text:
Talk:Dewa Sanzan

OK, some insistent anonymous shrine guardian keeps on deleting this chunk regarding the secret contents of Yudono-san Shrine:

 * ...except by noting that the character 湯 (yu) means "hot water" in Japanese.

Surely it's not too big a hint to tell the foreigner what every single Japanese can figure out from the name? (WT-en) Jpatokal 11:18, 18 Jul 2005 (EDT)

Bus directions not clear
The section «Get in» states "On the bus going from Gassan-Hachigōme back to Tsuruoka, change buses at the summit of Mt. Haguro", but it does not say why. Is it required to go back to Tsuruoka? Or is it for any other reason? - Fabimaru (talk) 16:29, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Make Dewa Sanzan a Travel Topic
I don't know where to discuss this. Maybe the talk page or maybe nobody would care if I just made a unilateral decision, but I think the Dewa Sanzan article should be a Travel Topic rather than a "city" that can give information to pilgrims wanting to visit the three temples as a serious endeavor while Tsuruoka (as well as Shonai) where the temples are located would just list them as regular listings. Anyone have a problem with this? ChubbyWimbus (talk) 13:56, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The article says that it's common for visitors to see all three mountains, so turning it into an itinerary or travel topic sounds logical. BTW, as of now the article is categorized as a park, not a city. ϒpsilon (talk) 15:50, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

 * I have changed the template and User:Traveler100 has also tweaked some things I missed. Is there anything else that needs to be done to make it a travel topic that has been forgotten? ChubbyWimbus (talk) 10:38, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Dewa Sanzan


text:
Talk:De Zaanse Schans

De Zaanse Schans seems like a attraction rather than a destination. See Project:What is an article?. Should this page move to Zaanstad, Zaandam or Zaandijk or some other name? (see maps at and )

Also from my guessing about Dutch, and I am guessing;
 * Isn't de like the in English, so it should not be part of the article name?
 * Zaan is the name of the river.
 * -stad means city (or town)
 * -dam means dam or perhaps dam spillway/outlet or area protected by the dam.
 * -dijk means dike or dam structure itself.

I am uncertain of the best name and would like some suggestions. -- (WT-en) Huttite 06:43, 17 Jun 2005 (EDT)

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

title: Talk:De Zaanse Schans


text:
Talk:Dhaka

Research link
Taken from the page: For an extensive list of restaurants in Dhaka, please visit http://www.imhungrybd.com/ . --(WT-en) Evan 12:24, 17 November 2006 (EST).

BRACNET also has a searchable database of eateries in Dhaka by cuisine, location etc.

 * Third-party links like that are not used on Wikivoyage -- the information should be written here directly. See Project:External links. (WT-en) Jpatokal 03:50, 5 November 2007 (EST)

In the Get In section trains are not mentioned yet Bangladesh does have a train network. I don't have the knowledge to update the section, can someone who lives there do this? (WT-en) Exile 17:23, 27 May 2011 (EDT)

Districts
Should this city be districtified? Dhaka is most certainly a huge city, but would splitting the article really benefit viewers? A lot more information could possibly be added though. If we were to split, I think the districts would be Gulshan/Banani, Mirpur, Motijheel/Inner city, University, Old Dhaka, or something along those lines. Does anyone else want to have a go at creating a district map, and we can go from there? I tried doing one earlier, and Inkscape kept crashing. (WT-en)  J ames A    >talk 10:47, 12 May 2012 (EDT)

 * With no opposition (and no discussion) after 5 months, I've gone ahead and began districtisation. I've got a draft map of the districts on my computer, and will draw it into a proper SVG image later for use. I will slowly but surely move out listings to their respective district articles, creating the articles when the need arises. Some of the districts, such as Outer east are not even mentioned in this article and have zero listings right now. Note that the districts are based on the official government-defined thanas (districts) of Dhaka. Some of our article's districts only cover one official district (such as Motijheel), while others cover multiple (like Old Dhaka). When the map is uploaded, its should be clear what goes where. JamesA  >talk 14:51, 22 October 2012 (CEST)
 * In total, how many official thanas are in Dhaka? I guess 24 per WP article. Also, Banani is neighborhood of Gulshan district? --Saqib (talk) 14:54, 22 October 2012 (CEST)

 * Thanks for helping out with the process, Saqib! This map is very useful and is what I'm basing the final one off. Also useful is Wikipedia. It probably won't make much sense until I upload the districts map, maybe some time tomorrow. The borders have slightly changed since that map was created 5 years ago, but nothing dramatic. If you're thinking of working on Gulshan, it's number 5. Yes, in this case, I've included Banani as part of Gulshan. We could possibly rename the district to "Gulshan-Banani". This map might be useful. JamesA  >talk 15:04, 22 October 2012 (CEST)
 * Well done James. --Saqib (talk) 11:39, 23 October 2012 (CEST)

 * I live in Tongi, beside Uttara. My college was in Uttara and my office is there. So, I know the place very well. Therefore, I can contribute to write a good guide on Uttara thana.

 * About calling it District, do you guys think Badda, Banani, Uttara, etc. are districts? We generally call them Upazilla/Thana. Dhaka is a district itself and is under the division named "Dhaka". (There are only 64 districts in Bangladesh, under 7 divisions.) Saif A. Ratul (talk) 21:04, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Generally, whenever we divide a city on Wikivoyage, we name the subdivisions as 'Districts'. Some of the 'Districts' that are listed on the main Dhaka article are actually a few thanas merged together. There's no such thana/upazilla as Gulshan-Banani, so we can't call it that. JamesA  >talk 13:38, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Just created a dynamic district map based on the very basic static map. Hope it is a good starting point for refinement discussions.--Renek78 (talk) 23:46, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Thana and WV district comparison
To assist users in working out where particular listings/info belongs, I've marked which thanas are part of what district according to our article.
 * Thana - New format district
 * Badda - Outer east
 * Cantonment - Uttara
 * Dhanmondi - Tejgaon-Dhanmondi
 * Demra - Outer east
 * Kotwali - Old Dhaka
 * Gulshan - Gulshan
 * Hazaribagh - Old Dhaka
 * Kafrul - Mirpur
 * Kamringir Cha - Old Dhaka
 * Khilgaon - Outer east
 * Lalbagh - Old Dhaka
 * Mirpur - Mirpur
 * Mohammadpur - Tejgaon-Dhanmondi
 * Motijheel - Motijheel
 * Pallabi - Uttara
 * Ramna - University
 * Sabujbagh - Outer east
 * Shyampur - Old Dhaka
 * Sutrapur - Old Dhaka
 * Tejgaon - Tejgaon-Dhanmondi
 * Uttara - Uttara

Type any thana name with the keyword "map" into Google, and a very well-made map should appear in the results, with roads, points of interest and borders. JamesA  >talk 13:09, 23 October 2012 (CEST)

Cantonment and Pallabi are not under Uttara. Pallabi is probably near Mirpur. And Cantonment is a 45 minutes drive from Uttara. Cantonment is very near to Banani. So, Cantonment can go under Banani and Pallabi can go under Mirpur. Saif A. Ratul (talk) 21:09, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

 * Thanks for your recommendations. I don't live in Dhaka, so had to base my map-making off my trip there 2 years ago and the internet. I can make the changes you suggest. The problem is that I created the new 'Districts format' along thana lines. Take a look at the map here to see how I divided it. If I put Cantonment thana into the Gulshan-Banani District, there'd be a weird narrow border. Maybe Kafrul thana should be cut in half between Mirpur District and Gulshan-Banani District. Let me know if you think there is another way we could change it. :) JamesA  >talk 13:38, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Where would Savar Cantonment will go in our Dhaka distrct map? --Saqib (talk) 08:24, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Savar would be outside Metro Dhaka, I'd say. Are you trying to add the listing for the National Monument? We could either create a Savar article, although apart from the monument, there's not much else. Or we could incorporate it into the regional Dhaka District article. JamesA  >talk 09:10, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * On second thought, there is quite a bit in Savar according to Savar. In that case, I'd create a new article :) JamesA  >talk 09:14, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * No James. I'm not trying to add any listening. Actually, I thought Savar Cantonment should be inside the Dhaka district map as this cantonment seems to be very near to Shahjalal airport. Btw, James, Karachi article is districtified as per Karachi Division. What do you think should we exclude some area to represent only Metro Karachi area? --Saqib (talk) 10:29, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmm, are we thinking of different places? If you type 'Savar Cantonment' into Google Maps, you'll see it's actually quite separated from the Metro area and the airport, out to the west. As for making the article about the whole district, I don't think that's a good idea. In Karachi it might work, but the Dhaka District is not just urban areas. See . It actually stretches quite far out to cover other cities like Nawabganj. JamesA  >talk 11:03, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, now I got it James. Btw, in Karachi article, I've included all the cantonment areas into the districts articles although officially those cantonments areas are outside the jurisdiction of city district government of Karachi. Please see this for your reference. If you think it is fine, can you please write a brief over this districtification here please to give visitors a clear idea. --Saqib (talk) 11:26, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I believe cantonments work the same in Bangladesh, although I'm not that knowledgeable about it. I just included them into what seemed geographically logical, but because I do not live in Dhaka, it is hard to determine. Sorry, what did you want me to look over/do? JamesA  >talk 12:11, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I meant could you please copy edit this section. --Saqib (talk) 12:56, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Anytime, Saqib! I've gone ahead and copyedited, but also removed some small bits of info that I didn't feel were worth a mention. JamesA  >talk 06:30, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks James. --Saqib (talk) 08:38, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Edit
I'm reluctant to simply revert this edit, but I don't like the deletion of background and historical content, and I'd like to know what others (especially those of you who personally know Dhaka) think about this. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:07, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Banner
Following some comments on Talk:Bangladesh, I've restored the previous banner. The change was made without any discussion, and several users (including me) don't find it an improvement. If anyone disagrees or wants to propose even another banner, please comment here. JuliasTravels (talk) 18:22, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

 * Glad you liked the original, Julias =) James A ▪ talk 12:54, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

A selection of page banners. Maybe the second banner is a more appropriate representation of street life in Dhaka :) --Renek78 (talk) 20:53, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
 * My vote is with #2, which more accurately pictures the city. Selfie City (talk) 21:01, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I changed the page banner to picture 2. If somebody disagrees just change it back. --Renek78 (talk) 21:33, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Dhaka


text:
Talk:Dharamsala

Notes 1 & 2 have been transferred from 'Dharamsala/McLeod Ganj' discussion page.

1

Hybrid McLeod Ganj / Dharamashala
What would people think of making these two into one article. It's kind of awkward having them as two, most of the transport info should be on the Dharamashala page, the sleep, eat, do, see, stuff should be on the McLeod Ganj page. The Dharamashala page even defines McLeod Ganj as part of Dharamashala. I know they are a 10 minute bus ride apart, but is that enough to justify giving them separate pages? Any responses?
 * I think the only way the could be one page is if one is where you stay to see the other... or if one is really just a district of the other... but if they're 10 minutes apart doesnt that require some info on how to get from one to the other? sorry if this isnt helping, I'm going to look more closely... (WT-en) Majnoona 14:55, 26 March 2006 (EST)
 * Ok. now that I've looked I think you're right-- there's no reason Dhramashala should only be Lower Dharamashala (I havent benn there, but I'm thinking it does quite need to be a Huge city with districts like Mexico City, etc...). Can you combine the info and then we'll make this a redirect to Dharamashala? (WT-en) Majnoona 14:58, 26 March 2006 (EST)

 * My 2 momos is that the articles should definitely be merged: as the article says, there's nothing of interest in the lower town except the bus terminal and maybe the Kangra Museum of Art (which I didn't visit and thus won't comment on). (WT-en) Jpatokal 12:15, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

Article name
Uh, I'm not happy with this article name -- AFAIK, it should just be Dharamsala -- maybe with a redirect from McLeod Ganj. We have no precident for an article "Placename-slash-wellknown subplacename". I'd argue against it for a couple of reasons: Anyone have any reason why this should stay here? (WT-en) Majnoona 20:25, 31 March 2006 (EST)
 * The slash in names is reserved for sub pages, specifically Districts in Huge cities.
 * Even if it weren't for the above, It looks messy
 * It doesn't help users, the search engine will get them here if they look for McLeod Ganj and the redirect will get them here if they look for it directly.
 * I also wanted to say "sorry" if my agreement to "merging" the two articles implied that the article should move to a hybrid name as well -- I don't think I was clear that the content should merge, but stay under Dharamsala. My bad!(WT-en) Majnoona 20:28, 31 March 2006 (EST)

 * Although you are more than welcome to change the slash to something else, yes, I do have reasons for calling the page Dharamasala/McLeod Ganj. First it has been up as two separate pages for some time, and this is to clearify that this page covers both.  But more importantly Dharamashala and Mcleod Ganj are two places, but conventionally described, and always in the traveler community as Dharamasala.  The important exception being when in McLeod Ganj one talks of Dharamasala (meaning lower).

While I can live with Dharamasala as the name for the hybrid page, I don't think that it's the best thing to do, and I'm surprised that it was moved back so quickly without discussion.(WT-en) keithonearth 16:53, 2 April 2006 (EDT)
 * Hey, Keothonearth, thanks for your comments. Sorry for moving the article so quickly. I agreed with Maj's idea, and as there were no dissenting opinions, I acted on it. Basically the problem with the previous name was that it was thought that no-one heading to McLeod Ganj would type in the name 'Dharamsala/McLeod Ganj'. Likewise, to most of the world, HH Dalai Lama and his government in excile live in a place called Dharamsala. Even for those who know that his residence is actually in McLeod Ganj, if they type in that name there will be a redirect. Before moving the article, I checked with Wikipedia, and it stated that the town is called 'Dharamsala', which is dived into upper and lower, with upper also being known as 'Mc Leod Ganj'. If you can offer a different option, then please put it out for discussion. I have no opinion either way and will leave it for the general concensus. Apologies if my abrupt action was inappropriate (WT-en) WindHorse 3 April 06

Shri Kali Ashram
I just reverted the deletion of this ashram, since no explanation was given and it looks like their website is still up and going... did it close, or was someone just practicing their editing skills? (WT-en) - Cacahuate 01:27, 25 February 2007 (EST)

 * And again... speak up here if there's a valid reason you're deleting this ashram – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 01:24, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

Hi Cacahuate, I appreciate your reverence for the ashram. I deleted it from the Dharamshala section of wikipedia and submitted it to the Koh Phangan section of wikivoyage has we have returned to Kho Phangan again. Actually I had thought I had deleted it and was most surprised to find I had not but your diligence explains that mystery. Anyway thanks for that. Shri Ma Kristina Baird

 * Well, that explains that! Sometimes people come by and delete random things or places they personally didn't like... so just like to make sure it wasn't vandalism. Thanks for speaking up. – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 14:05, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

Taste of India
Hi there, I tried to even out the tone of the description, hopefully that's better? I agree it's not that great, but I also didn't have as bad of an experience as you... it's unfortunate the dirty rag incident... but far from uncommon, I'd say par for the course in most of the country. Anyway, we don't usually write first-person accounts within the articles themselves, so hopefully my new description suits you. – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 16:33, 31 July 2007 (EDT)

Asia Health Resorts
Is it really that bad? I went to their website to check it out, and if the music is a clue, it just might be... but I guess, sometimes you want to go where everybody knows your name. hm. – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 19:37, 27 May 2008 (EDT)

 * Well it got changed from terrible to awesome by one editor, so I've toned it down a bit... I can tell from the website and pics that it's not "amazing", I know the type, and it's def not for all – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 12:18, 8 June 2008 (EDT)

Informative website
http://www.mcllo.com/

I've removed this link per our external links policy, but it's licensed under CC, so the content is usable here if anyone wants to go through and find things to use on our page... just be sure to mention where the info came from in the edit summary if you do. – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 17:18, 4 October 2008 (EDT)

external links causing spam
I tried to add a very minor change which involved no links and when I saved I got the spam error message. It says that the link causing the issue is seen in the link below. however the whole page is displayed there with no highlight of which particular link is the problem!!

So what to do can't edit this page because of this link though can't work out which link it is.

Any suggestions?

Bad roads?
A major Indian newspaper says Visit to Dalai Lama's abode is tourists' nightmare due to horrendous road conditions between Dharamsala town & McLeod Ganj. Pashley (talk) 01:35, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item is missing permission
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item is missing permission information and may be deleted: You can see the details at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:23, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
 * IPL 2023 May 17 2023 at HPCA Stadium.jpg

 * Not on the page, anyway. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:08, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Dharamsala


text:
Talk:Dharamsala/McLeod Ganj

Hybrid McLeod Ganj / Dharamashala
What would people think of making these two into one article. It's kind of awkward having them as two, most of the transport info should be on the Dharamashala page, the sleep, eat, do, see, stuff should be on the McLeod Ganj page. The Dharamashala page even defines McLeod Ganj as part of Dharamashala. I know they are a 10 minute bus ride apart, but is that enough to justify giving them separate pages? Any responses?
 * I think the only way the could be one page is if one is where you stay to see the other... or if one is really just a district of the other... but if they're 10 minutes apart doesnt that require some info on how to get from one to the other? sorry if this isnt helping, I'm going to look more closely... (WT-en) Majnoona 14:55, 26 March 2006 (EST)
 * Ok. now that I've looked I think you're right-- there's no reason Dhramashala should only be Lower Dharamashala (I havent benn there, but I'm thinking it does quite need to be a Huge city with districts like Mexico City, etc...). Can you combine the info and then we'll make this a redirect to Dharamashala? (WT-en) Majnoona 14:58, 26 March 2006 (EST)

Article name
Uh, I'm not happy with this article name -- AFAIK, it should just be Dharamsala -- maybe with a redirect from McLeod Ganj. We have no precident for an article "Placename-slash-wellknown subplacename". I'd argue against it for a couple of reasons: Anyone have any reason why this should stay here? (WT-en) Majnoona 20:25, 31 March 2006 (EST)
 * The slash in names is reserved for sub pages, specifically Districts in Huge cities.
 * Even if it weren't for the above, It looks messy
 * It doesn't help users, the search engine will get them here if they look for McLeod Ganj and the redirect will get them here if they look for it directly.
 * I also wanted to say "sorry" if my agreement to "merging" the two articles implied that the article should move to a hybrid name as well -- I don't think I was clear that the content should merge, but stay under Dharamsala. My bad!(WT-en) Majnoona 20:28, 31 March 2006 (EST)

vfd discussion

 * Moved article to Dharamsala in response to Maj's comments: "I also wanted to say "sorry" if my agreement to "merging" the two articles implied that the article should move to a hybrid name as well -- I don't think I was clear that the content should merge, but stay under Dharamsala. My bad!" Majnoona 20:28, 31 March 2006 (EST) - (WT-en) WindHorse 1 April 06

title: Talk:Dharamsala/McLeod Ganj


text:
Talk:Dieng Plateau

Dieng Plateau
Per Project:What is an article?, this content should probably be merged to the appropriate city or region article, and the page turned into a redirect. But I'm not at all familiar with the area, so I'll leave this decision to the vfd page. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 18:48, 15 December 2008 (EST)
 * Hmm-m. I suspect the Dieng Plateau is better known under that name than the main town in the area, Wonosobo. It might make more sense to keep this article at Dieng Plateau and redirect Wonosobo there. (WT-en) Jpatokal 21:51, 15 December 2008 (EST)
 * Yes, especially since we do not yet have a Wonosobo article. (WT-en) Pashley 04:05, 16 December 2008 (EST)

 * Keep. This blog, by someone who's been there, implies that you can sleep there, although the "Franglish" is such that it's difficult to be sure.  For probably the hundredth time, I say: we really need some new model for handling locales that are overwhelmingly rural, yet may have lodging, etc., outside the towns ("destinations") and interspersed among the boonies. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 14:07, 30 December 2008 (EST)

Banner
Here are a few propositions for a banner on the Dieng Plateau page. The fourth one is flipped horizontally for the clarity of the composition ( maybe it was not a smart move)

Emmeca (talk) 05:51, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

 * The 4th one also seems to show construction scaffolding. All the others are fine, but the 2nd is my favorite because it's a beautiful scene with a characteristic relic in it. The 1st banner is an excellent composition and shows a beautiful scene, but without visible relics, while the 3rd shows both relics and a view of the volcano, but is mostly foreground. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:07, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:Dieng Plateau


text:
Talk:Digha

Protection
See Talk:Mandarmani --(WT-en) Peter Talk 17:57, 25 September 2010 (EDT)

title: Talk:Digha


text:
Talk:Dijon

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

Comments
What's the deal with the owl? I visited Dijon earlier today, but they were out of the English tour book and nobody could really explain -- something about the church? 82.120.66.127 15:43, 20 June 2008 (EDT)

I've added something about the owl, which is an icon for locals. (WT-en) BohwaZ 14:00, 28 April 2011 (EDT)

title: Talk:Dijon


text:
Talk:Dili

A lot of this article was written in 2006, at a time when there was public disorder and the dangers were much higher than today. Dili has changed a lot since that time and help is needed to update it to the present situation. 111.92.178.246 10:31, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

 * Please plunge forward and start the process. Dili is not served well by our current guide.  --Inas (talk) 10:42, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Map
Hi, everyone. That map of Dili looks nice and clear, but I think we ought not to use the Indonesian-language name for the strait on its shore, Selat Ombai. Instead, we should be using either a Portuguese name or perhaps a Tetum name (which I'm guessing doesn't include "Selat"). Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:32, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Guide?
This is now rated Usable. If it were Guide it would be a fine candidate for an Off the Beaten Path featured article. It looks close to me. What would it take to get it there?

There are a few places where it seems to me it could have better wording; nothing major, under an hour's work for a proofreader. One cracks me up; "The Leader supermarket has lots of western treats, including chocolate and toilet paper."

I also notice a few "as of 2016" or similar & that makes we wonder if listings are up-to-date. Pashley (talk) 12:29, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

 * A considerable amount of work is needed, as many listings lack descriptions. Could be a good candidate for informative status tho. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:40, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Dili


text:
Talk:Dilijan

copyvio
Much of the original text of this article was a copyvio from. It has been removed. -- (WT-en) Ryan 16:37, 28 March 2006 (EST)

title: Talk:Dilijan


text:
Talk:Dilworth

DO NOT FORGOT ABOUT THE DAIRY QUEEN IN DILWORTH!!! THEY MAKE THE BEST BLIZZARDS IN TOWN!!!

title: Talk:Dilworth


text:
Talk:Dimona

Nuclear Center
I changed the opening paragraph a bit. While I haven't removed the reference to the nuclear center (let's face it, I don't think there is anything else Dimona is known for), I don't think this should be the only introduction to the city. The previous inroduction made it look like Dimona is built around a nuclear weapons plant, which is not true.

In any case the nuclear center is not very close to the town, and is one of the most in-accessible places in Israel (it's hardly even visible from the main road, completely closed area, and you'd probably get arrested just for stopping your car or walking to close to the fence). So I don't see any value to travelers mentioning it too much. (WT-en) Shahar 16:59, 24 December 2006 (EST)

title: Talk:Dimona


text:
Talk:Dinant

This edit: 06:08, 21 March 2009 75.100.244.250 removed my content, which I think was useful for English-speaking tourists. Do I put it back, or is there a curator for this page? 121.73.5.66 00:15, 16 June 2010 (EDT)

 * That seems like a potentially useful advice, so put it back as you like, but please avoid using first person pronouns and please avoid outright removing what replaced your edits, instead try to improve it. Also there is not a "curator" neither for this, nor any other article at Wikivoyage (and at other wikis for that matter), absolutely anyone has the right to edit any article—we call it "plunging forward". – (WT-en) Vidimian 09:54, 16 June 2010 (EDT)

title: Talk:Dinant


text:
Talk:Dindigul

Airports
How far are Madurai and Trichy from Dindigul City (which, I assume, is at the center of the district?--(WT-en) Wandering 10:48, 14 November 2008 (EST)

The birth place is now called as Kunnuvarankottai or Kannaptti as pronounced by locals here. The biography of Sachidananda Bharathi- I states this place as Srikanteswarapuram (old name of this village) or Kunruvarankottai or Kunnapatti, but now it is known by locals here as Kunnuvarankottai or Kannapatti. This discussion can be closed as the name of the village recognized by locals is "Kunnuvarankottai" or "Kannapatti" (Tamil:கண்ணாப்பட்டி). (WT-en) Kbala1055 21:56, 19 February 2010 (EST)

There are many sub-divisions or taluks in Dindigul district not covered in the Dindigul city page. The sub-divisions are Athur, Vedasandur, Palani, Kodiakanal, Nilakottai, Batlagundu, Dindigul city etc. So it is advised by a person who knows the local geography here that Dindigul district and Dindigul city be kept separate and that would only be appropriate. (WT-en) Kbala1055 09:52, 23 June 2010 (EDT)

Dindigul
swept from pub:

I'm wondering if there is a mistake or what the logic is behind redirecting Dindigul to Dindigul (city)? We don't have an article for the Dindigul District, and I don't think there are any cities outside of this area by the same name. If this is the case, don't we do "Dindigul" for the city name and "Dindigul (district)" for the district name like we do with the Japanese prefectures (ex: Tokushima is the city, Tokushima (prefecture) is the prefecture) (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 19:34, 6 June 2010 (EDT)

 * I am not sure I understand your point. Dindigul is not a redirect, it is the district article. The BC is Tamil Nadu -> Dindigul -> Dindigul (city). I do think that Dindigul should be renamed Dindigul (district).--(WT-en) Burmesedays 10:22, 7 June 2010 (EDT)

 * On the Dindigul article, there is a merge tag to merge it into Dindigul (city), but in these cases, doesn't the city get preference like in the Tokushima example to NOT have parenthesis in the name? Shouldn't the Dindigul (city) article actually be merged into the Dindigul article and then create a Dindigul (district) article? (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 16:42, 7 June 2010 (EDT)

I am hailing from the Dindigul city, i agree with Chubby to merge with Dindigul District. For more info www.dindigul.tn.nic.in, this website belongs to Tamilnadu Govt. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) Thamins (talk • contribs)

Based on the above discussions, I think it is better to rename to "Dindigul District" and keep the "Dindigul (city)" as such or also rename "Dindigul (city) to "Dindigul".. This will be in line with other pages in the Southwestern Tamilnadu, namely, Madurai District, Theni District etc. Your opinions please.

(WT-en) Kbala1055 23:50, 5 February 2011 (EST)

Have merged the details of Dindigul city in Dindigul page for the city and created Dindigul district page similar to other district pages in South western Tamilnadu. Removed the Merge tag (WT-en) Kbala1055 05:07, 4 April 2011 (EDT)

title: Talk:Dindigul


text:
Talk:Dingle Peninsula

I removed a plea for travelers to avoid the Dingle Peninsula. I don't know what to replace it with, though. --(WT-en) Evan 14:56, 16 Dec 2005 (EST)

 * Perhaps a Respect section, if the locals are anti-tourist and fear the destruction of their culture by too many visitors. -- (WT-en) Huttite 18:29, 17 Dec 2005 (EST)

My Contribution has Change/Disappeared
I posted an addition to the DO section of this artical. It then disappered. I understand from the history that it was elimenated/deleted. I read the guidelines some more and understand why it could have been. My question is why so are other links within this artical still allowed to stay?

 * It might have been that your edit was spotted as it was added and so deleted immediately. Others were undetected. I've deleted a bunch, but this whole page needs to edited to conform to the Wikivoyage manual of style, and any other external links that are not from a primary source also need to be deleted. Cheers. (WT-en) WindHorse 10:21, 6 March 2007 (EST)

Thank you. I'm sorry for being so brazen by my initial post and for not fully understanding the guidelines.

 * No problem. Nobody can know all the guidelines when they first begin. In fact, I'm still discovering new ones after a few years of editing! Anyway, if you have any questions, please feel free to ask. Cheers. (WT-en) WindHorse 11:13, 6 March 2007 (EST)

title: Talk:Dingle Peninsula


text:
Talk:Dinosaur Provincial Park

This has just been redirected to Brooks. This strikes me as the tail wagging the dog. Why redirect a world heritage list park to an insignificant town, especially when the town is miles away? For ealier discussion, see Project:Votes_for_deletion/June_2007 (WT-en) Pashley 20:14, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
 * (WT-en) Pashley: Hi, good to hear from you. You make a good point.  I think it's a judgement call whether this park should be its own article, an "Other destination" in the Southern Alberta region, or a "See" attraction in Brooks.  I was guided by Project:What is an article?, which gives lots of reasons to leave it in Brooks: the "Can you sleep there?" test, the "too far for a day trip" test, etc.  I wouldn't object to restoring the park as a separate article using the Project:Park article template, especially if the article was improved as a result. Camping info would be especially nice.  I do have one comment about the Project:Votes_for_deletion/June_2007: The Royal Tyrrell Museum is 177km away from Dinosaur Provincial Park, so it definitely belongs as a "See" attraction in Drumheller, and not in the park's article. (WT-en) JimDeLaHunt 15:51, 5 April 2008 (EDT)
 * 13 years later, I've revived the article. Am working on it, as I completely agree with you that UNESCO WHS ought to have their own articles, not redirected somewhere 50 kilometres away. I was very surprised we didn't have an article on this, but here we do. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 23:49, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Dinosaur Provincial Park


text:
Talk:Disabled travel in South Africa

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

Comments
I have started this page in order to consolidate information for disabled travellers into one place.

There is quite a bit of information on the web, but it is distributed all over the place and not always easy to find.

There is also a lot of seemingly insignificant (but very important to disabled travellers) information that is simply not available on the web and can only be found when visiting a place.

I'll check on the following next time I am at O.R. Tambo:
 * Braille on the elevators (I think they parkade has, not sure about the rest)
 * Does the moving walkways in the domestic terminal have an audible warning before you get on the walkway? I know they have a warning just before the end, but am not at all sure about the start.

Other things that need to be checked
 * I know some ATM's have braille on the keypads, but do all of them have it? —The preceding comment was added by NJR ZA (talk • contribs)

title: Talk:Disabled travel in South Africa


text:
Talk:Low-cost airlines

Intercontinental flights
Does anyone know if there are any transcontinental discount fares? Specifically, I am interested in Europe-North America.

I wonder about the same, especially Europe-Asia. How about an intercontinental-section. I'm sure it's somehow possible to do that with cheap discount airlines provided you have the guts to change several times. I'm interested in how much you could save by doing that.

 * There's Zoom Airlines, from Canada to Europe, some real good deals there.
 * I had started an article Intercontinental discount airlines (without logging in), but it was removed. I just started a subheader ===Intercontinental===, please add more information. (WT-en) Guaka 16:40, 26 September 2006 (EDT)

Europe to South America
I'm struggling to find any cheap fare options between Europe and S America (Rio, BA, Lima, Santiago). Anyone got any ideas? The only hints in this article are Air Berlin and Condor, and I can't get their websites to give any useful options. (WT-en) Andyfarrell 12:23, 12 November 2009 (EST)

South America?
Low-cost_airlines has links for most continents but not for South America. Can that be fixed?

What about flights from North America to South America? Canada's Air Transat has a few. Are there others? A question on this is at Tourist_Office. Pashley (talk) 13:22, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Strange picture?
Did anyone else notice that the departure board picture does not in fact feature any low cost airlines at all? :) Andrewssi2 (talk) 10:40, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

 * Nice catch. It is now gone. Pashley (talk) 15:17, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Content not related to Low-cost airlines
There have been some recent edits regarding Fifth-freedom Flights (and other subjects) that appear to have nothing to do with Low-cost airlines at all, but rather 'How to fly cheaply'.

Does this material really belong in this article? If not, where? Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:35, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure it belongs in this article, but it seems worth having somewhere.

 * There may be variants worth mentioning as well. At one point, for example, there was a triangle route Montreal-Mexico-Madrid with stopovers at no extra cost; price was comparable to Montreal-Paris return & similar routes. This let the airline avoid strict US 5th freedom rules. It has been over a decade since I heard of this so I've no idea if it still exists, but if not there might be similar things elsewhere. Pashley (talk) 05:16, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

 * The name of the article could be changed to "Low-cost air travel." Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:46, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

 * I think you are right... The article started off as an overview of budget airline travel, and then lost focus and subsequent material became "Low cost air travel".
 * Can I suggest that we create a new article - Air travel on a budget and move all that information in there? We could also merge some other funny articles such as Airline_consolidators. Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:44, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Sure. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:36, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Sound like a smart idea. Nowadays also regular airlines offer low costs (and service). ϒpsilon (talk) 09:04, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Merge?
Isn't this article the same as Air travel on a budget to a large extent? PrinceGloria (talk) 16:10, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
 * See the discussion in the section immediately above this one. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:34, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Still, the article seems to double the content of Air travel on a budget + some assorted outdated trivia. Apart from our German friend adding more words, nobody updated it for a year. Does any of the content merit present merit a separate article? PrinceGloria (talk) 21:27, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
 * From the above thread:

 * Can I suggest that we create a new article - Air travel on a budget and move all that information in there? We could also merge some other funny articles such as Airline_consolidators. Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:44, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

 * It seems that the only issue is that no-one has yet followed up to move all the information from here to there and then redirect the article. So if you want to do that, go ahead. I don't think further discussion about this is really needed, as no-one ever objected to the plans discussed above. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:33, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

 * OK, got it, plunging in due course. <3 - PrinceGloria (talk) 21:35, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

title: Talk:Low-cost airlines


text:
Talk:Low-cost airlines in Africa

Royal Air Maroc partners
> Royal Air Maroc, and its partners feature cheap flights

Could anyone provide a list of Royal Air Marocpartners? Or are all the partners' tickets sold under Royal Air Maroc brand only? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 11:20, 26 October 2006 (EDT)

Needs Much Work
Seriously, are there no discount airlines outside South Africa? I'm not qualified to write about this topic, but this article seems really light on useful info.JadeDragon (talk) 12:13, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Merge into Air travel on a budget
As the article says, the airlines in Africa tend to be unstable and much of the info is outdated, and any info added can get outdated very quickly. Besides that, this article contains very little content of value that is not included in said article it is to be merged into. PrinceGloria (talk) 14:18, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

title: Talk:Low-cost airlines in Africa


text:
Talk:Low-cost airlines in Asia

I unlinked some of the things that were linked on this article. We don't usually have articles for individual airports or airlines.

I also took it off of the Main Page. I think it'd be a good article to feature there, but it seems to be in a half-finished state (lots of empty sections), and we don't normally have partly-finished articles on the Main Page. See the Main Page policy for details. --(WT-en) Evan 11:38, 5 Feb 2004 (EST)

Removal of DoHop.com link
that link was spam, i think. doHop doesnt even index low cost carriers (at least on the few sample routes i tried) and thus should not be linked to on this page.

Is there a low cost airline connecting Hanoi
I would like to know if there is a low budget airline going to Hanoi from Singapore, KL or Bangkok? Thanks,

 * Tiger to Singapore, Air Asia to KL and Bangkok. (WT-en) Jpatokal 00:32, 7 January 2007 (EST)

Jetstar
I think there is a information moving around that JETSTAR may withdraw from Singapore to Bangalore and I have tried to book this flight after 8th Jan'07 and there is no flight is available. Anyone can add more information are welcome. - Rajan, Singapore —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 165.21.154.12 (talk • contribs)

 * That's correct, the flight has been withdrawn. I'll revise the article.  Rumor says Tiger is planning to start flights soon(tm), but they've been saying that for a while now... (WT-en) Jpatokal 00:28, 7 January 2007 (EST)

Jet Airways
...is not a low-cost carrier: if anything, they're usually the most expensive option on any given route. (WT-en) Jpatokal 06:52, 14 June 2007 (EDT)

Bangkok Air(ways)
I have checked wikipedia, it states; Bangkok Airways Co., Ltd. is a regional airline it doesn't state it is a No-frills airlines or budget airlines. -(WT-en) SnappyHip 20:19, 24 February 2010 (GST)

Viva Macau has ceased operations
Please refer to: http://www.flyvivamacau.com/mo/en/press-releases/67/6-apr-2010/viva-macau-office-closure

VFD discussion
If the other ones can't be saved or salvaged, this one won't be, either. I think our coverage is best handled under air travel on a budget which gets updated a lot more regularly than those articles do. Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:44, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

 * Keep. The Asian market is different & it is better to cover it in its own article. Pashley (talk) 08:24, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * could you please elaborate on that? Hobbitschuster (talk) 11:25, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

 * There is nothing different about the Asian market except perhaps for the less "open skies" than in Europe, but this concerns airlines as businesses and is not really much of an issue for the traveller. The article does not really cover Asia as such, but individual markets one by one, which is better handled in individual country articles. Much of the article is outdated and its redundancy with other articles and better sources (e.g. airlines' own websites) guarantees it will forever be. No reason to keep it around and confuse the traveller with the misfortune to stumble upon it. PrinceGloria (talk) 08:25, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

 * Delete - as someone who does travel in East Asia, I would not trust this long list of airlines and destinations to be accurate. Maybe the intent was good, but we should be providing solid travel advise, not a list of (probably incorrect) routes that I would be getting from Expedia, not WV. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 10:12, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

 * Do not delete - Again, redirects are preferred to deletion, and I see no reason why this should be an exception. -- Ryan • (talk) • 00:56, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

 * Comment As far as I can tell no one has cited a valid reason as to why this article should be deleted rather than merged/redirected, so my inclination would be to close this VFD as a "keep" and have this discussion continue at Talk:Low-cost airlines in Asia unless there are further arguments that would justify a deletion. -- Ryan • (talk) • 13:24, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Outcome: Kept. -- Ryan • (talk) • 04:46, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Merge or redirect
As has been proposed in the VFD, this page should be merged or redirected. air travel on a budget sounds like a good target. Thoughts? Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:18, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * User:Wrh2, User:Andrewssi2, User:PrinceGloria, User:Pashley any thoughts on the matter? Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:56, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

 * I'd actually disagree, since air travel on a budget is not the same subject as LCC (Low cost carriers) that this article is covering.
 * I'd prefer a more targeted article on LCC's that gets rid of lists (these companies startup, merge and fall apart all the time) and focuses instead on the benefits and implications of budget airlines. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:30, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

 * Part of the problem is that more and more "legacy" carriers are now blurring the line. And some supposed low cost carriers (especially in the US) offer even more in terms of luggage, food and beverages on board, legroom and all the other things LCC are famous for charging extra... So how would you want to see our articles on the subject reorganized? Hobbitschuster (talk) 01:33, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

 * I'm actually not too concern with the 'organization' of the articles. The question regarding any article is whether it is useful or not. As it stands the present article is a list of budget airlines and not very useful and therefore I do support doing something with it.
 * Appreciate the line can be blurred, but just speaking as someone who has done work in this industry there are still significant differences between LCC and FSC (Full Service Carrier). I believe that when you say 'legacy' you mean a FSC that has created a separate LCC operational business, or otherwise a carrier that has split its business into both models (i.e. Aer Lingus) . --Andrewssi2 (talk) 02:18, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

 * While from the business point of view there might be a difference between what one would call an LCC or a legacy/FSC, the traveller couldn't care less. Same rules apply with both, and you can now book a fare covering nothing but a seat with many FSCs who'd otherwise still sell you a proper First Class on a long-haul flight. I see no added value in article proliferation. This should be "merged" with Air travel on a budget, but I guess I did mention earlier that I do not see anything in particular worth merging, it's just either repetition or outdated trivia. PrinceGloria (talk) 22:36, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

 * I would beg to differ. A traveler booking a flight on a LCC will experience many differences when booking a similar flight with a FSC. I'm not saying there absolutely must be a separate article for LCC, but I don't believe that the traveler 'couldn't care less'. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:46, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

(starting on the left again) Yes I agree there is a difference from airline to airline (I have flown on different airlines and ceteris paribus I would take Lufthansa over any of the others, but usually price trumps such considerations), but Low service (I refuse to use the marketing term "low cost" thy often aren't actually cheap, just a rip off) airlines and legacy airlines are now so intertwined in similarities that it becomes hard to differentiate them. Yes Ryanair certainly has a business model that differs from Lufthansa and the same may probably be said about some airlines in Asia. But outside of offering first or business class (which is a concern only to people who would not have needs to our guides anyway, as they tend to get the flights paid for them or are such frequent fliers that they could tell us new things, not the other way around) is there really such a big difference for the bulk of airlines? I have never flown to or in Asia, so I don't know which of the Ryanair type shenanigans are common there (which are btw covered in the air travel on a budget article and mentioned every time someone says Hahn), but what exactly do you propose? As it stands now the vfd was closed and it may not be wise to reopen it. Hence we are basically left with three realistic options aside from the "keep as is" non-option. Option a) replace the content with a redirect link. option b) identify worthy content in this article and copy it to the future redirect target than proceed like option a). Option c) update this article and if necessary expand it in a matter that it deserves to be called a good WV article. I think either a or b are the best options and the only thing that keeps me from doing it myself is waiting for consensus and the question where this redirect link should point to. Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:19, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

So yet another month has passed and we have not made any progress. What should be done? Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:30, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

 * I will wait a couple more days before redirecting to air travel on a budget. Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:21, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Low-cost airlines in Asia


text:
Talk:Discount airlines in Australasia

Domestic Airlines
I can see a reason for not including domestic airlines here, however if we decide to include domestic airlines, it is probably useful to label them as such. --(WT-en) Inas 18:22, 28 October 2008 (EDT)

Only really Australia
This article really only contains information about discount airlines operating to Australia. Its probably more relevant in the Australia article than expecting people to look here. Since this is the only article that still uses Australasia, it is a bit out of place. I see three options..

 * 1) Relocate the information to the Australia article, and remove this one entirely - my preferred.
 * 2) Rename the article as Discount airlines in Australia, and make no further changes - is there enough info to justify a full travel topic article?
 * 3) Rename the article as Discount airlines in Australia and New Zealand, and make no further changes - there is some commonality in airlines, but the chances are, it would need subheadings by country to make sense.
 * 4) Rename the article as Discount airlines in Oceania, and wait for additional content to arrive - the information would likely have to be grouped by country to make it relevant, but the article would remain consistent within the Discount airlines theme..

four options... i see four options...

--(WT-en) Inas 19:02, 16 November 2008 (EST)

 * I'd be fine with merging this into Australia. (WT-en) Jpatokal 23:22, 16 November 2008 (EST)
 * I'd support a merge as well. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 23:26, 16 November 2008 (EST)

Rehaul
If no-one has any objections, I'd like to actually include a list of airlines here again. I see that this page has been accused of Australia-centrism in the past, but I believe a large part of this is due to the simple fact that almost all of the discount airlines in the Australiasian region are Australian. 114.30.110.225 02:17, 3 November 2010 (EDT)

title: Talk:Discount airlines in Australasia


text:
Talk:Low-cost airlines in Europe

Removed Globespan
The airline just went out of business

Ryanair <-> Iceland
Does Ryanair really fly to Iceland? Isn't this perhaps being mixed up with the latest news that Germanwings is starting flights to Iceland? —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 77.190.27.195 (talk • contribs)

Article status
I think you need to read What is an article?. We don't normally do articles about airlines, although that might be a good idea. -- (WT-en) Evan 09:47, 7 Nov 2003 (PST)

Feel free to delete or modify excessively. It seemed to me that discount airlines are not well publicised and hence it would be worth while covering them. (WT-en) DD

 * I know that comment was made 5 months ago, but... Discount airlines not well publicized? Where do you live? It was THE tourism topic of 2003... -- (WT-en) Nils 08:50, 19 Apr 2004 (EDT)

Moved page
I went ahead and moved this to "European Discount Airlines." Despite the "no-relationship" disclaimer, I think we really need to avoid company-specific pages. They really don't fall under any of our article types but I think it's good info to have (and a nice article btw). I'm sure this issue will come up again in many different ways(WT-en) Majnoona

Consolidation
Ok Consolidated the Ryanair page into this one and added links to as many other European low cost airlines as I can think of (WT-en) DD

 * EXCELLENT job! What a good idea. We've gone from a couple of consumer-reports-style articles to a nice travel topic. If we clean up the prose on this a bit, I think it's a front-page article. -- (WT-en) Evan 13:43, 7 Nov 2003 (PST)

Moved page
I moved this article to a new name that's more inline, at least with respect to capitalization, with the article naming conventions. I also figured that "Discount airlines in Europe" kinda sounded like "Driving in Australia"; it might be a good pattern to continue. -- (WT-en) Evan 13:46, 7 Nov 2003 (PST)

Currency sign
To whoever wrote this article (sorry, bit new here so I don't know how to trace it back yet)...what is the currency of the cost figures mentioned? They are all just showing up as those funny "blank square" characters. I'm guessing as this is an article about airlines in Europe they're Euros, but I don't want to change it on an assumption just in case it's wrong (don't want to mislead anyone). NB. The Euro sign can be obtained (on my computer, at least) by typing CTRL+ALT+4. --(WT-en) sjc196 14:36, 7 Apr 2005, (GMT)

 * How you type the Euro sign is completely dependant on your keyboard layout. -- (WT-en) Nils 07:48, 8 Apr 2004 (EDT)

 * And how the Euro sign looks depends on your fonts. I think I need to update my Verdana. -(WT-en) phma 11:19, 8 Apr 2004 (EDT)

 * Euro sign (€) can be also inserted by typing &euro;. -- (WT-en) JanSlupski 10:28, 16 Apr 2004 (EDT)

 * Alt0128

Which currency and how to write it? Thanks for the (&euro) tip and for noting that Brussels spent a whole afternoon deciding that euro was to be written with a small "e" and that one euro was divided into "100 cent" without an "s". At least we understand it either way which is more than we can say for the "Global thinking" of the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand who persist in writing the $ (dollar sign) without stating which darned dollar they mean. An air-fare Toronto to Houston was quoted to me in dollars - Guess which type of dollars! Wrong it was in USD (or U$) as the quoter was American. Oz and NZ are just as bad and also have differing values. It is so easy to write U$, C$, A$ or N$ to clarify - that is unless you mean M$N which might just be the Argentine Peso!! -- User:(WT-en) Gari 18 Feb 2006, 16:15 GMT

The "Southwest model"
What is "the Southwest model", as in "both follow the Southwest model"? I live in the UK, have flown both EasyJet & RyanAir and this term is not familiar to me. 82.32.7.114 15:43, 12 Apr 2004 (EDT)

 * Southwest airlines in the United States, which originally operated mostly in the southwest of the US. They fly exactly one type of plane, and there is no reserved seating.  It's more like a bus.  They're cheap and they make a profit.  Web page probably needs to explain that a bit. -- (WT-en) Colin 18:27, 12 Apr 2004 (EDT)

Why Southwest? What is Southwest model? Whatever it is, why should it mentioned? What relation does domestic US airline (Southwest or whatever) have to international low cost carriers within Europe. Why should it or anything else for that matter from the US be used as benchmark for different operations in another part of the world (Europe), and in fact in a different civilization?

 * First, the phrase "Southwest Model" is meaningful to a significant number of English-speaking travellers. As above, I think this needs elaboration for numbers of English speakers who are not familiar with the phrase.  But generally, as a shorthand it is a reasonable thing to do -- it's not about whether the particular company in question is American.  For example, "Efficient Amtrak Model" would be nonsensical; whereas "Efficient European Rail Model" is quite meaningful.
 * Secondly, while you may not have been aware of Southwest's existence, it does affect you. The new European and Asian low-cost carriers are deliberately emulating Southwest -- and this is good for travellers who want to fly cheaply.  Southwest is essentially the only profitable and sucessful airline in the US. Which is to say Southwest is the only American carrier worth emulating.
 * Thirdly, while Europe may be a different civilization.. by the same logic Asian would be moreso. Both Asian and European low-cost carriers are all imitating Southwest. -- (WT-en) Colin 16:22, 9 Jan 2006 (EST)

easyJet's transfer policy
The article says:

 * Other airlines, such as easyJet, will transfer you for free onto another flight if the first one is late if you have left a gap of two hours between flights and they are both easyJet flights.

Is anyone able to substantiate this? easyJet's carrier regulations wrt to onward flights simply say:

 * If you have booked an onward flight with easyJet, this represents a separate contract. Please note that easyJet does not operate a connecting flight service, and therefore you will need to check-in with your luggage for each sector of your journey in accordance with the check-in requirements below. Consequently we advise that when booking an onward flight with easyJet, you allow at least two hours between the scheduled time of arrival of the incoming flight, and the scheduled time of departure of the onward flight.

This, of course, is not the same thing as what the article says, and if this is the extent of easyjet's policy, then the article is misleading. Anyone got a link to back it up? If not I'll most likely remove the snippet above in a week or so. -- (WT-en) Hypatia 12:19, 5 Oct 2004 (EDT)

 * When writing that article, I was citing this page on guardian.co.uk which featured a question & answer as follows;

 * If I am travelling, say, from Scotland to London, and have booked an onward flight with your airline but I miss the connecting flight because your first aircraft is delayed, will I incur any extra cost if getting on a later flight?

 * EasyJet: Free transfer to next available flight.

 * When travelling on a delayed flight from Belfast to Stansted last year, there were customer service agents booking people who had missed connections from Stansted onto flights later in the day. I would guess that what they are doing is transferring people onto later flights as a goodwill gesture if flights are flying empty, but they reserve the right not to. They are being a bit vague. (WT-en) Professorbiscuit 17:27, 7 Oct 2004 (EDT)

 * Thanks for the source. I suppose it might be best to put it as follows:

 * easyJet will sometimes transfer you for free onto another flight when the first one is late if you have left a gap of two hours between flights and they are both easyJet flights. However their [http://www.easyjet.com/EN/book/regulations.html#onwardflights carrier

regulations] do not guarentee this.

 * -- (WT-en) Hypatia 17:41, 7 Oct 2004 (EDT)

 * Updating page as per my draft above. -- (WT-en) Hypatia 05:20, 9 Oct 2004 (EDT)

Thius page should definitely be kept. As should the links to the particular airlines- as an American I am less than familiar with discount airlines in Europe, and googling "discount airlines in europe" basically leads to a fog of rip-off sites. I came to wikivoyage because I knew I would get the straight dope about it. And I did. I like trolling here for info- but so far this page has been the most useful for me.

Definition of "low cost"
What is the definition of a low-cost airline for this article? I'd like to add a few small airlines, such as OLT, which could be considered low-cost on certain routes where they fly cheaper than any other airline. This also applies to mainstream airlines like BMI, and Alitalia, as a couple of examples where they are sometimes cheaper than the lowcost competition for the same route. I would like to expand this but don't want to start an article on 'non-lowcost' airlines! -(WT-en) Wikibob | Talk 17:16, 2004 Nov 16 (EST)

FlyMatrix
Was trying to make searching connections more easy. Especially when searching for route that have no direct connection. Made script that imports data to huge HTML table, and added some simple javascipt tools for navigation.

Connection matrix can be found on my web page only, because HTML (styles, javascript) used there is not embedable in Wiki. --(WT-en) JanSlupski 16:13, 18 Feb 2005 (EST)
 * more information: (WT-en) FlyMatrix
 * connection matrix: http://www.juljas.net/flymatrix/

vfd discussion
Keep. Useful information. This article is unbelievably helpful. It would be a shame to see it deleted.
 * Please keep. I have found this article very useful.
 * Since Bus travel in Israel is forbidden, this article is also not allowed. --(WT-en) Daniel575 30 May 2006
 * Childish retaliatory VFD by someone unwilling to work within consensus. Keep. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 21:06, 29 May 2006 (EDT)
 * Keep. This is a well developed article. Wait out the 14 day process before removing VFD though. - (WT-en) Andrew Haggard (Sapphire) 21:07, 29 May 2006 (EDT)
 * Keep. Same as in previous entry.  Sigh... -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 21:14, 29 May 2006 (EDT)
 * Keep. This article was listed here as a retaliation for the vfd of the Egged Travels article, which is definitely not a reason for deletion. -- (WT-en) Ryan 22:52, 29 May 2006 (EDT)
 * Keep. As they say on Wikipedia, "don't disrupt wikipedia to make a point". -- (WT-en) Colin 23:13, 29 May 2006 (EDT)
 * Keep. Not a valid reason for deletion. (WT-en) Ricardo (Rmx) 09:27, 30 May 2006 (EDT)
 * Keep. I found this extremely helpful. (WT-en) Robby 1:18, 30 May 2006 (MST)
 * Keep. I also found this extremely helpful. I don't see what the problem with it might be.
 * please keep - very useful list of the cheapo airlines andogo advie abut useing them - impossible to find unbiased opiniona elsewhere
 * please keep this - it is a very useful set of links not found on standard search engines - indeed I wonder if the move to delete was not initiated by one of them!
 * Keep. it's awesome
 * Keep. Very useful and accurate. A great help to those of us in the Southern Lands.220.236.34.177 00:24, 1 June 2006 (EDT)
 * Keep. This is very useful information and has helped tremendously.  Has all European discount airlines on one page so you know what your options are.

 * Keep. I found this page both interesting and helpful.
 * Keep. Very useful!

Open Skies treaty
The 1992 Open Skies treaty has nothing to do with discount airlines. It's a disarmament agreement which establishes a program of unarmed aerial surveillance flights over the entire territory of its participants. I suppose the real legal framework enabling the development of discount airlines in Europe were some regulations or directives adopted by the (then) European Economic Community, but I'm not aware which ones. Wikipedia article on the 1992 Treaty on Open Skies (WT-en) MaartenVidal 13:35, 4 July 2006 (EDT)

Low cost airline resources
''I moved this section from the article; it's getting very heavy and tout-y and veering into Web-directory land, a definite non-goal. If someone has a good reason to put these back and is willing to separate the wheat from the chaff, please do, else let's let them sit for a while. --(WT-en) Evan 12:21, 6 December 2006 (EST)''

There are some very useful websites to use when booking connecting low cost airline flights (in alphabetical order):

 * Cheapflights.co.uk Price comparison for cheap flights out of the UK.
 * dohop.com cleverly composes multileg journeys based on low-cost airlines. Be careful when you plan journeys with connections! Lowcost airlines don't guarantee any time and not even the flight so put at least 3-4 hours between arrival and last check-in time (As the site suggests).
 * Eurovoli.com is a search engine for low cost flights from the UK to the rest of Europe.
 * flybilligst.com is a must if you're flying to or from Norway. The site lets you choose between the destinations of five low cost airlines. It then shows a graph with the prices for the next months, letting you easily select the cheapest day to fly. It is, however, in Norwegian, and seems not to have heard about Liverpool.
 * Flylc.com shows all European cheap flights on one screen and redirects to the low-cost airline operating the flight selected (Information site).
 * Flylowcostairlines.org Comprehensive search engine of low-cost airlines' flights, that enables to find direct, one-stop or two-stop connections.
 * Low Fare Flights, this UK site compares budget airfares on over 300 european routes, originating from the UK only.
 * momondo.com helps you find and compare prices across 200 airlines and travel agencies in realtime.
 * Openjet will find the cheapest way of getting between the 91 cities served by Easyjet, MytravelLite, BMIbaby, Basiq Air, HLX and Germanwings. Doesn't always work.
 * Opodo Joint airline company that sell spare seats and combines low cost with flagcarrier tickets.
 * fly.de Cheap flight tickets and combinations of several offers. The site gives an overview about flights from and in germany. Furthermore tickets in the whole world can be booked.
 *  Resetips is a site in Swedish and English useful for finding low cost flights to and from Sweden.
 * Skyscanner will find the cheapest way of getting between cities and has additional tools, such as fare graphs for a given route over a month and cheap weekend flights from any given city.

Also of use are some information sites (in alphabetical order):

 * air-scoop.com gathers all the main news published on Low Cost Carriers in Europe.
 * attitudetravel.com has information on 80 low cost and low fare airlines across Europe and further info on web-fares available on competing flag-carriers
 * BudgetFlightFinder.com lists some of the more obscure budget airlines that are missing elsewhere, particularly in Asia and the Middle East. Weak coverage in the Americas.
 * Euroflights.info provides information on low cost flights available to several hundred European destinations.
 * flycheapo.com is another excellent resource, and has up-to-date low-cost airline route news.
 * lowcostairlines.org lists all 61 European low cost airlines (plus many other low cost airlines all over the world)
 * Whichbudget.com Provides a regularly updated list of cheap flights with booking links, organised by airport. Concentrates on Europe, but covers some budget routes around the world. Be aware that an airline offering cheap fares on just a few routes (such as BMI) will be listed here under every airport it flies from, even if some routes are always very expensive.

 * I agree this page turned into a web directory of sites, but not listing anything is unhelpful too. I've found myself returning to the Talk page several times to lookup some of these sites. Is there some criteria we could use to list only a few sites? I've found the following to be very useful and I think they are popular: www.skyscanner.net www.bravofly.com www.momondo.com (WT-en) Gerdemb 11:21, 22 December 2006 (EST)
 * The listing is indeed very useful. I propose to reinsert the first part (the first 14 links). (WT-en) Alfio 17:16, 5 March 2007 (EST)

 * Most of these sites use EXACTLY THE SAME underlying search engine but they have a nice cover. I say you either LET ALL IN or TAKE ALL AWAY otherwise you are just helping some get popular and put others into obscurity (unless of course that is YOUR PLAN, or you are paid to do just that).  I Vote to take all LINKS OUT just like wikipedia has done. If someone wants to keep a few for their use JUST make a bookmark for yourself. (WT-en) George Kontopoulos 03:33, 14 November 2008 (EST)

Virgin Express
I rolled back the deletion of Virgin Express, but apparently the airline has merged with another to become Brussels Airlines. So, I've rolled back my rollback. --(WT-en) Evan 14:21, 5 April 2007 (EDT)

Flag Icons
It would be helpful it the airline list had flag icons to show where the companies serve, or are based. For example Air Berlin could have a little German flag next to it. Does Wikivoyage have them too?

 * No, we don't, and I don't like the idea very much — carriers like Ryanair have bases in half a dozen countries. (WT-en) Jpatokal 14:16, 25 June 2007 (EDT)

List of low cost airline hubs
What specifically is this list intended for? And why magical number "seventy"?
 * For these purposes, a low cost airline hub is an airport which provides more than seventy routes by the

Isn't it more natural from reader's point of view to find list of discount airlines operating from/to specific city on that city's article page? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 14:14, 22 August 2007 (EDT)

group airlines by their base country?
What if we group airlines by their base country? I see two reasons for that:
 * 1) primary: it will help to find airline for any specific point-to-point flight. First you check airlines basing in your departure country; if there's no luck, you also check airlines basing in your destination. Right now you have to search the article for the country you need, and hope you used the same writing as article's authors (like searching for French, France and Paris instead of just looking into France section), and the article has an up-to-date list of destinations.
 * 2) secondary: every airline is always based in one country. It means that every airline goes into a single section.
 * 3) another secondary: most of the times we use discount airlines for direct flights, not for complicated multi-country connections.
 * 4) yet secondary: it is not unusual that travelers fly from a country with no local discounters to a country with them. With the current list, even shortlisting discounters is really complicated.

Objections? Alternative ideas on making the list more usable and navigable? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 15:19, 24 September 2007 (EDT)

 * I plunged forward and implemented my suggestion. Does it look better now? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 17:10, 28 September 2007 (EDT)

 * Looks fine but what about airlines that operate between countries, neither of which is their base country? For example, FlyZoom (a Canadian company) also operates low cost flights between New York-JFK and Gatwick and San Diego and Gatwick. The base country listing system does not allow for that to be easily presented. With the coming open skies agreement, I expect a lot more of these third country flights. Perhaps the article should list all airlines that fly out of a European country (zoom would then be on the UK listing while RyanAir, MyAir, etc. etc. would be in multiple country listings). That way, if someone is searching for a list of discount airlines out of, say, Italy, they'll see all the choices available - not just the ones that base their operations in Italy. Also, that way, we don't have to have a list for "airlines based outside Europe", they'd just show up wherever they fly. --(WT-en) Wandering 15:36, 14 January 2008 (EST)

 * Trying to continue your thought, it would be quite logical to have that list of discount airlines flying from/to specific country in that country's article. But that way gives no single place for describing any given airline (and, judging by this article, we find such description somewhat useful for a traveler). BTW, this pops up related discussion: "Should we have articles on airlines?" --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 13:25, 26 October 2008 (EDT)

France-based discount airlines
Are there any discount airlines that are based in France? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 04:17, 26 September 2007 (EDT)

less likely to go bankrupt
> Centralwings ... generally makes use of LOT's fleet, and thus is probably safer (eg. less likely to go bankrupt)

Do we have examples of bankruptcies among discount airlines? How using national carrier's fleet makes the company safer in respect to bankruptcy? --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 04:30, 9 December 2007 (EST)

 * Countless discount airlines have gone bankrupt. Being owned fully or partly by a major/national airline means that they have access to a steady supply of capital and are thus less likely to go kaboom.  (WT-en) Jpatokal 06:29, 9 December 2007 (EST)

 * So the reason for higher safety is the fact that it is owned and funded by a well-established airline, not that discounter uses major's fleet, right?
 * If so, is it better for us to mention this observation in general overview rather than in details on a single airline? As far as I remember, many discounters are owned by a major airline. --(WT-en) DenisYurkin 07:07, 9 December 2007 (EST)

 * No, some LCCs (eg. Thailand's Nok Air, owned by THAI) use their parents' planes repainted and their maintenance facilities. I think it's worth noting for those that do.  (WT-en) Jpatokal 07:43, 9 December 2007 (EST)

Does RyanAir let you take on a winter jacket or does it count as baggage?
Does RyanAir let you take on a winter jacket or does it count as baggage? Usually I wear my jacket to keep my luggage lightweight and put a camera in the jacket pocket to keep the carry on luggage light weight. Does Ryanair let you do this?

Oh snap, we still have this?
When we first started dusting off and organizing articles on air travel content, we did delete a number of articles on "Airlines in the United States", "Airlines in Africa" and such for their no apparent value beyond holding a chest of quickly-expiring trivia better suited for specialist sites for geeks. Our destination guides usually provide a better idea of the available connections without focusing too much on the airlines providing them, and the general articles on flight topics seem to cover all possible interactions one might have with an airline sufficiently. Discussing a given line's meal plan on medium-haul flights does not seem to be the kind of thing we should be doing.

I totally forgot about this article still being in existence, and it seems to be quite long - can we see if there is any content that is actually useful information and does not duplicate the content of other articles before I move to VfD it? PrinceGloria (talk) 18:04, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

 * I am against deleting this, as low cost airlines in Europe are a) a very common phenomenon b) engage in some shenanigans that make flying with them complicated (which as per ttcf would indicate we include this info somewhere). Besides; the info in this article is more than just information on whether the kosher meal of Air France on their flight from Rio De Janeiro to Cape Town is edible. Would you than suggest we delete low-cost airlines period? Or merge all that into the already rather unwieldy flying on a budget article? Legacy carriers are self evident and all more or less the same. Low service airlines on the other hand make you print out a boarding pass to fly with no checked baggage from "London" Stansted to "Frankfurt" Hahn and unless you are aware of that, you are bound to get ripped off. Especially in Europe. Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:25, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

 * Low-cost airlines in Europe are not any different from low-cost airlines anywhere else, and we have that all covered in our articles pertaining to flying, no need to single out Europe or a given airline. We do advise regarding what you stated above in the appropriate articles. This one is just one more to take care of and decide whether some content belongs here or there (and thus leads us to provide a disservice to travellers by possibly not including some content in an article where it might belong or telling them to read too many articles - our series on flying is already long).
 * This article also has all the potential to collect unnecessary trivia (which is a disservice to travellers looking for useful info), be very subjective and possibly promoting or defaming a given airline and expire quickly - for instance, airberlin has long not been a low-fare carrier given what they charge me, provides free meals, takes my luggage for free (i.e. for the basic airfare) and actually two pieces of it since I have a status (show me another low-fare airline with status recognition, lounges and alliance membership). So today we might be feeling like writing some cool stuff we like or don't like about Ryanair and then it will linger on for three years since there are too many articles here to be updated often enough for the ever-changing world of airlines.
 * I will skim this article for content that is valuable and not included anywhere and move it to other articles whenever appropriate. Please join me in the effort. PrinceGloria (talk) 18:50, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

 * Maybe you should ask for a vote for deletion than? I see some of your points (though whether air berlin wants to be charter, low fares or legacy is one of the reasons they are closer and closer to bankruptcy each year), but if your argument is to delete the article, I suggest to have a vfd. I personally tend towards keeping it, because some low service airlines are actually not found by flight search aggregators and knowing which exist may be of service to many a traveler. Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:40, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

 * Some airlines or particular connections are not found by some search engines at all, regardless of how you'd classify them, so the best we can do is refer the traveller to Wikipedia, which has an excellenty-maintained list of all scheduled destinations operated by all airlines from a given airport in its article there (so we do not have to do it!)
 * As a sidenote, I believe that AB's issue is not as much what newspapers perceive as their strategy as awful operational management in many ways, which makes any strategy impossible to be executed properly (and, as a side symptom, leaves your bags stranded in strange places).
 * While filing a VfD, I also invite you to help me brush up Air travel on a budget, which is in equally sorry state. PrinceGloria (talk) 20:00, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

 * Well that's what having Hartmut Mehdorn in any management capacity at your company does... He also oversaw the disaster of the near-privatization of Deutsche Bahn and later took over the disaster that is Berlin's new airport (opening date only available through time travel, I guess...) which meant he had basically sued himself when he still was at air Berlin... Anyway, I have already written some of the stuff on air travel on a budget and see the problem of where this article wants to be going... I for one am under the (maybe mistaken) impression that while you can save some money (especially on short routes) the days of cheap aviation are over and not coming back soon and there is only so much you can do, especially in oligopolies like most US routes or some transatlantic connections... There is however a website where you pay people to find you the cheapest fare... Or so I've heard... Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:09, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

 * You guys don't have to do a Vfd to merge this with Air travel on a budget, if that's what you want to do. I'm disinclined to take a pro or con view on the wisdom of a merger and would tend to defer to you Europeans on this topic. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:39, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

 * It has nothing to do with being "European". Simply look at the comments I made as the last edit to this article and see whether you agree. Our side discussion about the fate of AB is irrelevant, we're just enjoying our geeky sides :D PrinceGloria (talk) 06:31, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

 * I'm just saying, do the merge if you like; you don't need to (mis?)use Vfd for that purpose. Just do it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:54, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

 * We also have continental articles about low service airlines for everywhere except low cost airlines in Antarctica (which would be a rather dull article, I suppose). How shall we deal with them?Hobbitschuster (talk) 12:27, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

 * Same. We deleted "Airlines in ..." as I said above, those are not different. BTW, Polar flights would actually be a useful and interesting guide. PrinceGloria (talk) 14:21, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

 * Than please raise the issue in the relevant talk pages. here, here and here Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:39, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

 * I will, in due course. As per the article at hand, is there anything else to merge into Air travel on a budget, or can we consider those two merged? PrinceGloria (talk) 14:16, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

A funny thing is that at one point somebody considered this article worthy of "guide" status (low cost airlines on the other hand is "usable") and now it seems to be consensus to unceremoniously dump this article in the trash... Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:19, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

 * You would be surprised at some of the articles that were once elevated to "guide" in the past years of WV, and some of them still have not been stripped of this "status" - as it has been pointed out in another discussion, not many people care and statuses are rarely updated. In the meantime, our articles on Flying went through a major makeover, after which the entire core series has been deemed appropriate for the Main Page. PrinceGloria (talk) 14:24, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

 * Ok, wakey wakey everybody - anything here still that is not covered @ Air travel on a budget or destination guides where applicable? PrinceGloria (talk) 05:30, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

So... what do we do now?
Should we have a vfd? Let this "guide" that is an embarrassment for the very word rot in limbo? Nothing? Try to maintain and update this article, giving it a shift in direction if necessary? Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:16, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

 * Merge to Air travel on a budget as per the above discussion. PrinceGloria (talk) 06:50, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

 * The effort to merge seems to have stalled... Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:04, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

If it survives the vfd
What do we do?

For starters, there are over sixty external links still in the old format. (Most of) the information on this page is outdated. And at the end of the article we have and uninspired list of "low cost airline hubs" of questionable accuracy and up-to-dateness... Given that Ryanair is notorious for changing "hubs" on a moment's notice (usually whe local politicians wisen up and cut subsidies, as has happened in Lübeck, in Magdeburg, in Altenburg...) it might be difficult to keep such a list up to date even if it were brought into a better format. The rest of the article might have a little content that might be merged to air travel on a budget, but not much... Hobbitschuster (talk) 00:24, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

VFD discussion

 * This one has still been the most live-like of several undead articles on this topic. It may be salvageable, though the lack of edits to it in eight months definitely indicates otherwise Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:43, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

 * Keep. There is a lot of info & much of it looks to be useful. Pashley (talk) 08:26, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

 * Keep. This article has guide status. AlasdairW (talk) 09:27, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: the article has been rated guide some time ago - this does not mean it currently satisfies reasonable or current criteria for guide status. Furthermore it is outdated in big parts due to lack of edits Hobbitschuster (talk) 11:23, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

 * I would rather that it is kept, but otherwise, then Redirect to Air travel on a budget, and this applies to the other similar articles. The article gets enough views to be worth pointing readers at something on the topic. AlasdairW (talk) 03:56, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

 * Delete - please look into it in more detail - all of the info is duplicate with our other flying-related articles. I did an analysis in the article's talk page and made comments in the body. PrinceGloria (talk) 08:15, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

 * Delete - Seriously would anyone find this useful when traveling to Europe? It is just a mass dump of information for the sake of it, and not with the interests of the traveler in mind. The 'useful' info' contained has been copied to other more worthwhile articles. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 10:09, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

 * Do not delete - I see no valid reason for deleting this article rather than redirecting it. If the content is duplicated elsewhere as PrinceGloria states then redirect it to Flying or another appropriate target. -- Ryan • (talk) • 00:54, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

 * Comment As far as I can tell no one has cited a valid reason as to why this article should be deleted rather than merged/redirected, so my inclination would be to close this VFD as a "keep" and have this discussion continue at Talk:Low-cost airlines in Europe unless there are further arguments that would justify a deletion. -- Ryan • (talk) • 13:24, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Outcome: Kept. -- Ryan • (talk) • 04:46, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Merge / Redirect / Whatever discussion
So apparently this article cannot be deleted because of... Something. It has been quite clearly established by several users that this article serves no conceivable purpose in its current form and the two (three if mine is included) delete votes speak volumes as to that. So what should we do? Is there any credible and useful merge or redirect target? I don't think the current laundry list with badly outdated information serves any purpose and I doubt a redirect to flying would do much good, but surprise me... Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:10, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Pashley, AlasdairW, PrinceGloria, Andrewssi2, Ryan what do you think about redirecting to air travel on a budget? Oh and the redirect for Ryanair should be deleted as a violation of our "no articles for individual companies" policy. Is there any content in this here article that you think could be merged? Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:00, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * In case anybody would have any doubts in light of what I have written multiple times - you have my full support for "merging" into air travel on a budget (not that I see any content worth merging). PrinceGloria (talk) 22:37, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * How long should I wait before replacing the page content with a redirect to said page? Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:10, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I think that the first half of the article is generally OK as it is. The list of airlines and hubs is unnecessary and will quickly date - destination articles are the place saying who flys where. If you want to merge with air travel on a budget, then fine, but be prepared to spend some time going through para by para to see what is already in the other article. I think that it worth having some specific advice about Ryanair and EasyJet as they are such big operators and non-Europeans may not be aware of the differences in attitudes of the two companies. Connecting flights only needs to mention airlines that do support connections. AlasdairW (talk) 23:22, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Have you had a look at the comments in the source of this article? Hobbitschuster (talk) 23:26, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I have now seen "Exactly, it's all there!" next to "see also: air travel on a budget". I don't agree that everything in this article is there - I could find no mention of Ryanair or EasyJet, and connections could be expanded with some of the stuff here. AlasdairW (talk) 23:49, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * PrinceGloria do you want to respond to this? AlasdairW I would like you to be a bit more specific. Which non obvious things specifically do you think should be put into our air travel on a budget article? Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:57, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The stuff to be merged includes the connecting tickets info for EasyJet, Air Berlin, Norwegian, German Wings, Flybe, Smart Wings, Iceland Express, and the sections on EasyJet, Ryanair and Air Berlin (these be condensed). AlasdairW (talk) 23:37, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The info on "connecting tickets" is redundant - most airlines covered simply do not offer those. For the rest who do, everything is just as with any other airline. Whether an airline offers a connecting ticket or not is to be found when booking, and is of interest only when a particular itinerary is explored and a connecting ticket becomes an option, whereas it will show as such.
 * Information on airBerlin is woefully outdated, they are not "low cost" in terms of either fares or operational model. Ryanair is a lot of fluff as well, nowadays tickets advertised as EUR 1 actually do cost EUR 1 (checked multiple times myself) and Ryanair is not an oddball airline anymore. No need to discuss it separately from all the rest. Same for EasyJet I guess. No value added for the traveller, just a place to vent for the amateur columnist who did not find a travel website for their ramblings. PrinceGloria (talk) 00:56, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
 * So to revive this discussion, what should we do? I don't want to just plunge forward, but nobody else seems to be doing much... Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:29, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Low-cost airlines in Europe


text:
Talk:Discovery Bay (Hong Kong)

Discovery BaY has limited tourism potential and I would recommend that this page is moved to form part of Lantau

title: Talk:Discovery Bay (Hong Kong)


text:
Talk:Disney Cruise Line

VFD Discussion
A cruise ship and a cruise line respectively.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 05:47, 11 April 2010 (EDT)
 * Obviously valuable information. It needs to be merged somewhere but where would you propose putting it?  We never came to a clear consensus last time we discussed cruise lines.  (WT-en) LtPowers 08:39, 11 April 2010 (EDT)

 * The same user has made edits here inserting names of cruise lines, I guess with the intention of starting an article for each. I would err on the of caution as I can see this becoming a slippery slope. Airline articles likewise - I am not quite sure why we have them. With articles about Cruise lines and Airlines, what next? Hotel groups? Bus companies? Tour agencies? It feels very slippery indeed.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 09:24, 11 April 2010 (EDT)

 * Delete. I am definitely in agreement with Burmesedays here, this is a very slippery slope. And I really see no good information in either of these articles, especially an article about a cruise ship. I think we should take a very hard line here; the Cruise ships article does a good job covering the general topic, and we should leave it at that - leave the specific cruise line/ship info to other sources, as that info is going to be 1) too much, 2) too unmaintainable, and 3) too undefined (as in, where exactly do we draw the line?) for Wikivoyage. (WT-en) PerryPlanet Talk 15:47, 11 April 2010 (EDT)

It's probably best that we revisit Wikivoyage_talk:What_is_an_article before coming to decisions on these. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 20:16, 11 April 2010 (EDT)

 * I have re-opened that discussion.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 22:10, 11 April 2010 (EDT)

The issues around cruise ship articles still aren't resolved, leaving these two nominations in a somewhat ambiguous state. The discussion on Project:What is an article seemed to be moving in a direction that would lead to creating broader articles with redirects for smaller topics like these, so would anyone be opposed to treating these two articles as "keep" and then converting them to redirects if/when that discussion reaches some consensus? -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 01:00, 31 May 2010 (EDT)

Result: Kept. Policy discussions on cruise lines are ongoing. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 00:20, 3 June 2010 (EDT)

Moved here from the traveller's pub
Could someone check this edit? An IP editor has repeatedly made these changes with a number of comments such as "could have been written by the Mouse himself" and "Revert to less promotional language", and I have reverted on the basis of Project:Tone. Despite my invitations to discuss the issue, no discussion has been forthcoming. Am I in the wrong here? (WT-en) LtPowers 21:05, 24 February 2011 (EST)

 * Your reverts seem fine, particularly if the anonymous user is unwilling to discuss. I took a stab at restoring most of the changes, but left in the references to "Canadian and US" customs since they seemed relevant. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 23:06, 24 February 2011 (EST)

Merge/Redirect?
I read through this article. It's quite informative; however, similarly informative articles could be written about every other cruise line, and I thought I correctly understood site policy to preclude articles about individual cruise lines (or airlines, etc.). What makes Disney Cruise Lines an exception to the rule?

Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:47, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

 * Wikivoyage talk:What is an article -- Powers (talk) 02:03, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

 * I read through that entire discussion. I think that opinion was running more against than for this article, but what it amounts to is that, as you argued, the Disney Line is an exception because it's mostly about what's on board, not about visiting ports of call or looking at scenery visible from the ship. I still think Peter (Southwood)'s proposal of Cruise ships/Disney Line might be better nomenclature. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:12, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

 * Why? That would be horrible for SEO and not the name under which people would expect to find it. Powers (talk) 22:58, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

 * I'll point out that the current name would redirect to the new name, but I'm not motivated to argue about this article's name. The main thing is that it's important to have a clear record of why this is an exceptional case in which a single cruise line can have its own article, and I'm satisfied that that's been established. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:31, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Update
The article should really be updated as they have 3 new ships arriving in 2021, 2022, and 2023. Also the get in about the passport in incorrect as you are not required to have a passport on a closed circuit trip i.e; leaving domestically and returning domestically. Only time you will need your passport is if you are on a one way trip to Spain or their other one way international destinations. Disney does however recommened you bring your passport as it will allow you to get home from an international port should anything happen to you. Otherwise you will have to go to an embassy to get a rushed emergency passport. Also Disney's Magical Express does take care of your bags if you are taking the Magical Express back to MCO, they will submit it through customs and it will meet you on your plane. You do have to go through customs but it a quick process only having to provide your id and customs declaration fourm. --Clarkcj12 (talk) 18:42, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

I agree with this, I don't particularly understand why no one has replied to, or bothered doing this, after almost 3 years. I'll do that right away. Also, because of COVID, their maiden voyages have been pushed back to 2022, 2024, and 2025. Also, there is going to be a second private destination, called Lighthouse Point, it's about 700 acres and is in the works to open in late 2022 or early 2023. SewChicago (talk) 17:35, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Disney Cruise Line