it was placed into the Other destinations section.

If Labu is to be described as an other destination it needs to be defined.

 * Where is it
 * How do you get there (km?) ((via?)

 * What is there, just a business or is there something else happening?

The listing per edit by (WT-en) Evertraveling (Talk)
 * Labu - Don't miss the small but beautiful beach in this small, virtually tourist free village. Stay at Krisna Bungalow, a brand new complex of 3 bungalows with a private courtyard right on the water. Contact Wayan at massroom66@yahoo.co.id.

If you wish to list this business it appears to belong in a Sleep section. If it is nearby to Kuta (Lombok) then it may be best to list it there so that it does not get 'orphaned' in the South Lombok regional article.

Please only us the standard Sleep section listing format when establishing a new listing.

*

This will ensure it displays correctly and that any missing information can easily be readily by other editors later. -- (WT-en) felix 00:55, 17 March 2011 (EDT)

title: Talk:South Lombok


text:
Talk:South Luangwa National Park

Dates for bird/animal watching
Do they not also apply to the rest of the animals? Certainly the dry season does... (WT-en) Cacahuate 07:11, 29 November 2006 (EST)

Mophy
Please read this edit. The text before editing can't stand because of Pronouns, but the edit was self-serving, by a user who also created a spam Mophy budget safari tours article.

It seems like the middle path is to de-list this safari, which I have therefore provisionally done, but if there are a lot of reports of dishonesty by them, that information should be shared in the article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:58, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

 * I will note that Mophy is now edit warring. Unless they clearly address the allegations against them on this page, it really doesn't make sense to allow them to post, and continued edit warring will result in blocks. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:15, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:South Luangwa National Park


text:
Talk:South Norfolk

This page should be merged into the Norfolk article. This article has practically zero content and the Norfolk article is hardly overflowing with content. The Norfolk article would benefit from more focused attention rather than having attention split away to South and North Norfolk. (WT-en) Travelpleb 11:22, 13 April 2012 (EDT)

title: Talk:South Norfolk


text:
Talk:South Ossetia

Situation in South Ossetia
I earnestly ask anyone to rewrite the news about a situation in South Ossetia. Current Piter's edition is no neutral point of view in my opinion (e.g. compare with neutral in Wikinews statements in ). It's impotant for us to clear a tragedy of the situation but not a political estimation. To do this, you can use a some numbers reported by Russian TV: about 2000 killed civilians in Tskhinvali and more than 30000 refugees from South Ossetia. -- (WT-en) Sergey kudryavtsev 11:38, 10 August 2008 (EDT)

 * I'm not sure what's non-neutral about my write-up (although, of course, we don't aim for neutrality. But also, we should neither be getting into politics nor writing about tragedies—as a travel site, all that we need to do is warn travelers. And right now, I think what a traveler needs to know is: there is a war, it's dangerous, don't go there. That's what I tried to write. In the future it will be necessary to write about these events in more detail in the understand section of South Ossetia, but I don't think we should do that until after the conflict (since we're not a news site). --(WT-en) Peter Talk 23:31, 10 August 2008 (EDT)

 * In "Political disputes" of Project:Be fair says: The best way out is to stick to the bare minimum of facts necessary, presented as neutrally as possible, while keeping a firm focus on the traveller's interests. A non-neutral statement is bolded: War has broken out in the Caucasus between Georgia and Russia within the separatist region of South Ossetia, ... (because Russia is not in a war state with Georgia; Russian troops just perform a peacekeeper mission incumbent by UN). I suppose only to remove a bolded text. Are you agree? -- (WT-en) Sergey kudryavtsev 02:27, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

 * Prime Minister Putin on 8/8/08 called the current conflict between Russia-Georgia a war, Georgia has mobilized all its armed forces and recalled 2,000 troops from Iraq to fight the Russian forces there, Russia has bombed Poti, all major Georgian airports, Bolnisi, and Gori. Prior to 8/8, Russia's presence within Georgian territory was only peacekeeping, but that has changed. The point is, regardless of what anyone calls it, from the traveler's perspective a war has broken out, so travelers should not visit the country! Were this still an ongoing conflict between the Ossetes & Georgians within South Ossetia, then travelers could visit the rest of the country, but that's not the case right now. I still don't see what is non-neutral about the statement as is (it doesn't take sides, does it?) and I think it mentions the bare minimum of facts necessary. Over explaining the conflict would include what I just wrote here, as well as explaining the sources of the conflict, which I think we should avoid, since there are competing narratives, and the reasons why this is happening are controversial. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 03:13, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

 * If it looks like war and sounds like war, it probably is war. And considering Russian and Georgian troops are involved, I don't see how the war could be between anyone else but Russia and Georgia.  You could, I suppose, replace "war" with "intense fighting" and "Russia" with "Russian troops", but both changes strike me as needless weaseling.  (WT-en) LtPowers 08:30, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

 * I change the news item per (WT-en) LtPowers' proposal. -- (WT-en) Sergey kudryavtsev 13:49, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

 * It wasn't really a proposal; I was explaining that the current wording was accurate and concise and that any changes to the wording would be "needless weaseling". (WT-en) LtPowers 16:50, 11 August 2008 (EDT)

 * There is a full mutual misunderstanding. You may revert a changes. I already regret that i was started this discussion. It's complicated for me to explain my opinion using a foreign language. I don't want to continue a useless discussion. -- (WT-en) Sergey kudryavtsev 03:06, 12 August 2008 (EDT)

 * Now you understand how it is for me when I'm trying to make an argument on the Russian version ;) --(WT-en) Peter Talk 17:47, 13 August 2008 (EDT)

Any news about this region as of 2018? At least from the perspective of safety for tourists. Also, is getting there dangerous? Marathonian (talk) 19:15, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

"Capital"
I've removed the inverted commas around "capital" for Tskhinvali. Tskhinvali is recognised as the "capital" of South Ossetia regardless if one accepts that SO is an independent country or not, just in the same way that, say, Edinburgh is recognised as the capital of Scotland within the UK, or Grozny the capital of Chechnya inside the Russian Federation. (WT-en) Shotlandiya 17:18, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

 * That's not accurate. South Ossetia formally isn't even a region of Georgia, unlike Abkhazia. It is an ethno-political conflict region, which overlaps the official administrative regions of Racha & Shida Kartli (the majority, of course, being in Shida Kartli). Tskinvali also does not wield control (formally, or even practically) over the whole of the South Ossetia region. It's the capital only in a figurative, assertorial sense. The only real meaning to the notion of capital status is that would likely be the capital of an independent South Ossetia, and that it is the cultural and population center of the Ossete population on the Georgian side of the border.

 * All that said, I could care less about quotation marks. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 19:52, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

Being sophisticated
Hi Peter! I don't like the opening phrase: And just so you sound sophisticated because first the tone is arrogant to me and second it's more an issue of pronounciation in my view. Why do you like it? (WT-en) jan 04:05, 10 February 2010 (EST)

 * Hmm, I don't understand why it would seem arrogant. I wrote it with the intention of it coming across as friendly and informal, which I think is what we should aim for. And surely knowing the pronunciation of far-off lands is a mark of worldliness and erudition? ;) --(WT-en) Peter Talk 15:45, 11 February 2010 (EST)

Terrorism
I track the progress of South Ossetia, and this happens to be the first place mentioning it. Whoever included it must cite a source from where they received this information

"If you find yourself in South Ossetia, you should probably try to find a way to get out."
What does this even mean? Unnecessary remarks about the situation in the country should not be present in in a travel article, regardless of your views
 * I'm not well aware of the situation in South Ossetia today, but to me that sentence indeed seems unnecessary and tainted. I plunged ahead and removed it, as it doesn't add any new information. The situation is discussed quite clearly above, and anyone who actually is there can make up their own mind on whether or not they should leave. (WT-en) Justme 16:59, 10 September 2011 (EDT)

Description of South Ossetia's status
Currently, the beginning of the article reads this way:

"South Ossetia is a separatist region of Georgia, mostly located in Shida Kartli. It is a partially unrecognized state, only recognized by Russia, Abkhazia, Nauru, Venezuela and Nicaragua."

I would propose to substitute this text:

"South Ossetia, a nation which separated from Georgia in 2008 with the aid of Russian troops, is mostly in Shida Kartli. South Ossetia's independence is recognized only by Russia, Abkhazia, Nauru, Venezuela and Nicaragua, and Georgia continues to claim the land, but an uneasy truce has held since 2008."

My reasoning is that it is in the interest of the traveler for us to simply recognize the de facto independence of the region and not take sides by calling it a "separatist region of Georgia." I would be willing to countenance a description like "South Ossetia, a self-declared nation..." Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:31, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

 * Trouble is Kartli is a region of Georgia. So saying that that South Ossetia is part of Kartli is perhaps not so good. I've changed the wording in that respect. Why not just use "de facto independent" as a term to describe it? It's less politically loaded.Travelpleb (talk) 11:27, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

 * I think your wording is fine. I'll make one other edit, in "Stay safe." Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:04, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Warning still needed?
There is a large warning in the header relating to the 2008 war between Georgia and Russia. It is now 6 years old, and although there is a tense situation I am guessing the possibility for armed conflict is probably quite low. (The Georgian military lost quite heavily and are probably in no hurry to try and take this territory back anytime soon).

Is it OK to remove this, and probably add some text in the main article itself? Andrewssi2 (talk) 06:13, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

"Tours" section in "Get in"
Keeping in mind this site's tour listing policy, should the section exist? If so, how do we prevent it from becoming a linkfarm for tour advertising? Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:41, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Russia trying to merge with SO
@LtPowers: OK. Lets' discuss this. What are your sources? Why liberation is in parentheses? Francois (talk) 08:50, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:South Ossetia


text:
Talk:South Sichuan

Anyone know if you can travel from Lugu Lake in sichuan to Xichang. We want to travel by train to Chengdu.

title: Talk:South Sichuan


text:
Talk:South Sudan

Region of Africa
South Sudan is not actually in the Sahel. It is full of lush forests/jungle and would seem geographically best placed in Central Africa in our hierarchy, but what do others think? (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 20:24, 8 July 2011 (EDT)

 * Agree.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 20:35, 8 July 2011 (EDT)

 * I agree it looks best there based on climate and geography, but what about culturally? They are going to retain strong economic ties to Sudan for the foreseeable future, but I don't know how culturally tied they are.  (WT-en) LtPowers 20:47, 8 July 2011 (EDT)

 * By the way, I just stuck it in the Sahel for the time being. I'm ready to update the maps when we make a decision on where it should go.  (WT-en) LtPowers 20:48, 8 July 2011 (EDT)

 * Excellent. Unless you want to I will do the South Sudan Region map when we decide on that (see below). I also did the original maps for a number of the surrounding countries and can update those quite quickly. Uganda done already.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 21:18, 8 July 2011 (EDT)

 * Agree. Its not Sahel anymore (it was never Sahel anyway but it was there being part of Sudan). Also, is Sudan the largest african country anymore? Perhaps Algeria is the largest now. (WT-en) WindowsNT 18:08, 9 July 2011 (EDT)

 * Yup, the scales of trivia have been overturned, and it's now 1) Algeria, 2) DPRC, 3) Sudan. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 10:23, 10 July 2011 (EDT)

 * Somebody has changed the BC and South Sudan is now part of Central Africa. Given the comments above, I guess that is OK? Peter, Central Africa is one of your maps... any chance you could update it? --(WT-en) Burmesedays 02:53, 17 July 2011 (EDT)

 * Done. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 11:23, 17 July 2011 (EDT)

 * Any chances that someone with mapmaking skills could also fix the map for Sahel by greying South Sudan out? – (WT-en) Vidimian 21:25, 21 July 2011 (EDT)

 * Have been meaning to tackle that - done.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 01:39, 22 July 2011 (EDT)

 * I just finished up the last of the neighboring country maps and world maps, so we've officially beat Google in updating to reflect the new political reality... --(WT-en) Peter Talk 19:57, 22 July 2011 (EDT)

 * Tremendous :). I thought I still had Chad to update until realising that it does not in fact share a border with South Sudan. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 02:34, 23 July 2011 (EDT)

This should be changed to East Africa, South Sudan has very little contact with Central Africa, but far more linkages to Kenya, Uganda, Ethiopia. --Soman (talk) 23:54, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
 * True.
 * But I suspect that it is User:LtPowers that you will need to convince of the realities on the ground. --W. Frankemailtalk 01:07, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Me? Why?   LtPowers (talk) 01:57, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Regions
We will need to give some thought to this. Clearly, the 10 states currently shown as regions is far too many. The 3 historic provinces as shown here would seem to be a convenient region split? --(WT-en) Burmesedays 20:43, 8 July 2011 (EDT)
 * Ten isn't really too many if that's the most convenient way to do it. (WT-en) LtPowers 20:48, 8 July 2011 (EDT)
 * It is compared to neighbouring countries with a far greater tourism profile and relatively huge content (eg Uganda and Kenya). The three sub-divisions as per the WP article I linked seems far more appropriate.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 21:21, 8 July 2011 (EDT)

 * Since the 3 subdivisions still use the borders of the ten within them, I'd say using the 3 would be best, since there is very little content for this nation right now and the tourism industry is highly underdeveloped. I don't imagine it gaining very much content anytime soon. If it does, though, it will be easy to divide it again in the future with the 10. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 00:15, 9 July 2011 (EDT)

 * Voicing support here for the three region idea. Is anyone working on a map, or can I sign up for the job? (I was just planning to just do a quickie based on the existing Sudan map.) --(WT-en) Peter Talk 14:35, 18 July 2011 (EDT)

 * I was about to start using the UN Sudan map paths. Happy for you to do it though Peter.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 20:52, 18 July 2011 (EDT)

 * Done. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 11:17, 24 July 2011 (EDT)

Stronger and clearer warning needed?
Given the events the past few days, I would say the warning needs to be stronger than "visiting Juba and South Sudan is not recommended." Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:40, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

 * Done. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:10, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Currency, time and spelling conventions
Below is a proposed infobox to let readers know which formatting conventions to use in Wikivoyage articles. Do you agree with these proposals? If you have direct knowledge of what is most commonly used in the country, please let us know. Ground Zero (talk) 16:57, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Moved to the top of this article. Ground Zero (talk) 12:43, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Did it end up happening?
"Overland crossing from Sudan to South Sudan was closed from the latter's secession in 2011; Sudanese leaders have announced plans to re-open the border in 2016.[1]"

It's 2021 now, did it happen? SHB2000 (talk) 23:09, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:South Sudan


text:
Talk:South Texas Plains

I live in McAllen and I wouldn't consider this place to be a "forbidding desert area." Maybe west of here is more desert like, but I would describe McAllen and points east as tropical. —The preceding comment was added by 67.67.39.126 (talk • contribs)

 * Fix it! (WT-en) OldPine 22:07, 9 July 2008 (EDT)

title: Talk:South Texas Plains


text:
Talk:South Tyrol

Tasks to be done
First, there are 17 footnote-style links that need to be converted. Second, "See" and "Do" headings were absent, and these sections need to be filled in. Third, a map is needed. There may be other important tasks, but those are the most obvious. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:00, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I think a region discussion might be helpful before a map is drawn. The guide currently proposes seven regions and I think there are about seven city articles. -Shaundd (talk) 06:13, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Regions withing South Tyrol? The borders of South Tyrol itself shouldn't be controversial, but I sure don't know anything about sub-regions within the region. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:19, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I meant regions within South Tyrol. Right now the page lists seven subregions, one of which is the city of Bolzano, and only three of the subregions have pages. There are six or seven city articles and a lot of redlinks. I'm not sure if this is a sign that there's a lot of content that could be added or if South Tyrol is over-regionified. I guess I'm just adding another task to the list (since I also don't know how or whether there should be subregions). -Shaundd (talk) 15:23, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
 * There is a lot of content to add to South Tyrol, and I don't believe it is over-regionified – have a look at the German page. Adding content to South Tyrol is actually on my list of things to do, if I ever find the time for it. And I agree, Bolzano should not be listed as a region. –StellarD (talk) 15:58, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Merge sub-regions to South Tyrol
The "regions" sections is imho entirely pointless in what should clearly be a bottom level region. As far as the non-redlinks have any useful content, this should be merged and/or moved to city articles and then those articles should be redirected here or deleted outright. Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:24, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi! I don't really oppose having this merged, but looking at Südtirol, there's tons of stuff that can be written. And definitely, South Tyrol is such a big and non-homogenous area, that I wonder if it can be summarized in one article. I went through it quickly and while there's some generic info, there's no overview of e.g. imporatant historic monuments and such. I reckon in this area there's so many of them that you will easily cross the 9-per-article-rule... Of course, the other side of the coin is that someone has to write that stuff first (which I guess noone did in the past 10 years, when you decided you merge it :) ) Andree.sk (talk) 09:52, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

South Tyrol
I have just now done a bit of redlink removing and merging on our South Tyrol articles, but currently South Tyrol still has a "regions" section with two as of yet unredirected regions still listed. I tagged both of them with a merge tag. If you think there might be a better approach, do raise the issue at the appropriate talk page(s). My approach may have been rash, but there is nothing I did that cannot be undone if it turns out to have been a wrong decision after all, and I don't think anything would have happened for ages if I had just raised it on one seldom viewed talk page. At any rate, do weigh in in the discussion and what to do with the two remaining region pages. A short glance at them seems to indicate they duplicate a lot of content from the main South Tyrol page. Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:34, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Article name
Hi, I had to revert your move as Naming conventions states that we use the most common name used in English. As "South Tyrol" is more commonly used in English than "Alto Adige" (which I hadn't heard of until now), policy states that we should use South Tyrol. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 01:48, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:South Tyrol


text:
Talk:Southwest

According to my dictionary, the spelling Southwest is prefered over South West. However, both are disambiguating pages, so links on one should be duplicated on the other. Because disambiguating pages should link directly from the Project:Links to disambiguating pages page, these pages should not be redirects as the disambiguation page maintenance function (when it works) will identify errors. -- (WT-en) Huttite 07:00, 18 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Oh. Will this really cause a problem? I would have thought it was much better to try to avoid having two identical (or near identical) pages, although I don't know the technical implications.

I just thought it better to combine the 2 pages. The offical SW (England) website uses South West, rather than Southwest, not that it matters much to me. (WT-en) DanielC 07:43, 18 Apr 2005 (EDT)

VFD
Deleted per Votes_for_deletion/July_2021 Pashley (talk) 00:44, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Southwest


text:
Talk:South West (Scotland)

Isle of Arran
Arran is commonly pushed into Ayrshire when it comes to general administration. For instance, the health coverage of Arran comes under that of Ayrshire in the Ayrshire and Arran Health Board. Given the small size of the island I would advocate it being classed in the same region as Ayrshire - which incidentally is already a conglomeration of several different areas (East Ayrshire, South Ayrshire etc). I think this would make things a little tidier. (WT-en) Blankfrackis 10:12, 30 January 2008 (EST)

 * That was indeed done some years back, and continues to make sense.
 * See Clydesdale discussion for a proposal to group some of the tiny villages at the head of the Clyde. Grahamsands (talk) 10:21, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:South West (Scotland)


text:
Talk:Southwest (United States of America)

Cities
I added Las Vegas and dropped Taos and Las Cruces - Vegas is one of the largest and most-visited cities in the Southwest, while the other two aren't as major. The cities that are currently in the list (Albuquerque, Flagstaff, Las Vegas, Phoenix, Reno, Salt Lake City, Santa Fe, Tucson) seem to me to cover the major cities in the region, so I'm not sure adding a ninth is needed. -- (WT-en) Ryan 19:13, 1 January 2007 (EST)

--As a native american and lifelong resident of the southwest, I disagree with your perception that "major" cities are defined solely by population in this context. The large cities you mentioned do not entirely capture the cultural anchors of the region. Accordingly, I do not concur. --Clifton

 * The list isn't defined by population but by the usefulness to travelers. Bear in mind that the goal is to create the most useful travel guide, and the cities list in this page is meant simply as a shortcut to the most-visited sites in the Southwest.  That said, if you have a suggestion of how to better organize this page, please share your opinion. -- (WT-en) Ryan 20:20, 1 January 2007 (EST)

> > > So, I take it that you, as a well-rounded traveler and connoisseur of Southwest culture, are the foremost expert on how best to organize and represent information pertaining to this region. Odd. I think you're conflating the "cities list" with "most visited sites" in your statement...the Southwest has an abundance of sites that are visited frequently; they are not, however, all cities (e.g., Grand Canyon N.P., Saguaro National Monument, etc.).

On that note, if we're discussing cities as destinations (remember the cities list?), then who are you to decide what cities should be included? I have lived in both Arizona and New Mexico throughout my life, and I have had the unique experience of working for Federal and municipal entities in most of the major metro areas (from Phoenix to Tucson and Albuquerque to Las Cruces). I must say that, as someone with my background, I can attest that many tourists visiting this area flock to certain smaller metro areas in equally large proportions (percent, not sheer number). My attempt to edit this page was meant to act as a service, not to come in conflict with the opinion of outsiders trying to describe an area I have a comparatively unparalleled depth of knowledge of.

Insofar as your inclusion of Flagstaff as opposed to Las Cruces is concerned, I see that your methodology in this instance is flawed. Both cities (although Las Cruces is a good bit larger) have regional significance, and receive tourists, accordingly. Flag is popular with Valley residents simply because it is a good bit cooler at 7,000'; however the bulk of out-of-state tourism in Flag is a direct result of its proximity to the Grand Canyon. In this case, the same, if not more, can be said for Williams. Las Cruces is the site of the X Prize, the future location of a Virgin Galactic-sponsored spaceport, and is the gateway to White Sands N.P., Missile Range (the birthplace of the atomic bomb and this country's missile defense system) and NASA. It is the second-largest community in NM (to Albuquerque), and is also southern New Mexico's main portal to Mexico via El Paso/Ciudad Juarez. I can go on and on; however, it was my intent to impart my knowledge of both common and not-so-common factoids for the benefit of all readers interested in visiting.

Your addition of Las Vegas--although appropriate--in light of your subsequent deletions, makes me think that you, like many people from CA, see the Southwest as a playground and not an enriching place to experience. Granted, Las Vegas does, in fact, belong on the list; it does not, however, represent a major cultural representative sample of the region at all.

I don't know about you, but, in my travels (and I have done so extensively), I have appreciated guides that provided a breadth of information covering everything from the superficial, Disneyland-esque attractions to the not-so-obvious, delightful treasures most outsiders are unaware of. Who better capable of sharing that knowledge than a native (in more ways than one) with an education in geography and southwestern history/prehistory?

You cited Wikivoyage's goal of providing useful travel info...that, my friend, is a subjective topic in which you are evidently convinced of having a firm grasp of. I'll leave it to you to do as you wish. --Clifton

BTW, if you're concerned about usefulness to travelers, then ponder this: in AZ, Flagstaff is the hub of the norththern reaches of the state, Phoenix central, and Tucson south; in NM, Santa Fe=north, Albuquerque=central; and Las Cruces=south. Follow me? From the perspective of a Californian such as yourself, you can appreciate this in the tradition of showcasing San Francisco, L.A. and San Diego along the same lines. The only difference is that the SW isn't like coastal CA (yet, thank goodness) and is still largely an urban-rural mix. Now extrapolate that logic into a definition of usefulness that actually works.

 * I'm afraid you're seeing my and others' edits as an "us against you" situation. To be clear, there has been extensive discussion over the years about what hierarchy to use for various regions, how to feature cities, etc.  Please take a look at Project:Geographical hierarchy, some of the discussion on Talk:United States of America, and Project:Region article template for examples.  After reading those pages, if you feel that Las Cruces should absolutely be in this list, please add it.  However, we generally try to limit lists of cities/destinations/whatever to 5-9 exemplary entries.  Also note that for a less-controversial way to add content, feel free to discuss Las Cruces or any other destination in some of the other sections of this article, or even better edit the New Mexico article, which is where more specific information should go. -- (WT-en) Ryan 00:01, 2 January 2007 (EST)

>>>Controversial is an overstatement. Rather, this is a case of you misinterpreting my intention of adding depth to a section which has great meaning to me. I have already read most of the discussion threads you posted. Specifically, in the Region article template, the following can be found regarding cities:

"It's usually a good idea, if there are a few prominent  cities in the region, to list them here, since that's often all that travelers are looking for. Regions without sub-regions, though, just have cities in them. List links to each city, with a brief description for each. If there are more than about 10 cities, or there are clear or traditional sub-regions, consider breaking the region article up. If there really aren't any cities to list, leave out this section.

Lastly, if calling the settlements in this region "cities" is a real stretch -- say, for remote or rural areas with only towns and/or villages -- it's OK to rename this section 'Towns' or 'Villages' or 'Settlements' or whatever. But if there are lots of different kinds and sizes of settlements, just leave it as "Cities".

City 1 - industrial port city but a good starting point City 2 - fun and funky, great nightlife City 3 - warm beaches and slow lifestyle City 4 - ancient castles and inspiring museums"

Las Cruces, in this case, is an excellent starting point for the traveler wishng to explore southern NM and northern Mexico. It has picturesque mountainscapes and embodies the tricultural heritage of the Southwest (a la "warm beaches and slow lifstyle). It is the gateway to some of the most diverse geologic and biological features in the region.  Apparently, when one person reads an item, they take away "X" and the other takes away "Y."  The excerpt above seems to follow my logic fairly well, in this sense.

Insofar as your recommendations for editing other articles in existence pertinent to this region go, I have already started to review and retool a number of them. Thank you.

I'll leave the Southwest travel section alone for now, until you find yet another corner of this world that you have visited once or twice--or lived in for a month or so--to encapsulate in your own "unique" way.

 * The term "Cities" has given us trouble a couple of times. It's a real problem in the United Kingdom.  Anyhow, I just thought I'd but in here and explain that we are trying to keep the lists of whatever down to a reasonable number so that readers (travellers) can take the list in more easily.  Research says that people can take in a list of 5+-2 items, but people get really fired up if we limit the list to 7, so we've allowed 2 extra just in case.  The idea is you take something off, put something on, and explain why.

 * Try to keep the explanation short and sweet. -- (WT-en) Mark 01:29, 2 January 2007 (EST)

Texas & Colorado
Over time several contributors have added Texas and Colorado to this article, and other editors have removed those states from the article. The discussions that lead to the breakdown of regions for the United States are scattered on various pages at this point, but the summary is that no one is denying that Texas, Colorado, and even California have portions that are clearly Southwestern, but for the purposes of organizing a travel guide a line needs to be drawn somewhere and it is easier to draw that line along state borders. As a whole neither Texas, Colorado or California are Southwestern states - Colorado is primarily a Rocky Mountain state, while California and Texas are more their own entities than parts of any other US region, and Wikivoyage has created regions that follow that idea.

As always anyone is welcome to disagree and discuss, but please read some of the discussions about this issue on Talk:United States of America and elsewhere first. Alternatively, for a less constructive approach, feel free to launch into personal attacks against me (see above), although such rants are probably more appropriate for my talk page. -- (WT-en) Ryan 21:32, 6 March 2007 (EST)

Couldn't care less about your take on western Texas. Have you been to El Paso? Have you lived in the Southwest? Doesn't matter, really. I'm content returning to this page as many times as it takes to implement this change. What baffles me is your apparent claim of ownership over this page. It makes me wonder what your objective and interest truly is. As someone who has lived here for nearly my entire life, I take issue more with the inclusion of Utah over that of western TX. Using your form of logic (which is still beyond me), then parts of Colorado should be included --you DO mention MESA VERDE in the intro, after all.

...and Utah isn't entirely southwestern, unless you're mormon. Ask folks in Reno if they're part of the Southwest. At this level, using state boundaries is idiotic. The northern extremes of the aforementioned two states extends the region's boundaries far beyond that of what is acceptable.

By the way, your discussions on the issue of what to include in this article is akin to uneducated imbeciles debating topics in quantum physics.

I look forward to revisiting this with you all over the next few months, years, and so on...as I said, whatever it takes for you to move on to something else (and I'm prepared to wait). May I suggest assembling model planes? Checkers? Until next time! -- —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 76.18.80.24 (talk • contribs)

 * You analogy about imbeciles debating topics in quantum physics is akin to imbeciles debating topics in quantum physics! Why?  The answer is because apparently your take on how a wiki works is skewered.   We (everyone that works on Wikivoyage) have set up various policies and guidelines about how we will manage regions and due, in part to some technical limitations places that don't exactly in one region over another are occasionally put in wherever we deem best for the traveler and easiest for the technical reasons.  If there are problems or issues with our policies then, in a wiki, we discuss the problems and possible solutions until we reach a consensus until we've satisfactorily resolved the issues.  I invite you to discuss whatever problems you have with the article, then propose a solution so that we may work with you.

 * Also, this quote baffles me: "What baffles me is your apparent claim of ownership over this page. It makes me wonder what your objective and interest truly is." (-- —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 76.18.80.24 (talk • contribs) ).  Your ramblings suggest you are unwilling to be civilized and an adult by talking about how to best solve the problem or issues, rather you want to come back time and time again and essentially vandalize the article.  This actually indicates that you are doing the same thing by making an apparent claim that your authority is greater and better, and through the transitive property making you the "owner" of this article. -- (WT-en) Sapphire • (Talk) • 00:47, 8 March 2007 (EST)

I love your utopian, Star Trek view of the world. By the way, my sinister objective is to rid this article of your pathetic attempts at whittling down my home, a region that I have studied and made a career of, into a caricature of itself. So, call me an educated vandal. I'd much rather be classified as such, than belong to the idiocy of a small group of tourists doubling as Wiki-geeks. Go Buckeyes! -Your favorite barbaric Injun.

BTW: "Currently, I am writing a book about places that I've never been and will probably never travel to. Why ruin the romantic illusions I create by visiting a city overrun with prostitutes, more thieves than residents, and unbearable humidity?" How on earth can your world view, from this comment, be seen as useful to travelers?

-->Almost forgot, what are you going to do about your mention of Mesa Verde, oh wise tourists? It is in Colorado, after all. Doesn't make you seem very consistent.

 * Two points:

 * First, the existing regional hierarchy for the US was developed after much discussion (which can be found by searching the archives, although some can still be found on Talk:United States of America). That breakdown is laid out on United States of America and on the region pages that are linked from that section.  It's not a perfect hierarchy by any means, and if anyone has ideas of how to improve it the suggestions are welcome; however, a common problem with any region on this site is defining what is and is not within the region, and as a result having non-subjective borders is generally a necessity.  In the case of the regional breakdown for the US, state borders are used.  An unfortunate side-effect is that what one person considers the "South", "Southwest", "Midwest", etc doesn't always exactly correspond to the hierarchy used here.  That is an understood problem, but the consensus so far has been that for the purposes of organization it's better to have boundaries that people can agree upon rather than relying on subjective interpretations of where the South, Midwest, or Southwest begins and ends.  It took a while to discuss and agree upon the current hierarchy, and so any change will require revisiting that discussion - the talk page for the US article would be the place for such a discussion.  A unilateral change that goes against the Project:Consensus process will generally be reverted until a discussion has run its course.

 * Second, it would be best if discussions on this page were limited to the Southwest (United States of America) article. Any personal comments should be placed on the appropriate talk page.  In particular, any comments about a particular user should go on the user's talk page.

 * -- (WT-en) Ryan 02:16, 8 March 2007 (EST)

As stated before: don't care. It isn't only my consideration, try reading archaeological texts on definitions of the region. Or how about cultural geography? Based on my degrees, I'd consider my observations to be objective and yours subjective. That, coupled with the fact that I'm an anarchist, doesn't really leave room for me to waste time adhering to your quasi-democratic processes. Keep in mind that I'm not defacing this article, but merely adding bits of depth, where you have obviously failed.

..and you still haven't addressed your inclusion of Mesa Verde.

 * Your insults are a waste of my time to read. You can cooperate with others with reason and well thought arguments, or you can continue to pretend there is only one person standing in your way instead of an entire community.  In the meantime, I have rolled back all of your contributions to this article. -- (WT-en) Colin 02:48, 8 March 2007 (EST)

Then don't read my comments. I'll be content reverting to my versions as I have time. Again, I'm a patient asshole.
 * If you consider your patience adequate to the task of forcing your opinion to be used as a replacement for the community's opinion, you may have misunderstood how this community works. -- (WT-en) Colin 03:01, 8 March 2007 (EST)

It's more than adequate. If your "community" is geared toward perpetuating falsehoods and misconceptions, then my task is that much more gratifying. You may revert to whatever version you like. Either way, I 'll be back (perhaps in 5 minutes, 5 days, 5 weeks--who knows!)

Protection
I suspect that this particular battle will unfortunately go on for a while, but in the interest of introducing a brief respite I've added page protection which should be removed as soon as it is appropriate to do so. There is almost no chance that the regional hierarchy for the USA will be changed without discussion, but at the same time some verbiage could be added to this article to indicate that portions or Colorado and Texas are often considered part of the Southwest. -- (WT-en) Ryan 03:13, 8 March 2007 (EST)
 * I reinstated the protection. Any admin who sees fit should go ahead and unprotect it when they are ready. -- (WT-en) Colin 05:01, 8 March 2007 (EST)

Your suspicions are correct, Ryan. There's more than one way to skin a cat. Many of you have accused me of introducing subjective items to the article; however, I beg to differ. The vast majority of you have no expertise in this realm, yet you are insitent upon enforcing a paradigm that is justified only by your inherent need to reinforce each other's lack of knowledge on this subject. This only perpetuates the existence of a mediocre article with misleading information. I don't think any of you will be around over the next year or two, so, again, my patience will pay off sooner or later.

For you to revert all edits I have made essentially undermines your purported goal of offering a useful product for the reader. There were many subtleties that I had corrected and improved, which, at a minimum, I feel should persist amidst this period of rest you have granted your wiki-followers from my so-called abuse.

 * Flagstaff: Not a major city! (wait, that's my opinion, and it's purely subjective)
 * The Southwest doesn't "empty out on the flatlands of the Rio Grande;" it does extend to the basin and range province (which, I concede, isn't as topographically diverse as the Rockies) at both the Colorado River and Rio Grande watersheds. Using flatland twice in the same paragraph is awkward.
 * Have you driven I-25 from Burque to Cruces? Apart from the Jornada del Muerto, there isn't a flatland to be seen.  Especially in Sierra county, which derives its name from the obvious.
 * Mesa Verde: Waiting for an answer! The Southwest starts high in the Wasatch and Rocky Mountains? Really?  But not the Colorado Rockies, I take it.  Poor folks who live near Mesa Verde (Durango, Purgatory, etc.)

 * You still aren't understanding. We have a policy at Project:Geographical hierarchy that says we must cut up the United States into NON-OVERLAPPING pieces.  (Don't like that policy?  Go argue against it at Project:Geographical hierarchy.)  When dividing the US, we decided to place entire states into the subregions rather than, for example, dividing Texas into two parts -- some in the Southwest and the rest in some other region.  (Do you think putting whole states into the subregions was a bad idea?  Go argue about it at Talk:United States of America).  We then decided to make Texas a region of it's own rather than including it in the southwest (wrong decision?  go argue about it at Talk:United States of America).   So your problem is that you are arguing about stuff in the wrong place.  Your second problem is that, whichever policy or decision you think is wrong, you need to go to the talk page appropriate for what you think is wrong and figure out why the decision was made the way it was so that you can make an informed argument against the policy/decision.  -- (WT-en) Colin 03:44, 8 March 2007 (EST)

No, you aren't understanding. I don't care! Get it? None of you have even addressed the points I have repeatedly brought to your attention (see bullets above). --Wait, I almost forgot! You aren't capable of thinking unless a topic is posted in the appropriate forum. I apologize.

The issue of regional conformity is so important to you, yet you're so dense, that you can't see that you have allowed for the inclusion of Mesa Verde, COLORADO in the intro in direct violation of your moronic claims! Is it because you're willing to allow an exception in your noble, democratic process because you all enjoy visiting Mesa Verde every summer? Your lack of consistency is infuriating.

By the way, I choose not to waste my time with your discussion pages. Do you not understand the term "anarchist?" Good god, Colin. Scheißen!!!
 * You have failed to understand that I don't have a dog in this fight. I only require that the appropriate attempts be made to reach consensus, and that nothing happen in the meantime. -- (WT-en) Colin 04:26, 8 March 2007 (EST)

You love to think that I lack understanding. One more time, say it with me: "I DON'T CARE!" YOU only require? What happened to the community? He is an individual, after all!

 * Yes, I require that you reach a consensus with the community. I do not care, and really have never cared, how the community chooses to apportion the US. And I don't care if you want to or not, you can either work towards consensus or you can fail.  I have no idea where you got the odd notions that wikis are an anarchy, but they are not.  They are a community, and you are failing at "playing with others." -- (WT-en) Colin 04:36, 8 March 2007 (EST)

Did I say wikis were anarchistic? NO! I am an anarchist, got it? Very simple to comprehend, really. I'm not playing with others...I'm a native american with experience, education and expertise on the Southwest, and I cannot allow these faleshoods and misconceptions to persist at the hands of people who have no real knowledge of the region.
 * Given that you are behaving in a way which cannot lead to any outcome desirable to you, apparently you can allow these misconceptions to persist. If you truly cannot, I have given you pointers to the path forward which at least contains the possibility of success. Too bad "I'm right so therefore they must suffer my changes" didn't work out.  Perhaps there is a lesson for you here.  -- (WT-en) Colin 04:57, 8 March 2007 (EST)

Remember, I'm patient! Good night, my sweet Colin. Give my regards to Ryan. BTW, I can access this page anonymously via multiple IP's, so perhaps you should discuss requiring all editors to have accounts. That should keep you busy!

Thanks for the insight, Col. You must be quite the religous person. Too bad I'm not. My objective is multi-faceted, so winning isn't the issue. Whether you like it or not, my antics have exposed flaws in your collective thinking, and it's not up to me whether or not you recognize them. Be back soon. Chau!

Anasazi
Copied from User talk:(WT-en) Wrh2:

How about you correct the entry yourself. Here's your source: http://www.indiana.edu/~arch/saa/matrix/naa/naa_web/mod15D.html

Look at Item 2b, subitem 3, where the chronology mentions that the Anasazi start to "identify" themselves through the material record. The same is true for Mimbres, Hohokam, etc. We, as archaeologists, cannot even begin to assume that we can truly identify a culture solely through material remains. When you read enough SW arch. journals, you'll begin to understand that cultural associations such as that with the Anasazi, are purely based on recognition of pattern via basketware, ceramics, etc. That's precisely why anything pre-formative is classified as Archaic or Paleo. Is that enough for you?

 * I've re-worded the section in question so that arrival date is no longer specifically mentioned. I'd originally taken the 1200 BC date from Wikipedia, but a sample of other sites that use that date (based on a quick web search for "Anasazi") include, , and .  Hopefully the new text is agreeable. -- (WT-en) Ryan 12:00, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

Four corners
I was thinking of adding Four corners in a list of Other destinations, but it is already full (7+2). Any ideas how else to link it? --Danapit (talk) 19:59, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It would be silly to link to it from all four states' articles. I can't come up with anything better than to delete the "least relevant" destination of the nine that are here and replace it with Four Corners. ϒpsilon (talk) 20:05, 18 August 2013 (UTC)#
 * Hmm, I wouldn't know which one. They are all pretty relevant and they are marked in the map. What about subdividing the list of other destinations to NPs and Others and add a couple more others, starting with Four corners, Hoover dam, etc Maybe mentioning it somewhere in the prose (introductory paragraph or under States)? --Danapit (talk) 20:19, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
 * White Sands, I guess. The problem is that Four Corners is technically orphaned at the moment, as its breadcrumb parent is this article; this article thus must link to it by policy.  LtPowers (talk) 01:55, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The ODs currently listed are incredible destinations, in a region rich with amazing non-urban destinations. Four Corners, on the other hand, is an inane photo op plus some half-hearted tourist trap facilities. Off the top of my head I can think of several dozen other destinations not listed here that should get priority over it! It should be listed from the appropriate parent regions in each state, though—it should not be orphaned. --Peter Talk 05:24, 19 August 2013 (UTC)


text:
Talk:Southwestern Alaska

Would like to add boroughs as sub-regions to the regional areas of Alaska. It is the only logical subdivision I can think of.

(WT-en) AlaskanAtHeart 18:07, 20 August 2009 (EDT)

 * In principle, I support this idea. But is it a good idea to do this now, when there is so little content on this page, and only four cities/towns listed? If you intend to fill out the sub-regions, and to create a bunch of new city/town articles, then I say go ahead. However, I think the Aleutian Islands should remain a separate region in any breakdown, since they are so commonly recognized as a distinct travel region. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 19:36, 20 August 2009 (EDT)

 * Peter - I followed the link you gave me in the note about dividing regions into boroughs, but it ended up here when I meant it to go to the Southcentral Region. However, if you don't want it to be done that way here, maybe we should skip dividing it into boroughs anyplace in the state, if we're going to be consistent, that is.  I would be interested to hear suggestions about other ways of subdividing these very large regions.

(WT-en) AlaskanAtHeart 21:46, 20 August 2009 (EDT)

 * Southcentral is already a more crowded article, so I say go ahead. We can certainly subdivide this article into boroughs in the future—I'm just not sure it makes sense to do it until this article has attracted a bit more content (best not to spread our content to thin). So, go ahead ;) --(WT-en) Peter Talk 21:57, 20 August 2009 (EDT)

title: Talk:Southwestern Alaska


text:
Talk:Southwestern British Columbia

I have reorganized the hierarchy for SW BC. Hopefully this new hierarchy makes sense. I think my previous version was not that good as it referred to areas that are not traditionally part of the Lower Mainland in the Lower Mainland.

However, I'm not 100% sure that this level in the hierarchy is necessary. It may be worth moving all of these regions up to the BC region and leaving it there, and delete this region. Comments, thoughts?....

-- (WT-en) Webgeer 15:27, Jul 22, 2004 (EDT)

So are we going to lump Coquitlam, PoCo, and Port Moody all together? I am not sure they can all support their own guide just now.- (WT-en) bulliver 05:24, 3 March 2006 (EST)

title: Talk:Southwestern British Columbia