text:
Talk:Chichen Itza

We just returned from seeing the ruins and it should be noted that the government is doing its best to get them listed as one of the new 7 Wonders of the World. As such, there is no more climbing on the temple this year. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) Vsurg (talk • contribs) 1 Jan 2007

We recently visited Chichen Itza areound the Christmas Holidays 2009. I had been there about 5+ years before. I can't tell you how disappointed I was that it was turned into a flea market. I'm not talking outside the site but literally inside the archeological site itself. There were vendors selling their stuff along the paths to different pyramids. It was difficult to take in the wonder of it when you had people trying to sell you hankies,masks,drums,etc. as you're trying to appreciate the site. I don't know what the powers to be are thinking letting this go on. I personally would not go back. It really does take away from it. It was mentioned that the government had a hand in this. Wrong way to go!!

 * Thank you for the new information, please incorporate it in the article, (WT-en) ClausHansen 23:40, 14 January 2010 (EST)

The municipal and estate governments have converted Chichen Itza in a flea market, very noisy and dirty. It is not what used to be. It is definitely a must see sighting in your trip to Yucatan, but try to spare enough time to rather visit Uxmal, which reminds the glorious days of Chichen Itza, impressive archeological ruins, much more tourist friendly and absolutely no vendors inside the archeological site. I hope the government soon realizes how damaging is to Chichen Itza's image the populist approach it has followed by allowing vendors inside the site.

Alternative banner for this article?
I created a new alternative banner for this article (I initially created it first and foremost so that it would be used at the top of the parallel article in the Hebrew edition of Wikivoyage, yet I later decided to also suggest that the English Wikivoyage community would consider using it here as well). So, which banner do you prefer having at the top of this article? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 08:28, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I prefer the top one, because the lede image is of the bottom one. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 11:59, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Alternative. We can always change the lede image. --Comment by Selfie City  (talk about my contributions ) 14:41, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree with SelfieCity. —Granger (talk · contribs) 15:10, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Alternative 100%! --ButteBag (talk) 23:26, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The current looks like some concrete monstrosity, while the alternative is clearly Chitzen Itza. --Comment by Selfie City  (talk about my contributions ) 23:40, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm going to chime in and say I like the alternative one better. It has more vibrant colors and looks more like Chichen Itza. DethDestroyerOfWords (talk) 13:54, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Done. —Granger (talk · contribs) 01:14, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Chichen Itza


text: Talk:Chichibu-Tama-Kai National Park

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

title: Talk:Chichibu-Tama-Kai National Park


text:
Talk:Chidambaram

I had a hard time finding info on Pichavaram when it was added as a stub, but Google turned up an article in the Hindu about Pichavaram. I tried to extract relevant info into this article. --(WT-en) Evan 14:00, 29 December 2006 (EST)

title: Talk:Chidambaram


text:
Talk:Chikuma

Usable
If someone could suggest some more places to Sleep we could bump this up to at least usable, not far from guide status actually. (WT-en) texugo 21:44, 30 August 2011 (EDT)

Get around by bus
I'm going to remove the bus times, as I think the clutter they add outweighs their usefulness, but I'll preserve them here for posterity's sake. (WT-en) texugo 02:03, 3 September 2011 (EDT)

From Yashiro Station

 * No. 1. at 7:05, 8:58, 10:47, 13:43, 15:48 and 18:27, goes south along the east side of the Chikuma river to Chikuma Station, Togura Station, Kamiyamada, and then north along the west side of the river to Yawata and Inariyama, then back to Yashiro station.
 * No. 2. at 7:22, 9:38, 11:22, 14:11, 16:13 and 18:30, the same route as No. 1 above, but in the opposite direction.
 * No. 3. at 8:28, 10:52, 14:32, 17:24 and 18:42, goes to the Anzu no Sato (Apricot Village) area. Some buses in the middle of the day also go past the Chikuma City Council Office.
 * No. 5. at 7:05, 8:37, 10:20, 12:10, 14:52, 16:40, 18:14, and 19:13, and going to JR Obasute Station via Inariyama and Yawata
 * No. 6. at 8:20, 11:45, 14:00, 16:14, and 18:26 and gong to Inariyama and Oodahara

From Chikuma Station

 * No. 4. at 8:18, 10:45, 14:15 and 16:40, goes to Yashiro Station, then across the river to JR Obasute Station, then back to Chikuma Station; and departing Chikuma Station at 9:35, 12:55, 15:34 and 17:50, following the same route as above but in the opposite direction.

From Chikuma City Council Togura branch

 * No. 7. at 8:11, 9:55, 12:17, 14:15, 15:46, 17:10 goes to Kamiyamada, Togura Station and JR Obasute Station
 * No. 8. at 8:30, 9:52, 11:21, 13:40 and 15:30 goes to Goka and Togura Station.
 * No. 9. at 6:40, 7:45, 8:35, 9:20, 10:47, 13:20, 14:47, 16:13, 16:55, 18:02, 19:07 and 19:41 goes to Togura station by various routes; and departing Togura station at 7:25, 8:16, 9:00, 10:30, 11:53, 13:55, 15:15, 16:40, 17:40, 18:25, and 19:26 to returns to Chikuma City Council Kamiyamada branch office, again by various routes.

title: Talk:Chikuma


text:
Talk:Chile

General
For future reference the Project:CIA_World_Factbook_2002_import is at Talk:Chile/CIA_World_Factbook_2002_import.

The apparent mispeeling "Antartica" occurs in a Spanish phrase. Is it correct? -(WT-en) phma
 * "Antartica" is correct in Spanish. See for an example.

Pisco sour is peruvian. There was a sentence wich said:"....pisco sour (the national drink)". That's a fake. Anyway, if you don't believe me. Please go to www.es.wikipedia.org and you'll sea. Please don't confuse people. Pisco sour is PERUVIAN.
 * Actually, I believe there is a version of pisco sour for both Peru and Chile, both being slightly different. This came from a a resident of Santiago. Also, Wiki even makes a mention of this (very clearly): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pisco_sour

In reality, the term "Pisco" was internationally trade-marked by Chile, so legally pisco is chilean. It is also made in Peru, but they don´t own the patent. There is no need to type in CAPS, when the law is on your side! —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 200.126.125.66 (talk • contribs)

 * Pisco is Chilean by trademark, Pisco Sour is a Peruvian cocktail, in which pisco is one ingredient. Please sign your posts, so it's clear who is writing what. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 00:38, 26 July 2009 (EDT)

Cities and Other Destinations
Help! I have almost finished a regional map for Chile. The geography makes this an incredibly tough map to get right. There is barely enough space to show roads, let alone place names. Can somebody who knows Chile (that certainly is not me) weed down the mass of cities and other destinations listed in the article to a sensible list of a maximum 9 of each please. I will then try to show all of them on the map. To get the ball rolling, it would seem to me these are must haves:
 * Cities:
 * Santiago
 * Concepcion
 * Puenta Arenas
 * Antofagasta
 * Valparaiso
 * Arica
 * Puerto Montt

--(WT-en) Burmesedays 03:56, 16 January 2010 (EST)
 * Other Destinations:
 * Easter Island
 * Torres del Paine National Park
 * Villarrica

 * I have uploaded the map. Once there is a sensible list of cities and other destinations I will add them all. I hope we have a Wikivoyager who knows Chile well to help with this. The article has clearly been very unloved. Did not even have an undersand section. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 10:05, 16 January 2010 (EST)

Who deleted Temuco from the city's list?
I don't understand why Temuco doesn't deserve to be in the list if it is one of the most important Chilean cities. Moreover, the city has an important history and it is the threshold to awesome places.

 * It can be in the cities list, as long as there are no more than 9 places listed :-) Globe-trotter (talk) 01:50, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Earthquake at sea, tsunami, evacuation
M8.2 - 95km NW of Iquique, Chile. Do we need a warning in the article? Pashley (talk) 13:17, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
 * The tsunami advisory has been cancelled. I believe the danger is past unless things something else hits. Texugo (talk) 17:50, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Unknown currency notation
I wonder why we came up with "CLP$" as currency notation for Chile. Actually, no one around here uses this. Everything is priced with just "$" ... of course meaning pesos - "$3,000". And when spoken, they just say "pesos".

Should we therefore maybe move from "CLP$300" to "300 pesos" to have travellers not burdened with a weird notation that can nowhere be found?

Cheers, Ceever (talk) 00:03, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

 * I assume it was done to provide clarity between US$ and Chilean $. I assume that as in other places in South America, tourists will encounter some prices in US$ (tours, expensive hotels), so disambiguation makes sense. Using "pesos" works as well, and may be clearer than using a made-up symbol like CLP$. Ground Zero (talk) 02:42, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
 * It is the ISO code for the currency, so is method to distinguish. How about giving ? --Traveler100 (talk) 06:56, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Hiking trail
Seen in another guide: Chile Opens 1,700-Mile Hiking Trail Connecting 17 National Parks Pashley (talk) 14:49, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

 * Chile’s new Route of the Parks in Patagonia is the most beautiful road in the world Pashley (talk) 04:09, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

12-hour or 24-hour clock?
Which is more commonly used? Ground Zero (talk) 18:16, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:06, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Valdivia en Imágenes.jpg

Covid and Santiago protests
The warning box is still about the date hike protests. I assume, Covid has by now overtaken them. Can someone edit accordingly, please? Hobbitschuster (talk) 09:49, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:49, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Skyline Concepción, Chile.jpg

 * It seems the image is uploaded by somebody who just found the image. I suppose we can get another similar image. –LPfi (talk) 08:47, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Yep. Not too hard. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 09:09, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Sleep - VAT outdated?
Showing the receipt I received on entry of the country, I was exempted from the 19% VAT at my last hostel, even though I payed in pesos. This is also mentioned in the Get In section. Can anyone confirm, that the dependency of payment with foreign currency is outdated?

I'll also consult my host, if I again stay some place. Carroll D. (talk) 16:44, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

 * BUMP! Does somebody know anything more? –LPfi (talk) 09:50, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Memorising textual traffic signs
says:
 * "If you cannot read or speak Spanish, you must take the time to memorize the meaning of the most common signs and markings"

How do you do that? How do you know what such signs there are and which are most important?

Getting a grasp of local traffic signs before driving should be obvious, but a list of the most important traffic sign texts (not necessarily the most common ones) would be very useful. Do we have some such list to point to? I think we at least should have an infobox on the important ones, i.e. those that you should understand to avoid dangerous situations or where you cannot just be especially careful instead of following the specific instructions.

–LPfi (talk) 06:52, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Chile


text:
Talk:Chilika Lake

what is the distance from puri? means of communication? what is the fair? all other tourist spots there?

Mangalajodi
Hi, I've added a bit about the project I am working on, Mangalajodi Ecotourism, and I'm trying to be fair. I think it should be included as it is a really worthy project, as we try to empower the villagers instead of funneling out the money for ourselves. I am pretty new to this, and if someone objects, please respond!

Chilika not "Chilka"
The name of the lake, unofficially and officially (1) and official portal) is "Chilika" and not "Chilka". Requesting editors not to change it back. --Psubhashish (talk) 11:02, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

title: Talk:Chilika Lake


text:
Talk:Chimayó

I don't object to a Chimayó article (quite the contrary, thanks for starting it), but the Easter pilgrimage shouldn't just be mentioned here. The pilgrims come from a remarkably wide area and cover amazing distances. Both as an interesting phenomenon and -- significantly -- as a matter of safety, the regions (North Central (New Mexico) and Sangre de Cristo Mountains) should definitely contain this text as well as this article. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 19:17, 3 March 2008 (EST)
 * Fair enough! (WT-en) Texugo 19:18, 3 March 2008 (EST)

title: Talk:Chimayó


text:
Talk:Chimney Rock National Historic Site

Notice
Notice in these pictures how much Chimney Rock has eroded.

 * 1849
 * 1929
 * 1930s
 * Today
 * Fallen Fragments

Extra Park Information
The park offers one photo opportunity after another with all of its breathtaking sights, and has been featured in major motion pictures such as "Last Of The Mohicans". You can spend a day, a week, or perhaps just the afternoon hiking the trails or enjoying the scenic views that the park has to offer. (WT-en) Waterfallsrus


text:
Talk:China

Different types of police
Why is it useful for travellers to understand the differences between different types of police? The text in the article doesn't give any indication of how someone would use this information, and in more than two years in China, the only time I had to worry about what kind of police I was talking to was when going to the PSB for registration. I would assume travellers should act the same way around all police – should I act differently around PAP compared to PSB police? Is it only okay to ask some types of police for help and not others? —Granger (talk · contribs) 22:25, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's important to know the details about the differences, but since both the PSB and PAP have law enforcement powers, I think it is useful for tourists to be able to recognise both of them by their uniforms. If you look at our articles on the United States of America, Canada and Australia, we also describe the different kinds of police you are likely to encounter. If you are the victim of a crime, it is certainly helpful to know what uniforms police officers wear so you can approach them for help. And also, if one type of security officer is more likely to be professional and less likely to be corrupt than another, it is certainly helpful for tourists to know that when they need to seek help. The dog2 (talk) 22:33, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Okay, makes sense. I think the section may be more detailed than necessary but I can see the value of what you're saying. —Granger (talk · contribs) 22:48, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I've tried to make some tweaks to focus on what is important for travellers to know. 廣九直通車 was the one who originally wrote that section, so I'm also pinging him here to have a look and give his opinion. The dog2 (talk) 01:23, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I think the current version still isn't very helpful. The section says that private security officers dress similarly to the police and that the city police wear uniforms varying by city – I guess some of them have peaked caps and blue shirts like the civilian police (although not identical ones). I would like some definite way of recognising the "helpful and professional" corps, such as (I assume) images of their badges.
 * What about other people in uniform, such as bus and train station officials, are they also helpful? What about private security guards? I assume the city police should be avoided, and probably private security guards in some contexts A discussion on this would be useful: if you need help and see a uniformed person, when should you approach them and when should you turn elsewhere?
 * –LPfi (talk) 06:20, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Oops, I didn't see "the characters 中国武警 at the top of the insignia patch on their left sleeve". A bit difficult for those not reading Chinese, but still something. –LPfi (talk) 06:26, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, it doesn't look like there are good pictures of Chengguan on Wikimedia commons. Chengguan have some law enforcement responsibilities, but aren't actually police officers and aren't allowed to arrest people. They mainly do things like asking street hawkers to move when they are blocking the way. Unfortunately, there have been incidents of Chengguan using violence to get these street hawkers to move, including at least one where the hawker was beaten to death.

 * Since you live in China, would you by any chance have a good photo of a Chengguan officer that we could use so people can recognize them? The dog2 (talk) 11:51, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Well, I wouldn't normally take photos of law enforcement officers but I happen to have a friend who works as a Chengguan officer so perhaps I may be able to get a photo of him in uniform later. I'll let you know if I do. He works in another city, so it may be a while before I see him. STW932 (talk) 12:32, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * And by the way, what's your view on the way the section on law enforcement is written? I don't think we should paint a board stroke over all Chengguan, because there are certainly good ones as well, but it seems that there are more complaints about chengguan brutality than public security police brutality. Also, do you have advice on how can an English-speaking foreigner communicate with police officers if they need help? It's hard for me to give advice on this because I speak Chinese so I don't have the communication issue that most Western tourists visiting China will have. The dog2 (talk) 12:59, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * In general I don't have a problem with the way that section is written but I too wonder whether we could reword the paragraph about Chengguan slightly so as not to appear to be painting them with a broad brush, though it's certainly true that Chengguan have a bad reputation. Regarding your last question, I speak Chinese too, having learnt the language back in the 1990s, and I'm not sure what I'd do if I didn't except maybe get help from friends and colleagues. STW932 (talk) 01:40, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * When I lived in Shenzhen, a couple of non-Chinese-speaking family members visited me, and they had some success using Google Translate to communicate with store clerks etc. Something like that might work for asking police for help too, at least in simple situations. —Granger (talk · contribs) 06:50, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * This might be a bit antithetical and feel free to ignore, but should we specifically recommend certain translation apps that are more accurate than others? For Italian, per se, I wouldn't hesitate to use DeepL even though it can produce some mistakes, but as someone who knows almost zero Chinese, I would feel left in the dark if I had to interact with police with the advice simply being use online translation (or something similar – I think you get what I mean). -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 07:00, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I think the development in this field is quite rapid, so our recommendations may miss current developments. There is also a risk that the tools that are best at translating have other problems, such as spying on you and your environment. I would prefer to use more general language on translation apps, such as pointing out common pitfalls, which one might be able to check for or at least watch out for. This might be best done in a travel topic article on such apps (perhaps also touching on machine translated material – I note many Finnish sites have substituted their English pages with a link to a translation engine). –LPfi (talk) 08:26, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I guess we could do a bit of both? From what I've heard, Google Translate does a rather funky job when translating between English and Chinese (which is why I'm not fond of overly vague wording). -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 08:29, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:China


text:
Talk:Chinatown

Copy of VFD Discussion, July 2009
This seems like a useless disambiguation. Does Wikivoyage really aim to list EVERY Chinatown in the world? (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 19:22, 13 July 2009 (EDT)
 * No, but we should certainly list the ones for which we have articles. =)  (WT-en) LtPowers 20:08, 13 July 2009 (EDT)

 * Keep. It's an odd disambiguation, but better to have the links than not, both for the odd search and possibly for our own SEO. And actually, this one is a borderline travel topic. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 20:53, 13 July 2009 (EDT)

 * Delete. The question here is whether this is a true disambiguation, or whether it is just the start of a list of attractions of a particular type.  If it is just a list, which I think it inevitably will be, is it one of true interest to travellers, or is it just a Wikipedia style obsessive list making type of list?  --(WT-en) inas 21:37, 15 July 2009 (EDT)

 * I think Inas is right, and Wikipedia already has a list. See here . Our "Chinatown" page is definitely moving to mirror the Wikipedia page as articles grow and are added (I added some myself to see what it would look like prior to the Wikipedia search). As far as helping the traveller goes, maybe we should give the travellers a little credit. Someone searching for a Chinatown would likely put the city in the search with it. If they don't, and they are just searching in the cosmos for any old Chinatown then I would question the seriousness of their travel plans. If it were made into a travel topic, then what sort of information would we add to make it useful? The name "Chinatown" is probably as good of a description as any. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 01:01, 25 July 2009 (EDT)

 * The wp list contains loads of travel-irrelevant junk. (I've heard rumors that a Baltimore Chinatown did at one time exist, but I'm skeptical of even that.) The current page is more useful (and interesting), since it only links to Chinatowns that we actually cover.

 * Our policy on disambiguation pages gives When destinations share identical names as one of the three cases when such pages can be used. This is clearly such a case—Chinatown is place in NYC as well as a place in Chicago, D.C., etc.  I don't see any reason to delete it—a coherent collection of blue links like that may actually raise our search engine profile with people doing vague google searches for "chinatown".  --(WT-en) Peter Talk 05:08, 25 July 2009 (EDT)

 * As long as we keep it to articles that we actually have, rather than any city that could be said to have a Chinatown, I think this disambiguation page is necessary and useful, just like Downtown. (WT-en) LtPowers 10:06, 25 July 2009 (EDT)

 * I can't believe Wikivoyage has a Downtown disambiguation. A little embarrassing... Even the small town I am from has a "downtown" area. That's about as useful as creating a disambiguation page for McDonalds and listing every city with a McDonalds. So the real rationale for having these pages is to get Wikivoyage on Google? I don't really consider them to be "destinations with the same name" as NYC and Chicago do not have the same name, and certainly "Downtown" is not a "destination". I agree that the pages aren't hurting anything, but they don't seem useful either. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 17:50, 25 July 2009 (EDT)

 * I agree. The downtown article is definitely useless, and verging on plain silly.
 * The suggestion of limiting entries on a disamb page to geographies for which we have an article isn't current policy or practice for disamb pages. If we are going to make a list of Chinatown's, then we should at least aim to be fairly comprehensive.  --(WT-en) inas 20:21, 26 July 2009 (EDT)
 * I think districts are a special case. Yeah, we list redlinks for every community with a particular name on most disambiguation pages, but Chinatown and Downtown are clearly going to be districts; I see no reason we can't restrict those to just the ones for which we have articles.  (WT-en) LtPowers 21:01, 26 July 2009 (EDT)
 * Should we then add all of the districts titled with "East", "North", "South", and "West" to those disambiguation pages? Should "Uptown" get it's own disambiguation? What about "San"? These sorts of disambiguations just seem ridiculous. Travellers shouldn't need babied to such an extent that we create disambiguation pages for non-destinations. Just because someone types "ass" into the search, doesn't mean we need to create a disambiguation page to help them find Assisi.

 * Also, how do we distinguish which we "have articles" for? For example (going back to the Chinatown article): the Philippines entry I added is not Manila/Chinatown however, the page says it's the Chinatown of Manila. The Japan entries are just links to the city pages, because these cities are not large enough for districts, but they have Chinatowns (and they're quite famous). Is this supposed to be a disambiguation page just to list Wikivoyage's travel breakdown (aka: city/Chinatown) or is it a list of actual Chinatowns? I feel like you are suggesting just adding the designated Wikivoyage category breakdowns, but that seems rather arbitrary, because we would then need to delete all the Japan entries and the Philippines entry. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 21:45, 26 July 2009 (EDT)

 * I'd be interested in your reasoning here. For example Sydney has a Sydney/Chinatown article.  This looks like it is going to change to Sydney/City South.  However, Sydney still has and will have always have a Chinatown district, regardless of how we choose to district the city on WT.  If this article is a disamb, we aim to direct people searching for Chinatown to the appropriate district on WT.  Assuming we want a list, why would we want the list to be less than comprehensive? --(WT-en) inas 21:23, 26 July 2009 (EDT)

 * I didn't read LtPowers as saying that only articles called 'Chinatown' would be included on Chinatown. We have coverage for Sydney's Chinatown, whether it's on Sydney/Chinatown or Sydney/City South, so it would belong on the page. In any event, I think again it's more useful to think of this page as partly a travel topic as well. Chinatowns tell an interesting story about the Chinese immigrant experience, one that can be quite interesting to a cultural anthropologist. The more Chinatowns I've seen, the more interesting I find the next one. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 21:58, 26 July 2009 (EDT)

 * I know this is under Chinatown, but concerning Downtown, it would have to work the same way, but that list would be insanely long! Otherwise, as stated for the Chinatown, it simply becomes an archive of Wikivoyage category breakdowns rather than a complete list of cities with "downtowns". I don't see how either of them could be used. Although I don't necessarily feel that Chinatown is a "destination", someone is much more likely to use that page than the "Downtown" page.

 * I certainly don't want to put words into LtPowers keyboard, but As long as we keep it to articles that we actually have, rather than any city that could be said to have a Chinatown, sounds like it would exclude Sydney's Chinatown if there wasn't actually an article for it.
 * I agree that it could make an interesting cultural travel topic. This assumes that someone is going to come along at take it on.  As I (and others) have said before, travel topics work well when someone takes on the initial work of getting them over the usable hurdle, otherwise they will more than likely languish and do the site a disservice.
 * And yes, obviously none of this reasoning applies to downtown. --(WT-en) inas 22:30, 26 July 2009 (EDT)
 * Agreed about Downtown. I'd vote 'delete' on that. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 23:03, 26 July 2009 (EDT)
 * Since this could be converted into a travel topic, I suppose I will revoke my objections against Chinatown. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 00:04, 28 July 2009 (EDT)

 * Keep. Completely valid disambiguation page or even a travel topic, if curated attentively. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 18:09, 25 July 2009 (EDT)
 * Delete. Since it hasn't been receiving attentive curation, it's less useful than simply searching for "Chinatown".  If an enterprising user comes along and decides to make it a true travel topic, they can recreate the page.  - (WT-en) Dguillaime 14:22, 28 July 2009 (EDT)
 * Keep. The given reason for nomination, in my opinion, is completely ridiculous. --(WT-en) GnarlyLikeWhoa 19:21, 29 July 2009 (EDT)

 * Is that a substantive objection? I can see a line reasoning why we would want to build lists of Chinatowns around the world, and I can see a line of reasoning why we would benefit from a travel topic on Chinatowns and how they evolved, and where they are, and I can see a line of reasoning why having an index article to articles we have is a good idea.  We don't quite know which one of these the article is trying to be, but there is some logic behind each of them.  There is also a line of reasoning against each one.  Building lists is best left for Wikipedia obsessives, we don't need it here.  Having a travel topic as a long term stub detracts value from the site.  There are a limited amount of resources, and an infinite number of travel topics are possible - we can't keep them all.  If someone can't push them into usable articles then they should be deleted until someone is willing to step up.  Having index articles as disambiguation article is a good idea, but when the name is so generic, it has little value to guide the traveller.
 * Which of these lines of reasoning do you consider to be "ridiculous", in your opinion? --(WT-en) inas 20:12, 29 July 2009 (EDT)

 * Inas, your comment doesn't make any sense. I considered ridiculous the reason given for the nomination. I agree there are many many different reasons for keeping it, including all the reasons you gave.

 * Do you understand how it may be baffling for me to ingest that last question? I didn't consider any of those reasons you gave to be ridiculous, only the thinking that we can't gather all the Chinatowns in the world. As I've stated on this site recently, this should be the most informative and inclusive site on the internet. To have all the information, or not have all the information, that is the question.

 * Simply deleting an article because it doesn't have all the Chinatowns in the world is not good reasoning.

 * In addition, I wasn't aware I even had to give a reason for my vote. If I do, sorry! Maybe I should have consulted you before I cast my vote for Obama.--(WT-en) GnarlyLikeWhoa 12:27, 30 July 2009 (EDT)
 * It does state above that commments should come with reasons under the "Commenting" header. My argument was not that it should be deleted because they are not all listed; I was questioning whether or not the list itself was useful. Also, once it was mentioned as a travel topic, I had asked what people suggested could be added to make it an informative travel topic. Both have been addressed to varying degrees. The comments may be difficult to follow, because upon mention of "Downtown" as an article, many of my comments (and others) were directed at that. Anyways, as a travel topic it has potential to be interesting, but I do question whether someone will actually make it a travel topic or if it will just remain a list. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 15:47, 30 July 2009 (EDT)
 * Gnarly - the votes for deletion page, is misleading, because it isn't actually just a vote, we are trying to reach a consensus one way or another. The only way that will work is if you try to convince others of your arguments, and you are willing, in turn, to be convinced by them.  Sometimes, when the overwhelming sentiment goes one way, or you are convinced by someone else's arguments, there is not much use for reasons - they are apparent.  But this one is a bit controversial, so substantive arguments and an effort to understand the other points of view get us closer to a consensus.
 * And your question To have all the information, or not have all the information, is right on the money IMO. I'm certainly in favor of not having all the information.  Exhaustive lists is not what I think WT is about. -(WT-en) inas 19:17, 30 July 2009 (EDT)

To revisit this (in the hopes of perhaps reaching a resolution), what is our goal for the Chinatown page? Is this going to list worldwide Chinatowns (which there is a push against) or is this going to be a travel topic? If it is a travel topic, how do you propose preventing it from becoming a large list? (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 02:21, 26 October 2009 (EDT)

 * We're pretty far from any consensus on this one, and it is part of a larger unresolved policy issue of when to disambiguate district articles that should not be resolved on the vfd page (it should be resolved at Project:Disambiguation pages). (If the article were curated as a travel topic, then it would clearly be a valid article, but it is not.)

 * So until we have that discussion, perhaps it would be better to keep for the time being, and copy this discussion to Talk:Chinatown? --(WT-en) Peter Talk 16:52, 26 October 2009 (EDT)

title: Talk:Chinatown


text:
Talk:Chinde

I just came back from Chinde yesterday. It is an adventure to go there. The only enjoyable thing is the 3 hours boat ride (If there are no waves) otherwise it takes 3.5 hours with waves. Again that is with a speed boat.

local commercial boats will take you about 13 hours sailing!! So unless you want to have that experience, please don't take these boats. Besides passengers they will pile up some goods (You can immagine how unconfortable it is for over 10 hours).

While in town just concentrate on your mission and get ready to leave whenever you can. There is nothing to do in Chinde. When its dark just go and sleep. Unless you have brought a small player and you can enjoy and dance some music, and perhaps some local chaps may come and admire you!!

Good luck!!

Inacio Lote Gimo —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 196.28.237.106 (talk • contribs)

 * Did they get the connection to the national power system? (WT-en) Davidbstanley 04:38, 22 October 2011 (EDT)

title: Talk:Chinde


text:
Talk:Chinese cuisine in the San Francisco Bay Area

Um, this really doesn't fall under a destination page (see What is an article? for more details)-- maybe it's a travel topic page, but even for that I think it would have to be reworked. Any comments or suggestions on what to do with this? But I'm going to move it ASAP. (WT-en) Majnoona 01:38, 2 Feb 2004 (EST)

 * OK, just trying to move this page convinced me that it really doesn't fall within our goals and non-goals. Someone have an argument as to how this fits in? It just doesnt seem travel related, and certainly not San Francisco specific. (WT-en) Majnoona 01:41, 2 Feb 2004 (EST)

This is specifically a San Francisco page
This page is specifically intended to discuss challenges that people from other places who have visited Chinese restaurant in those other places may face when visiting Chinese restaurants in the San Francisco Bay Area.

I acknowledge that there may be some overlap with other North American cities which have large and recent Cantonese immigration (New York, Sacramento, Vancouver, Los Angeles), but the content as I envision it specifically applies to San Francisco.

In any case it is not useful as a general introduction to Amercan Chinese food, as many of the categories, as well as some of the characteristics of the categories, do not apply to Chinese food in nearly all of the US outside of the specific places mentioned above. (WT-en) Notty

 * I like this idea, but a page specifically on Chinese food in San Francisco is probably too fine-grained for inclusion in our travel guide. It may be a good idea to include a paragraph or so in San Francisco or Bay Area (California), but I agree with Maj that this article either needs to become a travel topic on the more general concept, or be included in a smaller form on another page. (Possibly in the description of individual restaurants...?). --(WT-en) Evan 13:13, 2 Feb 2004 (EST)

I'm asserting that I'm the one who wrote the article so far. I grok the idea that this is too fine-grained for Wikivoyage. At the same time, it is the article that I want to write. May I request this article be deleted, so that I can post it where it will be welcome? (WT-en) Notty

 * I did find this article a bit odd. :) In Wikipedia, the article by the same name is one that mocks bad American versions of Chinese food. (WT-en) Fuzheado 00:25, 3 Feb 2004 (EST)

 * I doubt that the article is going to stay in its current form for long, but if you want the entry "American Chinese food" deleted, please post it on Project:votes for deletion, and it'll be gone in 7 days, barring objections. Well, I hope this hasn't soured you on the whole Wikivoyage experience, and that once you publish this article elsewhere, you continue to contribute. --(WT-en) Evan 02:07, 3 Feb 2004 (EST)

 * As you can see, I have decided not to try to delete it. I hope people will discuss both the page and the concept. (WT-en) Notty 02:13, Feb 5, 2004 (EST)

Good, I think we're getting somewhere. I just got back here from Wikipedia where I read the article you mention. It appears that most of my current article belongs in the Wikipedia, linked from the American Chinese Food article. However, I believe any correspondence between neighborhoods and types of Chinese food (for example traditional Sinicized Western food is found only in SF Chinatown, while modern Sinicized Chinese food can be also found in SF Richmond, SF Sunset, and Millbrae), or lists of restaurants serving a particular type of Chinese food, would seem to belong over here. Certainly I agree that reviews of particular restaurants belong over here. I believe this could be solved with suitable cross-linking.

There is a larger issue that the organization of Wikivoyage is hierarchical by State/City/Neighborhood. This means that I have to look at each neighborhood to find out what kind of Chinese food can be found there (or Afghan, etc). Would it be in the spirit of Wikivoyage to add an Eat section to San Francisco Bay Area where might be included somewhere in that section sentences like: "Modern Sinicized Chinese food can be found in San Francisco/Richmond, San Francisco/Sunset, and Millbrae." "Authentic Indian food is found in Fremont and in Pakistani restaurants in San Francisco/Tenderloin" etc.?

So, a review of San Francisco's only Musim Chinese restaurant would belong in the Sunset neighborhood where it is, but would be linked to from this article. If someone doesn't even know that San Francisco has a Muslim restaurant, and had no interest in going to the Sunset otherwise, how would they discover it? (Unless they are Muslim and are specifically searching for food which follows Islamic law.)

Finally, I'm concerned that the link from San Francisco that I orginally used to make this page has been removed, making this page an orphan. Obviously, some people are finding this page and commenting on it. Still, I'm concerned that people who might be interested in discussing whether this article is too granular won't see it to be able to discuss it. Unless I've been locked out from changing this, presumably I could add it back (and change the title back to San Francisco/Guidelines for choosing a Chinese restaurant). However, I don't want to get into an edit war.

I've just looked at the goals and slippery slope articles, and don't see where granularity is a non-goal. I do see from the slippery slope article that I need to only list or review restaurants I would recommend (which means that I won't be listing or reviewing any Americanized Chinese restaurants, although others might). I'd therefore like to respecfully suggest that this article be allowed to exist on Wikivoyage under its original name (or something similar) rather than being mostly moved to Wikipedia (would also solve the issue of copyright differences between the two sites, as well as the issue of cross-linking) (WT-en) Notty

The story so far
A. I was mistaken about the link being deleted from San Francisco. It appears from that page's history, as well as the orphans page, to be a bug. I will report it. (done)

B. Main comments against this page by other than me to date:
 * not about SF (was posted while I was still creating page)
 * not aligned with goals (con)
 * some confusion over the title (neutral)
 * nice, but too granular (pro and con)

What I am going to do for now:
 * 1) Rename the page to Bay Area (California)/Localized Chinese cuisine (done)
 * 2) Link to it from Bay Area (California) and San Francisco (done)
 * 3) Add a related restaurant review to a San Francisco restaurant.
 * 4) Make one cross-link between that review and this page, to demonstrate the utility.
 * 5) Make only minimal grammar and organizational changes to this page until further discussion reaches a consensus (of course, others can edit the page).
 * 6) Raise the granularity question in the Travellers' pub (done)

(WT-en) Notty 01:13, Feb 4, 2004 (EST)

Why this page moved
So, I've moved this page, since we don't use sub-pages for anything but districts within a city. --(WT-en) Evan 11:32, 5 Feb 2004 (EST)

SF vs. West Coast
Seems to me that this could usefully be broadened to West Coast of North America. Most of the same considerations apply in any West Coast city. The only thing specific to each city would be individual restaurants. -- (WT-en) Jmabel 19:26, 9 Feb 2004 (EST)

 * My take (which could be wrong) is that Chinese food is different in the Bay Area. Maybe it is also true of LA, especially places like Monterey Park, or Vancouver, but I was unable to find suitable Chinese food in Portland or Monterey. It is entirely possible I don't know where to look. (WT-en) Notty 02:18, Feb 10, 2004 (EST)

Article or Travel topic?
swept in from pub:

Well is this a travel topic or an article?;Chinese cuisine in the San Francisco Bay Area. Article needs some attention and organizing. -(WT-en) SnappyHip 22:31, 12 March 2010 (GST).
 * "Travel topics" are one of three subsets of "articles", so the answer is "it's both". (WT-en) LtPowers 13:53, 12 March 2010 (EST)
 * Oh Ok, but that article really needs organizing. Thanks :). Have a nice day. -(WT-en) SnappyHip 22:58, 12 March 2010
 * I really don't know why we even have articles like that. A trimmed down version of that could easily fit in the Eat section of San Francisco or the Bay Area. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 14:13, 13 March 2010 (EST)
 * I agree. A large portion of that article is empty formatting. (WT-en) Texugo 23:36, 13 March 2010 (EST)
 * There are quite a few of that nature. Might not be a bad idea for a COTM - merging all undeveloped travel topics into proper articles. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 04:59, 14 March 2010 (EDT)
 * That article is so old the chow mein's got hair on it (created February 2004!) -- it should long since have been swallowed up into San Fran itself. (WT-en) Jpatokal 07:18, 15 March 2010 (EDT)
 * Merged and redirected. (WT-en) PerryPlanet Talk 14:42, 20 March 2010 (EDT)


text:
Talk:Chinese phrasebook

>number measure word _____ "number" here means not a cardinal number (eleven buses) but an ordinal (the eleventh bus), e.g. in Charlotte the eleventh bus goes on North Tryon, the 17th goes on Commonwealth and down Independence, etc. -(WT-en) phma 15:36, 1 Jan 2004 (PST)

 * Oh, I c, thanks for reminding. Besides, I think I am a little unneutral writting this article: there are a lot of romanized systems for Chinese, pinyin is just one of them. Do I need to make a note for that since people from Taiwan or Hong Kong might not know them at all! :O --(WT-en) yacht(Talk)China 20:56, 1 Jan 2004 (PST)

Odd Choice of example words
I don't know enough Chinese to correct, but I thought it was worth of comment - a couple of the words chosen to highlight pronunciation are often not words in English, like "spall" and "ping" and I have no idea in what dialect the g in genre is pronounced the same as the r in fair. Credit to whoever did it, it's very good, but they might want to think about those ones.

Errors
Big mistakes! I'm gonna start working on pinyin first, but maybe someone can help me.
 * 1) There many pinyin phrases where the tones are missing (I can garantee you, a traveller neglecting the tones will not be understood!)
 * 2) In the end of the article, traditional Chinese is used. It's clearly said, simplified charachters are being used! (WT-en) LiangHH 09 Jan 2006

Edit: I solved the Pinyin problem. Now, there are only the traditional characters to be converted into simplified. (WT-en) LiangHH

Edit: Everything solved. 3h of work. (WT-en) LiangHH

 * 谢谢你. 加油! (WT-en) Jpatokal 02:21, 9 Jan 2006 (EST)

"Mandarin Chinese is the official language of ...Hong Kong, Macau...". It's an official language, but just beside Cantonese Chinese and English:

"Chinese and English are the official languages of Hong Kong. Committed to openness and accountability,  the Government produces important documents in both English and Chinese.  Correspondence with individual members of the public is always in the language appropriate to the recipients.  Simultaneous interpretation in English/Cantonese/Putonghua is made available to meetings of the Legislative Council and Government boards and committees as needed." (from the Hong Kong governmental web site: http://www.csb.gov.hk/english/aboutus/org/scsd/1470.html )

Macau: Chinese (Cantonese) and Portuguese are the official languages of Macau.

Tones
Note, please put tone above the correct letter (e.g. xièxie instead of xìexie):

 * ai
 * ao
 * ei
 * ie
 * iu
 * ou
 * ue
 * uo
 * ui

Edits
Why did someone just change words like hùi to hui4??????????
 * hùi is incorrect, which should be huì.

Someone please revert the page
All,

Apologies, I\'m operating behind a proxy and it appears that when I save a page it adds three /// signs after an open or end quote symbol. Whoever gets to the page first, please revert it back to the last revision by Stephen Mok. Thanks,

steviejojo
 * Done. Thanks. — (WT-en) Ravikiran 03:41, 26 August 2006 (EDT)

Taiwan
Is this country to be ignored? Their populace generally speaks Mandarin and government functions are in Mandarin. They do not use the simplified script. Therefore, perhaps shouldn't the traditional characters be offered in parentheses, as well as the occasion where there is a Taiwanese specific tone difference? 70.190.49.222 15:28, 14 June 2007 (EDT)

 * See Chinese phrasebook - Traditional for a version using traditional characters. (WT-en) Jpatokal 23:12, 14 June 2007 (EDT)
 * Oho, thanks for pointing out what my eye missed! 70.190.49.222 04:46, 16 June 2007 (EDT)

Fixed some jumbled typing stuff...
I don't edit Wikipedia that often, except when I find vandalism or whatnot. Anyways, I found some jumbled "asdlfkjadlfkjdlfkjadflkjdsaflfkj (etc.)" on the front of this page and deleted it. I'm not sure if I need to make one of these entries for that, but I figured I should be on the safe side. Thanks for the wiki entry on this, :D

 * No need to make a talk entry when fixing something, but unfortunately you removed quite a bit more than just the garbage. I rolled back your change and removed the junk text --(WT-en) Nick 13:26, 31 January 2008 (EST)

Pinyin pronunciation
Chinzh, I'm genuinely weirded out by some of the additions you're making to the pronunciation guides.

 * j as in jeer if followed by 'u' or 'ü', but like zebra if followed by 'i'

AFAIK pinyin j is always IPA [tɕ] and never [z], which is a voiced alveolar fricative not found in Chinese -- "Beijing" is definitely not pronounced "Beizing" with an English voiced "z"! [tɕ] doesn't exist in English, but Wikipedia describes it as "unaspirated q, not unlike the j in jingle".

 * q as in cheap if it is followed by 'u', but as in cent if followed by 'i'

Again, always IPA [tɕʰ]. Doesn't exist in English either, but usually equated to the ch of cheap/cheek, strongly aspirated. It's certainly not "t", or are you saying that the Qing Dynasty is actually the Ting Dynasty!?

 * x as in shoot if before 'u' or 'ü', but as in sag if before 'i'

IPA [ɕ], and AFAIK never [s]. Wikipedia: "Like she, with the lips spread as when you say ee.". (WT-en) Jpatokal 23:17, 8 January 2009 (EST)

 * I get your point. I think it's a problem of how the sounds are produced with different Chinese accents! For I live in Singapore, and most people from Southern China/Taiwan do not pronounce the Chinese words with the "American 'r' " sound that is present in 'jing', 'qing' and 'xi' which is pronounced as 'zheeng', 'cheeng' and 'shee' (although it is very prominent in the Beijing accent), and so it can be pronounced both ways without causing misunderstanding. (WT-en) chinzh 00:19, 9 January 2009 (EST)

 * I live in Singapore too, and I prefer the "southern" accent of Mandarin without 儿 all over the place, but for better or worse, standard Mandarin is based on Beijing style, so I've reverted. Might be good to have an infobox on the differences though... (WT-en) Jpatokal 04:07, 9 January 2009 (EST)

 * As a Chinese language student studying in Beijing, I think it is very important to make sure all of the pronunciation guides (pinyin) on this page on done in southern-accented guoyu instead of Beijing mandarin. After traveling throughout China, I find that it is easier for people to understand me when I speak with a southern accent (not Taiwanese accent, but more of a Shanghai "r-less" accent). Not only is the southern accent easier to pronounce for newbies, but it also easier for people in the south to understand, especially Cantonese speakers that are not proficient in putonghua.  With the 'er' thrown in there they get really lost, at least they have a shot at understanding without it, and the Taiwanese give me attitude when I speak Standard/Beijinghua to them. Also, people in Beijing and Standard Mandarin provinces understand southern accent perfectly because of the influx of Taiwanese media and national media coverage, also the large amount of migrant workers.  More people speak and understand "r-less" Mandarin, like you both said in Singapore. The Standard Mandarin (r) that is present on some words could be confusing to someone who doesn't understand the mechanics of the language. Chuan4 is much easier to pronounce than chuan(r)4 (串). I agree, get rid of the 儿.

Merging Chinese phrasebook - Traditional into this page
Using Chinese Wikipedia and its sister projects, I have found putting traditional and simplified Chinese in unified wikis with internal converters better than splitting the wikis that would have split edits, which would be hard to coordinate. Therefore, I would like to propose merging Chinese phrasebook - Traditional into this page. Any comments before merging?(WT-en) Jusjih 11:47, 1 February 2011 (EST)

As in stop
The Chinese "d" sound is an unaspirated voiceless stop, the sound in the word "stop", not in the word "do". It is analogous to the Chinese "b" and "g" sounds, which have "spot" and "skin" listed as English examples in this article. I've changed the example accordingly. Mr. Granger (talk) 01:46, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Remaining tasks
I like this phrasebook and think it could possibly be the second (or would that be the third?) phrasebook to be featured on the front page. It might be pretty much ready now, but I think there's more useful work to be done. One section that looks ripe for additions is "Food": I'd love to see a bunch of vegetables and fruits listed there. The Chinese phrasebook is further along than the Malay phrasebook, but you can see how many different words related to food are in the Malay phrasebook. Food is just as important in China and other Chinese-speaking areas as it is in Malaysia, so I think the "Food" section should be longer and more detailed. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:00, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Mandarin universally understood and spoken in China?
Is it really? I know that in the past, there used to be quite a few people in Guangdong, let alone Hong Kong and Macau, who spoke Cantonese but didn't understand Mandarin. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:45, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

 * Yes, except in Hong Kong, Macau and some rural areas. Students are required to study Mandarin Chinese these days. Few people in cities in Mainland China can't understand Mandarin, but many people still can't speak Mandarin fluently. However, when they are trying to speak Mandarin in strong local accent, it's usually possible to figure out what they want to say.--117.71.53.46 08:28, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

 * It is an interesting aspect of China that a high percentage of the population only speak basic Mandarin. It might be similar to saying the French is universally spoken in Canada, where in fact is is just taught to everyone in school but not used as a main language throughout the country. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:22, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * found this discussion after five years. I doubt many in Tibet or Xinjiang will all understand Mandarin (as they speak Tibetan and Uyghur respectively) although I'm not too sure about that. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:18, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Unvoiced/unaspirated
I'm not sure I understand. Isn't an unvoiced "j" a "ch"? I speak Mandarin only a little but I'm fluent in Malay when in practice, and I know that in Malay, "p" and "t" at the ends of words are unaspirated but at the beginning and middle of words, they are aspirated. I'm not conceptualizing what an unaspirated j would be, since the difference between "j" and "ch" is that the former is voiced. Also, the "zz" in pizza and the "ts" in rats are exactly the same sound in the English I know. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:09, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

 * It's a good point that English "j" is voiced. Perhaps it would be better to give a word like "itchy" instead of "jeer". I'm not a native speaker, though. The dog2, what do you think? As for "pizza" and "rats", I can imagine someone pronouncing "rats" with exaggerated emphasis and aspirating the "ts" sound, but I agree it's not a perfect example. I don't know of any solid examples of an aspirated "ts" sound in English, though, so I'm not sure how to improve that one. —Granger (talk · contribs) 16:06, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

 * Honestly, I really can't think of anything similar to that sound in English, but I guess the closest you could get is a like a "tz" sound. The pinyin "ch" sound, though, is just like what you would expect in English and Spanish. The "zz" in pizza isn't really correct when you try to pronounce pinyin "z". In fact, I'd say pinyin "j" and pinyin "z" are very similar. And likewise, I'd say pinyin "c" and pinyin "q" are very similar. Pinyin "zh" is actually somewhere between the English "j" and "ch", basically, you could trying saying it as an English "ch" without the puff of air that accompanies it. And pinyin "ch" is pretty much like how you would pronounce it in English - like "ch" in "chair". The dog2 (talk) 16:48, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

 * Please edit at will for greater accuracy. A voiced "ts" would be a "dz", but I think I understand aspirated and unaspirated for "ts", partly because I speak Mandarin a little: Unaspirated means you say the sound but, as The dog2 says in regard to "ch", there's no additional puff of air at the end. It's just lightly touched, with the tongue ending up on the upper teeth (I think) and top of the mouth. Although that's not necessarily that different from how many native English speakers pronounce "rats". Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:49, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

 * In English, at least in my accent, the "ch" sound seems to be unaspirated when it occurs in the middle of a word. I would suggest "itchy" or "Richard" as examples of unaspirated "ch" sounds. "Itchy" would be the approximation for pinyin "j" and "Richard" for pinyin "zh". What do you think? Would those be better approximations than "jeer" and "jungle"? —Granger (talk · contribs) 20:21, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

 * I'd say that in the first case, it's definitely a better approximation than English "j". It's not exact since there's really no equivalent in English, but that seems to be the best we can do. In the latter case, I think it could be rather confusing. Since the English I learnt was mainly based on British English, we do pronounce the "ch" in "Richard" exactly the same as how you would pronounce the "ch" in "chair". Really, the only unambiguous way of describing "zh" I can think of is that it's basically halfway between an English "j" and "ch". That sound just does not exist in English, so I'm really having trouble thinking of an equivalent. But as far as pinyin goes, how "c", "s" and "z" differ from "ch", "sh" and "zh" is that you press the tip of your tongue on the roof of your mouth in the latter but not in the former. The dog2 (talk) 20:34, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Merging traditional Chinese into this phrasebook: format
I Talk:Chinese phrasebook - Traditional merging the traditional Chinese phrasebook into this article a while ago, as it's not really two different languages, but the same language written in two different scripts. As there was nobody disagreeing with this on that talk page, I suggest we go ahead with this. But I'm not sure how to format this. For a starter the format is not consistent on this page. For instance compare Chinese_phrasebook, Chinese_phrasebook and Chinese_phrasebook all use different format. Then there is quite a lot of information we have to put here. We'll have the English sentence, Chinese (simplified characters), Chinese (traditional characters) and Pinyin (romanisation). One possibility would be the following: or The second one is closer to Phrasebook_article_template but the first one makes in my opinion a better distinction between the tow scripts. I would argue against using cursive font for the Chinese characters, as this will make them even harder to recognise for people wo don't know any Chinese. Theoretically it would also be possible to only highlight the parts with differences, but not sure whether that will be too messy: Also note that some of the phrases will be identical in both scripts (你好. ) so we'll have to decide whether we want to still repeat it for consistency's sake or just write it once. Anyone else has any ideas or suggestions on how to handle this? Drat70 (talk) 07:51, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Leave me alone. : 不要打扰我. (不要打擾我. ) búyào dǎrǎo wǒ
 * Leave me alone. : 不要打扰我. 不要打擾我.  (búyào dǎrǎo wǒ)
 * Leave me alone. : 不要打扰(擾)我. (búyào dǎrǎo wǒ)

 * I agree that the third format would be too confusing to be useful. I prefer the other two. Another option would be to use a slash:
 * 不要打扰我. ／不要打擾我. (búyào dǎrǎo wǒ)
 * —Granger (talk · contribs) 08:39, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, I was thinking of the slash as well. The problem I see with this is that it's also used for another function where there is a sentence with alternative words: (A beer/two beers, please. 请给我一杯/两杯啤酒. (qǐng gěiwǒ yìbēi/liǎngbēi píjiǔ) or ...the bus station? ...汽车站? ...qìchēzhàn? (China) / ...巴士站? ...bāshìzhàn? (Singapore)) --Drat70 (talk) 08:48, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Good point. —Granger (talk · contribs) 08:54, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Merge of phrasebooks with tradtional and simplified script
I have now combined both the simplified and traditional phrasebook, so that in future we won't have to maintain two separate phrasebooks for the same language. Some comments:

 * The formatting was rather messy. I tried to standardise it as much as possible, but this definitely needs some more work. Especially the pinyin is used in a very non consistent way, sometimes capitalizing, sometimes not, sometimes using hyphens between syllables, sometimes not.
 * There's a lot of cases where the simplified and traditional script are the same for a certain phrase. In those cases I still put the parentheses with the traditional characters. My logic behind this is that if it is not there, there's no way of knowing whether the characters are the same or whether they just hasn't been added yet. I have hesitated quite a bit on whether to do it this way, so if anyone thinks we should remove those duplicates, I'd be glad to hear about that.
 * I picked up and corrected some errors in both versions along the way, which makes me think that probably there's a lot more which I wouldn't see because my Chinese is very basic. So it'd be great if a native could have a look through it and correct all the obvious mistakes that have been added over the years.

Going forward it's important that we mirror any changes to the simplified characters in the traditional ones and vice versa. This is quite easy to do, just google simplified/traditional chinese converter and you'll find handy tools to help you with that. Drat70 (talk) 14:55, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

 * Sorry that I just noticed this merger but as a fluent speaker, I'll do whatever I can. That said, there are some terms that differ between countries, and as a Singaporean, I may not know some of the equivalents used in China or Taiwan. That said, I can for the most part converse with a Chinese or Taiwanese person with no issues. The dog2 (talk) 01:20, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

"Chinese cultural invasion"
The article now says "some Taiwanese may be alerted of using Mainland Chinese words, seeing their usage as perceived 'Chinese cultural invasion'." Is this a real problem for travelers? I'm sure I used plenty of mainland words when I visited Taiwan, and I don't remember anyone being upset about it. —Granger (talk · contribs) 04:32, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * When I last visited Taiwan (just before the COVID-19 pandemic hit), I don't recall anybody making a big fuss over my word choice. Granted that Singapore Mandarin is somewhat different from standard Mandarin in mainland China, and I do try to adjust my Mandarin to make it easier to understand when talking to non-Singaporeans, but I highly doubt this is an issue unless you happen to encounter some extremists. Most of my Taiwanese friends are pro-DPP and absolutely loathe the CCP, but they are generally cool with regular Chinese people, and don't get offended over trivial issues like this. The dog2 (talk) 05:31, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

"Have you eaten?" box
The "have you eaten" box says "The literal translation of 'how are you', Nǐ hǎo ma?, will be understood but may sound stilted and foreign. It's more natural to ask some variation of 你吃饭了吗？ (你吃飯了嗎） Nǐ chī fàn le ma? (Have you eaten?)." However, is it meant to say "The literal translation of 'have you eaten' is 'how are you', Nǐ hǎo ma?, will be understood but may sound stilted and foreign. It's more natural to ask some variation of 你吃饭了吗？ (你吃飯了嗎） Nǐ chī fàn le ma? (Have you eaten?)."

That box seems a bit confusing to me, but asking both of you given that both of you are the only ones here that I know of who speak Mandarin. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:13, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

 * The point of the box is that although the literal translation of "how are you?" is "nǐ hǎo ma", this phrase is not so commonly used in Chinese. When greeting someone you've met before, it's more common to ask "have you eaten?". Apologies if the current box is confusing; I'll try to make it clearer. —Granger (talk · contribs) 11:04, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
 * That makes more sense. Thanks for clarifying it :) SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:09, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Chinese phrasebook


text:
Talk:Chinese phrasebook - Traditional

Um, isn't 200 liang bai? sry don't know the proper pinyin but I speak Mandarin 9trad) myself. I should know.98.194.43.193 21:42, 5 December 2011 (EST)

Renaming page
I suggest to rename page and make it standard and similar to other 'phrasebook' guides - at first place there is name (language) of the guide, after - keyword 'phrasebook'. So, suggested name can be 'Chinese Traditional phrasebook' intead of current one 'Chinese phrasebook - Traditional'. Perekhoden (talk) 23:17, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

 * Actually I find the naming problematic generally. There isn't a language called 'Chinese Traditional', and even there isn't even a language called 'Chinese' (although many see Chinese as synonymous with Mandarin, it is only a first language for approximately half the Chinese population).
 * I'd like this to be more specific. I'd prefer Mandarin - Taiwan phrasebook (that is where Mandarin is spoken with traditional script). Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:31, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

 * I think Andrew is right. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:59, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

 * It's also used in Hong Kong and Macau, so restricting it to Taiwan would not be a good solution IMO. But wouldn't it be better to merge this with Chinese phrasebook, the differences are in writing only and so it could be one page with both simplified and traditional script for each entry? As it is, there's a lot of unnecessary duplicate content here. As an illustration of another language page which uses two different scripts, have a look at Serbian_phrasebook
 * Except for this I support the move to name this Mandarin phrasebook, maybe making the Chinese phrasebook a disambiguation page, linking to Mandarin and any other dialect phrasebook there might be such as Hakka_phrasebook, Teochew phrasebook, Cantonesem Minnan_phrasebook. (For instance now Cantonese phrasebook starts with 'is a widely spoken Chinese language ' where 'Chinese language' links to the Chinese phrase book which is really rather misleading and wrong.) Drat70 (talk) 03:13, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

 * Actually, Drat is right. It would be simplest to include both simplified and traditional characters in the Mandarin phrasebook. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:19, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

 * "It's also used in Hong Kong and Macau" - no, they use them in the context of Cantonese. You wouldn't use the Mandarin verbal phrases and often not even the written ones.
 * I'm OK to have a Mandarin phrasebook with both traditional and simplified script. Andrewssi2 (talk) 05:18, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Chinese phrasebook - Traditional


text:
Talk:Chios

Cities/Municipalities
I'd say one list or the other needs to go. We don't need two lists, especially two that contain some of the same destinations. (WT-en) texugo 04:25, 20 August 2011 (EDT)

 * Agreed :) --(WT-en) globe-trotter 20:24, 21 August 2011 (EDT)

title: Talk:Chios


text:
Talk:Chipata

Chachacha Backpackers no longer operates a Chipata branch. This information should be removed.

 * Plunge forward! (WT-en) Jpatokal 05:59, 16 October 2007 (EDT)

title: Talk:Chipata


text:
Talk:Chippewa Falls

Why the change? (Question for Jpatokal)
Here is what I said: You reverted: Why?? Where is a good place to put this link?
 * 1) (cur) (last) 13:00, 15 June 2007 148.64.77.197 (Talk) (This would be a helpful link for a traveler who wants to know about the city. Should it be somewhere else in the article?)
 * 1)  14:00, 15 June 2007 Jpatokal (Talk | contribs) m (Reverted edits by 148.64.77.197 (Talk); changed back to last version by Jpatokal)
 * Never mind. I just figured out the WikiPedia link thing at the bottom. I wonder how many folks even think to look at the little box on the left?

title: Talk:Chippewa Falls


text:
Talk:Chiricahua National Monument

Chiricahua National Monument lodging
moved from User talk:(WT-en) Wrh2

I noticed that you removed a B&B listing from the Chiricahua article, presumably planning on putting it in Willcox instead. Laying aside that it was toutish, I think a reasonable case can be made that it's as appropriate in the monument article as in the city one. I've been through there, and the B&B, if it's the one that I'm remembering, is waaaay out in the boonies and in no sense well suited for a trip "to" Willcox. I can't imagine why anyone would stay there except in conjunction with a trip to Chiricahua. Let's discuss. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 21:48, 25 March 2009 (EDT)

 * Yeah, I moved it to the Willcox article since the address was there, and then added pointers in the "Lodging" section of this article to the two city articles that have lodging. If it makes sense to include it in this article, and if there's a way to do so that prevents lodging from nearby cities from showing up in the park article, then by all means let's do so - I was just trying to avoid the problems that we originally had with Yosemite where every border town lodging was being added to the park article despite the fact that it was a fair drive from most of them into the park. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 21:56, 25 March 2009 (EDT)

title: Talk:Chiricahua National Monument


text:
Talk:Chittagong

Shipbreaking
I added this a while back, and someone removed it:

 * Chittagong may be best known internationally for the shipbreaking areas near the Indian Ocean; these are considered one of the most polluted places on earth. Tourists are not welcome, but some photographers have been able to sneak in and get amazing photos of massive ships being dismantled for parts and steel. (See also Alang, India).

Is this not true? Of no interest to a traveller? It's why I know anything about the place. --(WT-en) justfred 11:49, 12 January 2007 (EST)

 * From the Wikipedia article:

 * Ship breaking was introduced to the area in 1969. This industry is concentrated at Fauzdarhat, a 16km long beach 20 km north-west of Chittagong. Poor environmental standards produce unsafe labour conditions for ship-breaking workers and release toxins such as asbestos and PCBs into the environment.[1]

--(WT-en) justfred 11:51, 12 January 2007 (EST)

 * I think it's interesting and noteworthy, so it's back there now. (WT-en) Jpatokal 06:23, 14 January 2007 (EST)

 * It's very much an attraction, I didn't delete before but moved it to Chittagong Division since it's not in the city of Chittagong, but the division... At the moment it's in both articles... I'm thinking maybe it should be on the division page and maybe also noted in the Get Out section of the city page, since most people will visit it as a day trip from the city... (WT-en) Cacahuate 05:33, 15 January 2007 (EST)

 * On second thought, I expanded the description as a see attraction on this page, and just put a mention on the Division page... | (WT-en) Cacahuate 07:14, 16 January 2007 (EST)

Sales tax rate?
Under Buy, current text has:
 * The local sales tax is 0.15%.

I am almost certain that should say 15%, but I've never been to Bangladesh so I am asking here rather than just changing it. Pashley (talk) 23:06, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ ~ Moheen  (keep talking) 10:39, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Bus stops in "Get around"
The long lists of bus stops are pretty questionable in terms of being helpful to the traveller. Also, if we are going to cover bus routes individually instead of simply referring the reader to the BRTA website, it's a good idea to mention specific points of interest that they serve. New York City in the New York City section could serve as a bit of a model, except that New York City is districted, whereas referring to specific neighborhoods in Chittagong without further explanation wouldn't be meaningful to the average reader. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:55, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I have already shortened the list, and think it looks good now. ~ Moheen  (keep talking) 12:03, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Much better in my opinion. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:07, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Article name
This has recently been moved from Chittagong to Chattogram. The WP article has also been moved recently, though there's a bit of an edit war there, Chattagram vs Chattogram & even Chottogram.

I'd say it should obviously be moved back to Chittagong, per policy given at Naming conventions to use the commonest English name. Other opinions? Pashley (talk) 23:31, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

 * Seems like an obvious case to me. I've never heard of any name but Chittagong. Let's revisit this in 5-10 years. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:34, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
 * The naming authority, Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh has changed the official name of the Chittagong to Chattogram to make the spelling similar to Bangla pronunciation. (1, 2) ~ Moheen  (keep talking) 03:32, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Right, and that's irrelevant to Wikivoyage nomenclature. Obviously, Chittagong will continue to be the most widely used name in English for at least a while, and that's the only thing that counts on this site. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:41, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
 * The official name should be mentioned in the text and a redirect provided so anyone who searches for it will find the article. However, it is irrelevant to article name choice; policy is to use the name most commonly used in English, and that is Chittagong. Pashley (talk) 03:45, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Exactly. Just like Roma and München. Though if the new name ever becomes the most used in English, the article should then be changed. Which is why we have Beijing and not Peking, Guangzhou and not Canton, Livorno and not Leghorn. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:17, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
 * So shall we revert? Any policy-based objections? Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:11, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Revert. It will be a few years before the new names start to be used.  The page title could be 'Chittagong (Chattogram)' to try to please everyone or no one.  The name change affects other districts too.Davidbstanley (talk) 07:08, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I shall revert. I don't think another name in parentheses is the way to go; we don't do that in any other article except as a disambiguation, such as in Paris (Texas). Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:33, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I added a short paragraph into the Bangladesh page showing the 5 region/city names affected. Davidbstanley (talk) 20:40, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:52, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

It is 4 years since this debate now. I am in Chittagong/Chattogram now. Just about everything in Bangladesh now uses the new name. The only place I have seen the Chittagong name is at the Chittagong Boat Club last night. I think it is time to reconsider/discuss the position on the name. I do note however that the UK FCDO still uses Chittagong though. Davidbstanley (talk) 02:39, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

 * The only question is which name is used more in English. Does anyone not in or from Bangladesh use Chattogram? Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:49, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I have still been using it in my discussions with others. But I am feeling a bit of a minority!  It would be good to get some opinions of others. Davidbstanley (talk) 10:13, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * For what it's worth, en.voy hasn't changed the name of the equivalent article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:25, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * If I'm travelling in Bangladesh, I think the important thing is whether I am taking a bus, train or taxi to Chittagong or Chattogram. English is commonly used in Bangladesh (is my understanding correct, Davidbstanley?), so the local English usage would be what we want. If the common local usage in English is Chattogram, there would be a redirect from Chittagong so no one will be unable to find the article. Roma and München are not English usages. They are other-language names for the cities that English-speakers call Rome and Munich. Ground Zero (talk) 15:35, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * There's an intuitive simplicity to your criteria, except that if you are buying a train ticket in Italy or Germany, you would want to know you are going to Roma or München and need to buy tickets to the cities of those names, so I don't see the distinction in that regard. Similarly, in China, it's very important (actually, I believe it's much more important) for you to know that you need tickets to 北京, 上海 or 广州. But we're not going to use those names as names for the articles about those cities. So, therefore, I don't think the name printed on the train ticket is the point. The point is, which name is used most often in English, which does include Bangladeshi English? Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:27, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * English is reasonably well used here. Certainly all hotel staff, many shop workers etc. will be fluent and many others will have a basic understanding.  As in India, plenty of English words/phrases find their way into Bengali.  Chattogram is used at airports and on road signs (where they are in English).  I think the time for the change here is close. Davidbstanley (talk) 14:50, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Chittagong


text:
Talk:Choeng Mon

TAT listings
I moved the following sleep listings from TAT here for future reference:

 * Chat Kaew Resort (ฉัตรแก้ว รีสอร์ท) 59/4 Mu 5 Tambon Bo Phut, Ko Samui (Tel: 0 7742 5109), 12 rooms: 500-700 baht
 * Choeng Mon Bungalow (เชิงมนบังกะโล) 24/3 Mu 5 Tambon Bo Phut, Ko Samui (Tel: 0 7724 5372), 34 rooms: 300-1,200 baht
 * Imperial Boat House (อิมพีเรีย�� โบ๊ท เฮ้าส์) 83 Mu 5 Tambon Bo Phut, Ko Samui (Tel: 0 7742 5041-52 Bangkok Tel: 0 2261 9000 Fax: 0 2261 9530-4), 216 rooms: 5,500–10,000 baht
 * P.S. Villa (พี เอส วิลล่า) 24/2 Mu 5 Tambon Bo Phut, Ko Samui (Tel: 0 7742 5160-1), 16 rooms: 400-800 baht
 * Payorm Park View Resort (พะยอมปาร์ควิวรีสอร์ท) 24/30 Mu 5 Tambon Bo Phut, Ko Samui (Tel: 0 7742 5429), 20 rooms: 300-600 baht
 * Sala Samui Resort & Spa (ศาลาสมุย รีสอร์ท แอนด์ สปา) Choeng Mon Beach, Koh Samui, Surat Thani, Rates: 5,960-24,280 Baht
 * The Tong Sai Bay (บ้านท้องทราย) 84 Mu 5 Tambon Bo Phut, Ko Samui (Tel: 0 7724 5544, 0 7724 5621-38 Fax: 0 7724 5620 Bangkok Tel: 0 2254 0056–63 www.tongsaibay.co.th ), 83 rooms: 12,947–61,204 baht
 * White House Hotel (ไวท์ เฮ้าส์ โฮเต็ล) 59/3 Mu 5, Cheongmon Beach, Koh Samui, Surat Thani, Rates: 3,520-7,040 Baht

--(WT-en) globe-trotter 11:47, 20 February 2010 (EST)

title: Talk:Choeng Mon


text:
Talk:Chokai

 * Yurihonjo is composed of several towns, the main one being Honjo. Chokai is 30km away from Honjo, and there's almost no public transit connecting the two, so the attractions in Chokai are worth separating from Honjo.  Should that be done using a separate section on the Yurihonjo page, or should it be done using a separate page? 211.120.119.94 19:45, 2 December 2009 (EST)

title: Talk:Chokai


text:
Talk:Cholula

I think tremendous number of nightclubs may be slightly inaccurate. A sprinkling would be more like it.

title: Talk:Cholula


text:
Talk:Chonburi

TAT Listings
Moved TAT Listings to Talk:Chonburi/Listings for future reference. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 23:24, 2 February 2010 (EST)

title: Talk:Chonburi


text:
Talk:Chonburi (province)

TMI in a really big way
That incredibly gigantic list of accommodations is TMI (Too Much Information) on a scale that boggles the mind. I don't know enough about this province to pare it down, but it does need paring -- lots of it. Anybody? -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 22:59, 8 February 2008 (EST)

 * Yeah, you can thank the Tourism Authority of Thailand for that. Most of it belongs in the Pattaya, Ko Si Chang etc articles, but I was planning on waiting until User:(WT-en) Borndistinction runs out of steam, and then getting to work. (WT-en) Jpatokal 03:35, 9 February 2008 (EST)

title: Talk:Chonburi (province)