text:
Talk:Tobacco

Smoking travel?
Article in an Indian paper on tourism catering to smokers:

Dump the list?
I think the whole list of smoking restrictions should be removed. One entry talks of a ban "scheduled to take effect in 2008". Checking the history, I find only a dozen edits to that section in the last three years, so it is clearly not well maintained and very likely out of date. I'd say it is unmaintainable and the information belongs in destination articles anyway.

A short paragraph (or just a sentence?) saying that most countries now forbid smoking in most indoor public places is all we need. It might mention a few interesting exceptions — e,g. Hong Kong forbids smoking in many outdoor public spaces while in mainland China smoking is common almost everywhere, and in Ottawa smoking is now forbidden even on the outdoor patio of a bar or restaurant — but I am not certain that is necessary.

If people want to keep this information in the article, it should be turned into a sortable summary table. Readers could then sort on different columns to find places that suit them — strong restrictions, cheap cigarettes or whatever. For an example of such a table, see World cities/Large. Pashley (talk) 16:11, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

 * A year later, list is still there and not updated... I support that it is useless. Amqui (talk) 21:17, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

 * Wikipedia has "smoking in X" articles for X={Albania, Argentina, Brazil, Canada, China, Colombia, Ecuador, Egypt, England, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Macau, Malaysia, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Sweden, Syria, Taiwan, Tokelau, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay} which have a better chance of being updated than anything here. Most of this article seems to be leftover from 2008. Perhaps we should import the WP data and start using lastedit=20xx-xx-xx markers on all list items, like those recently added to listing? K7L (talk) 16:37, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

 * I don't think we should import anything. This information belongs in the individual country pages, not here. Powers (talk) 17:14, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

 * Would Smoking then be a standard item under Cope? I think there are many things that could be using such a subsection. This kinds of lists could exist in every Cope article (travelling with kids, with pets, as disabled, as LGTB, ...) and could in all cases be argued to be moved to the country articles. I am not sure that is the ideal situation.

 * Restrictions on smoking are relevant for smokers when they cannot get a cigar after the meal or have difficulties finding anywhere to smoke, while it is for non-smokers when they cannot avoid the smell (and the related symptoms, e.g for the asthmatic). The nuances are not really that important. The summary of what you might have to be prepared for (smoking on buses in some countries, having to go out in -40° to get a smoke in some) might be enough.

 * We might want to have a Cope: Smoking only in countries where restrictions or lack of them may be a severe problem for the traveller. This may also be something that is best handled on the continent level. There are differences between e.g. Scandinavia on one hand and south and Eastern Europe on the other, but differences between countries in the same region are seldom bigger than what might be errors because of lacking updates.

 * --LPfi (talk) 10:57, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Preserved list
I have removed the list per discussion above, but am preserving it here:

The following countries and regions have smoke-free areas, although the list is probably not exhaustive:

 * Argentina: A 2006 smoking ban in Buenos Aires city prohibits smoking in public areas including bars and restaurants except if the bar is more than 100 m² where it is possible to provide an area for smoking customers. Similar bans in other Argentine cities require bigger establishments to provide a separate, contained area for smoking customers. The rule is not nationwide.

 * Armenia: A law went into effect in March 2005 banning smoking in hospitals, cultural and educational institutions and on public transportation. On 1 March 2006 new rules came into effect requiring all public and private institutions, including bars and restaurants, to allow smoking only in special secluded areas. Absences of any legal sanctions against those who violate the smoking laws have made them completely ineffectual.

 * Australia: The rules vary from state to state, but there is generally no smoking in public places (e.g. airports, train stations, schools, universities, government administration buildings). Restaurants (and bars in some states) are smoke-free. Public transport (including taxis) is smoke free, as are many outdoor sports venues. Hospitals generally ban smoking anywhere on the premises, including outdoors.

 * Austria: No smoking in public places (e.g. airports, train stations, schools, universities, government administration buildings) and on public transport (e.g. trains) (fineable offence). Smoking is allowed in restaurants, bars and cafés. Bars and restaurants of more than 100 square metres must have non-smoking sections.

 * Bahrain: Bahrain outlawed smoking in public places on 27 February 2008.

 * Bangladesh: No smoking in public places (a fineable offence).

 * Belgium: Since January 2007, smoking banned in restaurants and bars, except in the ones that serve "light meals" (e.g. cold meals, pizzas and warm meals that are served with bread instead of French fries) and have less of 30% of their sales from food servings. Small bars are also not included in the ban. Most large bars, such as concert venues, do little to enforce the ban.

 * Bhutan: First completely smoke-free country. The sale or use of tobacco is completely prohibited by law.

 * Bosnia and Herzegovina: The Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina within the country of Bosnia and Herzegovina, has banned smoking in public buildings since 1 September 2007. There is no ban on smoking in the Republika Srpska (Serbian Republic).

 * Brazil: Indoor smoking is banned in Brasilia.

 * Canada: Indoor smoking in public places is banned in all provinces and territories individually, as well as in locations under federal jurisdiction. Some provinces restrict smoking in hotel rooms, vehicles or directly outside entrances to public venues; additional restrictions on smoking in Canada may also apply at the municipal level.

 * Chile: Chile bans smoking in schools, hospitals, government offices, shopping centers, supermarkets, pharmacies, airports, buses, subway networks and other indoor public places. Smoking in universities indoors is banned, however, smoking is allowed outdoors. Restaurants, with large eateries (over 100 m²) must have fully partitioned nonsmoking sections. Smaller restaurants can choose between being smoke free or being for smokers. The same applies with cafes and pubs. Clubs, despite their size, are able to choose between being smoke free or being for smokers, however, in practice all clubs are "for smokers".

 * China: Shanghai Municipality will expand smoking bans from hospitals to kindergartens, schools, libraries and stadiums, effective March 1, 2010. In Guangdong Province, the Municipalities of Guangzhou and Jiangmen have banned smoking in public places, including restaurants, entertainment outlets, schools, supermarkets, and governmental offices on a trial run in 2007, however this is rarely policed. In the Special Administrative Regions of Hong Kong and Macau, smoking bans are stricter and are more effectively enforced.

 * Croatia: In April 2010, smoking was banned in all enclosed public places and workplaces including restaurants. Establishments that serve drink but not food can allow smoking if they install special ventilation equipment, and many have opted to do so.

 * Cyprus: On July 9, 2009 Cyprus passed a new law, tightening up the ineffective 2002 legislation, which will ban smoking in bars, restaurants, nightclubs and workplaces effective January 1, 2010. Since the introduction of the smoking ban on the 1st January 2010, compliance levels have been very encouraging.

 * Denmark No smoking in trains. Restaurants are smoke-free (but some have a smoking-room). Smoking is allowed in bars less than 40 sq meter. So go for larger bars if you want to avoid smoke. The smoking rules are from august 2007, and are not enforced very hard yet, so you can still risk smoke in small bars.

 * Estonia: Smoking has been banned within indoor public areas and workplaces, since 2007, also in restaurants, nightclubs etc. Smoking is still allowed in isolated smoking rooms.

 * Finland: Indoor smoking in public places is banned, including train stations, restaurants and bars. Smoking is allowed in designated rooms, but these have become rare. Most smokers nowadays do not smoke indoors at home either.

 * France: From January 1, 2008, smoking is banned everywhere: public places, schools, bars, restaurants, nightclubs, etc...

 * Germany: Smoking legislation varies from state to state, it is being enforced more or less, and some of the legislation is being contested at courts. In general restaurants and cafés are smoke free, but can have a smoking room. Many smaller bars allow smoking. Smoking is prohibited in trains and restricted to designated smoking areas (labelled Raucherbereich) at most of the bigger train stations. Smoking outdoors is allowed virtually everywhere.

 * Iceland: From June 1, 2007, smoking is prohibited in all indoor public places, which includes all bars/clubs.

 * Ireland: Restaurants and bars are smoke-free. Indoor smoking is banned in all workplaces and public buildings. However, many pub owners have compensated by extending their seating outdoors and there are smoking bedrooms available in most hotels, if you specify that you want one when booking.

 * Israel: In Israel it is forbidden to smoke in public closed places since 1983. The law was amended in 2007 so that owners are held accountable for smoking in premises under their responsibility. The ban includes cafes, restaurants discos, pubs and bars, and it is illegal for owners of such places to put ashtrays anywhere inside closed spaces. Also, owners of public places must put "no smoking" signs and prevent visitors from smoking. The fine for owners of public places is NIS 10,000 (around US$2,800) and for smokers - NIS 5000. In spite of this, the smoking bans in Israel are not effective and smoking remains extremely prevalent in public places, especially bars and clubs.

 * Italy: Restaurants and bars are smoke-free, as are most hotels.

 * Japan: Smoking banned at airports, most train stations, government buildings, but smoking rooms are provided.

 * Kazakhstan: Kazakhstan partially banned smoking in public places on April 1, 2003. A full ban was instituted in September 2009.

 * Lithuania: Smoking has been banned in restaurants, bars, places where food is served, clubs (except for special cigar and pipe clubs), and nightclubs since 1 January 2007. Furthermore, smoking on public transportation is forbidden except on long-distance trains with special facilities. The ban is well respected, at least in the main cities.

 * Luxembourg: Smoking is banned in all indoor public places, like hospitals, shopping centers, schools and restaurants. However, cafés and bars that only serve snacks are exempt from the law. There is a smoking prohibition from 12 noon to 2pm and 7pm to 9pm in cafes in which meals are served.

 * Macedonia: Macedonia has a strong national smoking ban in all public indoor areas, and in some cases in outdoor areas. Smoking is banned in bars, cafes, restaurants, nightclubs starting January 1, 2010. Smoking is not banned only in people's homes, at open spaces and public areas free of sporting competitions, cultural and entertainment events, gatherings and other public events.

 * Malaysia: Smoking banned in all enclosed indoor buildings except bars.

 * Malta: In April 2004, smoking was banned in all enclosed public spaces, including public transportation, clubs and restaurants although smoking areas are allowed.

 * Monaco: There has been a ban on smoking in Monaco since 1 November 2008, but does not extend to bars, restaurants and nightclubs.

 * Montenegro: Smoking in public places is banned in Montenegro, including public transportation, clubs and restaurants. The ban also forbids smoking advertising and the display of people smoking on television.

 * Namibia: On October, 8th 2009, the Namibian National Assembly adopted the Tobacco Products Control Bill, one of the most comprehensive Smoking Bans in the World. The law, once in force will ban "the smoking of tobacco in a public place, any outdoor public place or any area within a certain distance of a window, ventilation inlet, door or entrance". The bill has been voted into law on 16th February 2010.

 * Netherlands: Smoking banned in public transport & public buildings. And as of July 1 2008 smoking banned in restaurants, bars and even tobacco stores. Even the (in)famous Coffee shops will not be exempt, however it's still allowed to smoke cannabis in the coffee-shops. Apart from public transport, all companies will be allowed to designate rooms as "smoking rooms", as long as they are especially designated for this.

 * New Zealand: Restaurants and bars are smoke-free, although smoking may be permitted in outdoor dining areas. Commercial building owners, including accommodation places, can designate their buildings and grounds as smoke-free. All public transport is smoke-free, even taxis (unless the taxi driver agrees). Smoking can even be prohibited on railway station platforms, hospital grounds, sports stadiums and other outdoor areas where smoking might be expected to be allowed in other countries.

 * Norway: Restaurants and bars are smoke-free.

 * Philippines: Smoking banned in airports, malls, government buildings, train stations.

 * Poland: As of November 15, 2010, smoking is forbidden in all workplaces, train stations, bus depots and most clubs and restaurants. The only exception is when a club or restaurant has a specially designated smoking room that is separated and well ventilated.  Bars with only one room are not exempted.  Places that violate the ban are fined 2,000 zł while individuals who violate it are required to pay a 500 zł fine.

 * Portugal: On May 3, 2007, the Portuguese parliament made a law banning smoking in all public places, except when proper air-ventilation systems are provided. It went into effect January 1, 2008. Smokers who break the law face a fine of up to €1000 (~US$1300) and establishments that break the law will face a fine of up to €2500 (~US$3400). The legal age to purchase tobacco is 18.

 * Puerto Rico: Smoking is banned inside jails, restaurants (including open-air terraces with one or more employees), bars, casinos, workplaces, educational institutions, cars with children under age 13 and most public places. Smoking sections are not allowed. Fines start at US$250.

 * Qatar: The capital of Qatar, Doha banned smoking in public or closed areas in 2002.

 * Saudi Arabia: Smoking is completely banned in the Holy Cities of Mecca and Medina. The sale or use of tobacco is completely prohibited by law in these cities.

 * Serbia: In May 2010 a law was adopted which prohibited smoking in all enclosed public spaces and workplaces. Full implementation of the ban started in November. Restaurants, bars and cafes must either ban smoking completely or have smoking and non-smoking sections.

 * Singapore: Smoking banned in all indoor buildings, period, unless they have separate ventilation set up for smokers only — and no food or drinks can be served in such areas. Outdoor seating may have only 20% smoking tables, usually demarcated by ashtrays and labels.  No smoking at bus stops either.

 * Slovenia: On 22 June 2007, the Slovenian National Assembly approved a law prohibiting smoking in all indoor public and work places, effective 5 August 2007. Exempted from the ban are open public areas, special smoking hotel rooms, special smoking areas in elderly care centers and jails, and special smoking chambers in bars and other work places.

 * South Africa: Smoking is banned in all enclosed public spaces and places of work. Pubs and bars are excluded from the ban and most restaurants provide smoking sections, either ventilated indoor areas or outdoor open areas.

 * Spain: On 21 December 2010, the Spanish Parliament approved a law prohibiting smoking in all indoor public and work places and near hospitals and in playgrounds, becoming effective on 2 January 2011. Smoking is now banned in all enclosed public spaces and places of work, in public transportation, and in outdoor public places near hospitals and in playgrounds. Smoking is also banned in outdoor sections of bars and restaurants. Smoking is banned on television broadcasts as well.

 * Sweden: All indoor premises are smoke-free, except designated smoking rooms.

 * Syria: Smoking is banned inside cafes, restaurants and other public spaces by a presidential decree issued on 12 October 2009. The decree also outlaws smoking in educational institutions, health centers, sports halls, cinemas and theatres and on public transport. The restrictions include the nargile, or water pipe. A fine of 2,000 Syrian pounds (~US$46) is imposed on those who break the ban. Under-18s are not allowed to buy tobacco.

 * Thailand: Extensive ban issued in 2002, covering most air-conditioned public places including department stores, shopping malls restaurants, theatres and buses; extended in 2006 to cover all trains, hotel lobbies, health spas, beauty salons and massage parlours; extended again in 2008 to cover bars and nightclubs. Fines start at 2000 baht (approx US$60), but enforcement (esp. in nightlife areas) is spotty.

 * Turkey: Smoking is banned in public places (e.g. airports, metro stations and indoor train stations, schools, universities, government administration buildings, in all workplaces, concert halls, theatres and cinemas) and on public transport (airplanes, ferries, trains, suburban trains, subways, trams, buses, minibuses, and taxis). Smoking is banned in sports stadiums, the only outdoor areas where this ban is extended. It is a finebale offence of 69 liras (~ €32, $45, £28). Separately smoking is also banned, in restaurants, bars, cafes, traditional teahouses, the remaining air-conditioned public places including department stores and shopping mall restaurants; and there are no exceptions as indoor non-smoking sections are also banned. Apart from a fine of 69 liras (~ €32, $45, £28) for smokers, there is a heavy fine of 5,000 liras (~€2,318, $3,260, £2,028) for owners, for failing to enforce the ban properly and that is why it is strictly enforced.

 * Uganda: In March 2004, smoking was banned in public places, including workplaces, and restaurant & bars. An extension to private homes is being considered.

 * United Arab Emirates: Some Emirates in the United Arab Emirates recently started banning smoking in shopping malls and public places. States leading the ban on smoking include Abu Dhabi, Ajman, Dubai and Sharjah.

 * United Kingdom: Smoking is now banned in all enclosed public places, including bars, pubs and restaurants. There are no exceptions. On-the-spot fines are around £50, although the owner of the premises could be fined several thousand pounds for failing to enforce the ban properly.
 * Wales: This was actually the first country in the UK to decide to ban smoking in all enclosed public places but the Welsh Assembly Government lacked the powers to introduce the law until 2 April 2007, whereupon the ban came into force.
 * Scotland: Smoking in all enclosed places of work (including restaurants and bars) is forbidden. Violation of the law may result in a £50 on-the-spot fine (approx US$85).
 * England: Since the first of July 2007 smoking has been banned in all enclosed public places including pubs and restaurants. England is therefore the last country in the UK to introduce the smoking ban.
 * Northern Ireland: Smoking in all enclosed places of work (including restaurants and bars) is forbidden. Violation of the law may result in a £50 on-the-spot fine (approx US$85).

 * United States of America:
 * Arizona, Delaware, New York (state), New Jersey, New Mexico, Florida, California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, North Dakota, Washington State, Tennessee, Georgia, Colorado, Oklahoma, Illinois, Utah, Rhode Island, Vermont, Maryland, North Carolina and Ohio restaurants are smoke-free.  Many cities also have municipal smoking bans which apply to restaurants.
 * In other states, restaurants above a certain size must have non-smoking sections.
 * The state of California, New York City and some other large cities ban smoking in all public indoor places, including bars.
 * Most airports are non-smoking, or have designated smoking rooms.

 * Uruguay: Indoor smoking is banned in all the country.

 * Vatican City: On July 1, 2002 a law signed by Pope John Paul II became effective which banned smoking on all places accessible to the public and in all closed places of work within the Vatican City and within all extraterritorial properties of the Holy See. Smoking bans in museums, libraries and churches on Vatican territory were already in force before that date for a long time.

Comment or contributions needed
I have just edited most sections of the article & think I have improved it. The biggest change was removing the long list; see above, but I also expanded several other sections.

It now needs comment & contributions from others. Pashley (talk) 19:56, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Page move Smoking -> Tobacco
I don't understand why this page was moved, especially without prior discussion.

The stated reason is that the article includes discussion of smokeless tobacco, and does not include non-tobacco smoking. But [//en.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=Tobacco&oldid=2814613 the version immediately prior to the move] clearly does just the opposite; it includes non-tobacco products while making no mention of non-smoked tobacco.

Am I missing something here?

-- Powers (talk) 18:52, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

New page banner nominated
What do you say about this banner? /Yvwv (talk) 15:40, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

 * I think the current one identifies the article more clearly – it took a second or two for me to get what the new one is about – while the new one might have a bias towards buying of tobacco products. --LPfi (talk) 17:40, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

 * An excellent suggestion, Yvwv, but I admit to a bias toward simple, iconic banners... especially on travel topics. I would prefer to keep the current banner. Powers (talk) 01:55, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Liquid Nicotine
So this edit to Germany by an IP editor made me aware of an issue that I do not care the least about personally (being anon-smoker) but which might be relevant to deal with in some of our guides. Should this be handled on a by-country basis or should we rather cover this in some omnibus travel topic? And what exactly are the rules? Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:41, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

 * For the travel topic, see Tobacco. Some things can also be mentioned in anything from a country article down to a hotel listing, if either there are rules that will be a problem for smokers or smoke will be a problem for others. Pashley (talk) 15:27, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

 * I am specifically referring to the whole liquid whatever stuff. Apparently the rules there are different. Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:25, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

 * Perhaps there should be an e-cigarette section on Tobacco. However, country-specific rules and laws should definitely be in the 'Get in' of the relevant country. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:29, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

 * Ideally this would be in the Customs part of "Get in". However as Germany doesn't seem to have any information on customs I see why the author has put the vaping liquid allowances where he has (also pity he didn't link to a customs website to backup the 20ml limit). AlasdairW (talk) 21:03, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

 * Vaping is very popular in the U.S. I think it should get more than a 1-word mention. Yes, there should be a section on it. I wouldn't be able to add it, though, as I've never partaken and don't plan to. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:14, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

 * Not all e-cigarettes deliver nicotine using the same mechanisms or even in a steady stream in terms of dosage. Nicotine dosing can also be customized. Jeloantonio (talk) 05:40, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

 * If there's anything erroneous in the article, go ahead and correct it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:09, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

 * You can now choose an e-liquid that matches your current nicotine level. Some vape pen has 1.4 ML nicotine oil per stick like Bidi. Not bad at all.--Kayemailey (talk) 07:26, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

[outdent] I am not sure we need to cover e-liquids in the Get in sections: they are among the things you should check, like alcohol, medicines, guns etc. We should warn about the liquids being such an item here in Tobacco and in Border crossing, but I suppose we cannot keep up to date on the specific regulations. In Finland I know some of the liquids are illegal (and others are covered by restrictions). –LPfi (talk) 04:55, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

 * I added a mention at those pages. –LPfi (talk) 05:51, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

NZ restrictions
New Zealand wants to make smoking illegal "entirely smoke-free by 2025" Pashley (talk) 22:55, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

 * I hope Australia does the same too. SHB2000 (talk) 05:56, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Tobacco


text:
Talk:Snoqualmie Pass

Where is this skiable several hundred foot cliff? If your thinking about "the cliff" it can not be dropped and you will die. Which is why people have commited suicide off of it. There are serveral 50-60 foot cliffs up in edielwiess.

 * Feel free to plunge forward and edit the guide! Seems like you know more about this place than anyone else around here... thanks! (WT-en) Majnoona 09:45, 18 April 2006 (EDT)

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

title: Talk:Snoqualmie Pass


text:
Talk:Snowdonia Mountains

Perhaps this page should be renamed 'Snowdonia National Park', or just 'Snowdonia'. There is actually no such thing as the 'Snowdonia Mountains', as the name of a mountain range (as far as I'm aware anyway). While we're about it, do we have an index of the 'National Parks of England and Wales'? -- (WT-en) Nojer2 18:04, 5 Dec 2004 (EST)

 * I agree (I think I started this page with a vague idea of the place... I was only there for like a day). Do we actually need both Snowdonia to include the towns in the area and Snowdonia National Park for the park part? And I think a national parks index isn't a bad idea, but what "England and Wales" and no the UK or just separate ones for England, Wales, Scotland, etc? I know the politics of names is tricky for this area... thanks! (WT-en) Majnoona 21:22, 5 Dec 2004 (EST)

 * Oh yeah. I was thinking Scotland doesn't have national parks, but actually there were two created a couple of years ago, after they passed a new law in Scotland. So yes a new index page should include scotland (but not Ireland, since they dont have national parks). Hence it should probably be called 'National parks of the United Kingdom', but not sure what naming conventions apply to this.
 * I don't think there should be two artices 'Snowdonia' and 'Snowdonia National Park' as you suggest, because Snowdonia is a national park. That's all it is. That's the reason the name exists. At least I think so. Have posed this question to the wikipeidians. I do know the national park area encompases the towns too (and means they have strict building regulations in fact), so 'national park' doesn't just mean public green park area. -- (WT-en) Nojer2 03:56, 6 Dec 2004 (EST)

 * I was thinking of towns like http://www.llanberis.org/, if they're not "in" the park, where would you say they were? North Wales I guess? Let's just stick with Snowdonia National Park for now and link to the nearby towns in the get in / get out section... I'm going to check on how we do the indexes/lists for other things... thanks (WT-en) Majnoona 17:19, 6 Dec 2004 (EST)

title: Talk:Snowdonia Mountains


text:
Talk:Snowdonia National Park

Made up Facts
So Snowdon has one of only 3 rack and pinion railways in the World? I was sure I remembered as a kid being told there were loads like it in Switzerland, and sure enough http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rack_railway confirms this. (WT-en) Tarr3n 05:47, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

Listings
Should we have individual listings for Eat, Sleep, Drink in this article at all? Would they not be better placed in the individual town or village articles? (WT-en) Tarr3n 05:47, 3 September 2008 (EDT)

I am sure that Eat, Drink and Sleep lsitings should be in the surrounding town articles unless there is a very good reason ... eg an extremely remote spot in the park, not near a town. If someone who knows Snowdonia well can do this, plus add some general info in Eat and Drink and expand the camping section (more specific campsite details), then I think this article would be Guide status.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 08:13, 20 October 2009 (EDT)

 * I've created a new article for Rhyd Ddu, as that is where all the individual listings that had been entered here are located, and moved those listings across to that article. I've also written some general info about accomodation, and added a couple more pics to brighten things up. (WT-en) Tarr3n 07:00, 22 October 2009 (EDT)

 * Nice work. Really nice. If you could now change the Get out section (Get out is intended for brief bulleted ideas on where to go next - convenient next ports of call for a visitor) then I think this article is at guide status.  You should have the pleasure of changing that and I am sure you know how. If not, just change the  tag at the bottom to  . National Park articles throughout Wikivoyage interest me greatly. This is a good one. Cheers. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 07:55, 22 October 2009 (EDT)

 * Thanks Burmesedays. I think this article is starting to get into a decent shape now. I've retagged it as a guide. It could do with a map when I can find the time, but Tywyn and Aberdyfi are above it on my "draw Wikivoyage maps" list. What's really needed now is for the individual "city" articles in the park to be fleshed out as that's where specific listings and information should be-

 * Aberdyfi needs less work than most
 * Bala isn't too bad, but needs places to eat and drink and could do with more in Sleep
 * Bangor is one of the better articles
 * Barmouth needs accomodation listings
 * Beddgelert is better than some, but a wee bit sparse
 * Betws-y-Coed isn't bad but definitely needs places to eat and drink
 * Blaenau Ffestiniog has good coverage of the main attractions but little else
 * Caernarfon doesn't need too much work to be Guide status
 * Capel Curig needs a lot more info. This is one of the top destinations in the park but the page is pretty bare.
 * Conwy has lots of good info, just needs a bit of MOS work.
 * Dolgellau lokks pretty good but needs more places to drink and sleep
 * Harlech is getting there
 * Llanberis, like Capel Curig is a major centre for walking and climbing and needs a lot more info.
 * Porthmadog is on the way to a decent article but is a bit short of listings in most areas
 * Rhyd Ddu is only a wee place so there's probably not a lot that could be added to the article
 * Tywyn needs a map of the town centre.

 * (WT-en) Tarr3n 06:48, 27 October 2009 (EDT)

 * All very good stuff and this is definitely a guide status article in my book. I have not been to Snowdonia for many years and my knowledge is a bit rusty. If it were not (!) I might volunteer to help with a park map, despite my own rather large ongoing (WT-en) map project. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 07:20, 27 October 2009 (EDT)

If this were to be featured would it be dotm or ftt?
Now this is currently classified as guide (don't ask me how deserving of that status it is) - if it were to be featured, would it go in the dotm/otbp or in the ftt column? Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:36, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

 * I'd say OtBP. ϒpsilon (talk) 16:50, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Listings outside the park
It seems there are many see and sleep listings that fall outside the boundary of the mapshape. The see listings are okay to keep per WV:OUTSIDE, but the sleep is not. Is it that visitors typically stay overnight in these places outside the park? If not, I think these should be moved to the relevant city article as it needs to comply with the new policy. (I know I seem harsh but that is because I'm working on doing some small cleanups in preparation for nominating this for dotm/otbp). -- SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 07:20, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Snowdonia National Park


text:
Talk:Snowy Mountains

These pages don't follow the MoS. I have asked the anon. author to follow the guide. --(WT-en) Nzpcmad 20:54, 1 Jul 2004 (EDT)

Copied from Uniquely Snowies!
I'm moving this stuff here for integration later. --(WT-en) Evan 22:01, 1 Jul 2004 (EDT)

Uniquely Snowies!

Where on earth can you:

 * Walk on the rooftop of Australia?
 * Watch the sunrise from the summit of Mount Kosciuszko, the Australian mainland's highest mountain?
 * Play golf at the highest course in Australia?
 * Explore Australia's highest river, the Snowy River?
 * Taste famous cool-climate wines at the cellar door?
 * Go fishing in the morning and hiking in the afternoon?
 * Immerse yourself in the largest National Park in New South Wales?
 * Rediscover the walking tracks of early explorers?
 * Have your photo taken next to a 10m tall trout?
 * Enjoy the therapeutic effects of a thermal pool situated in the bottom of a gorge?
 * Visit New South Wales’ largest trout farm?
 * Discover the country's platypus capital?

The answer? In the Snowy Mountains!

For more information, visit www.snowymountains.com.au

Visitor centre info
Copied from To talk to a local, call our Visitor Information Centres. --(WT-en) Evan 22:20, 1 Jul 2004 (EDT)

To talk to a local, call our Visitor Information Centres

Cooma Visitors Centre Tollfree: 1800 636 525 Sharp St, Cooma NSW 2630

Snowy Region Visitors Centre Tollfree: 1800 004 439 Kosciuszko Rd, Jindabyne NSW 2627

Tumut Region Visitor Centre Phone: 02 6947 7025 5 Adelong Rd, Tumut NSW 2720

For more information, visit www.snowymountains.com.au

Mainland Oceania
The article says "The Snowies are possibly the best you could get in terms of alpine weather in mainland Oceania." I'm not completely sure what this means. Does mainland Oceania include anything besides mainland Australia? If not, the second term seems more recognizable to me. —Granger (talk · contribs) 16:54, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

 * “Mainland Oceania” seems bizarre to me. I agree that the proposed alternative terminology makes more sense. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 17:11, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Technically PNG has much higher mountains than Australia does (about 4000m in elevation), and the mountains in NZ have much more fjords and an alpine weather than the ones in Australia do. Tasmania also has quite an alpine weather, given it snows nearly everywhere outside its capital during winter despite the low altitude, and then there's also the occasional snow in New Caledonia's "Grande Terre".
 * The reason why I used "mainland Oceania" is because many think that Oceania only has beaches (which is what's mostly thought of) + some desert in Australia, but the mountains and the alpine weather are often not recognised by many. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 22:55, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Let's change it to "mainland Australia" then. I think that is clearer for readers. If you want to note the other places in Oceania with alpine weather, that seems fine to me. —Granger (talk · contribs) 10:38, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:13, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Banner
Title. Current is a bit dark towards the right. -- SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:49, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 1. Much more attractive. Vidimian (talk) 14:28, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Yep. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:52, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 07:04, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Snowy Mountains


text:
Talk:Snowy Mountains (NSW)

Are there other "Snowy Mountains" or does this need to move? Even if there are others and it needs to be disambiged, is (NSW) the right way to do it? I think we want to stick with full names... I don't know NSW so I thought I'd ask. (WT-en) Majnoona 15:45, 13 May 2004 (EDT)
 * I think Australia's Snowy Mountains ar by far the most famous. Other mountains might have snow on them, but few would be called by their most distinctive feature, snow. It rarely snows anywhere else in Australia, to the name alone is most descriptive. Anyway there is already a growing article under the unambiguated name, so I will redirect this article there. -- (WT-en) Huttite 18:10, 7 Jan 2005 (EST)

title: Talk:Snowy Mountains (NSW)


text:
Talk:Snuba

VFD?
Does this merit its own article? Or should the info just be included in the Scuba diving article? See discussion at Project:Votes_for_deletion. (WT-en) Pashley 09:41, 6 August 2009 (EDT)

This article is biased and makes statements that are opinion masquerading as fact. This is possibly one of the reasons for some of the votes to delete. If these statements were to be toned down it might make the pro-deletion lobby more tolerant. Personally I am in favour of keeping, as in spite of these issues I feel that the article provides mostly valid and useful information, and is not suited to a merge with Scuba diving. However it reads too much like an advertising brochure for my taste. (WT-en) Pbsouthwood 17:33, 25 August 2009 (EDT)

VFD Discussion
Unlikely to merit its own travel article.
 * Merge and redirect to Scuba diving. (WT-en) Texugo 23:51, 2 August 2009 (EDT)
 * A lot of work is being done on this page right now. I'd say inform the user and/or wait until that user has finished editing before making any moves. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 03:46, 4 August 2009 (EDT)
 * I agree. Best to give active new users a chance to make their contributions before making a decision. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 14:43, 4 August 2009 (EDT)

 * I lean toward keep since there seems to be quite a bit of info, enough for an independent article. However, I would not object strongly to merging instead. I would like to see more explanation: how does SNUBA work? What are the advantages over normal snorkeling? Can you SNUBA on your own, or does it require expert guidance? What depth range does it apply for? etc. (WT-en) Pashley 09:49, 6 August 2009 (EDT)

 * Keep. I agree with (WT-en) Pashley.  --(WT-en) inas 19:03, 6 August 2009 (EDT)

Pashley, if you read what is there, it is evident that the airtank stays above on a boat and you have a 7 meter tether. I still feel very strongly about a merge/delete, especially since this is a single company promoting their service, and it's not all that terribly unique in my opinion. (WT-en) Texugo 23:25, 6 August 2009 (EDT)

 * Merge into Scuba diving. What is relevant to say about Snuba already exists in this article, and can easily be condensed into a 1 or 2 paragraph section, I don't see a need to wait and breed more content into the wrong place, in this case. All that's notable about it is lack of carrying a tank on your back, lack of freedom since you're tied to a 7 meter cord, and that you don't need to be certified as a diver. I can't see anything else that distinguishes it enough to make it worth repeating all the similarities with scuba and snorkeling. Listing where it's offered, IMO, is not necessary, as I can't picture anyone planning a trip based on wanting to Snuba, it's simply something to point out as an option if you ever come across it. And per Texugo, we don't allow articles for companies – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 18:47, 7 August 2009 (EDT)

There are many factors that make Snuba unique from scuba diving. 1. The raft itself acts as a diving platform, meaning people that are already nervous about their first experience diving are not just bobbing around in the ocean. 2. The raft is highly visible and provides a measure of safety to prevent against boat traffic accidents. 3. The limited mobility of the 7 meter hose prevents descending deeper than 7 meters, prevents people from straying off and not following instruction, virtually eliminates the problems of Decompression Sickness "the bends" as the depth of 7m for a maximum time of 25 minutes is not deep or long enough to absorb enough nitrogen to produce enough bubbles in the blood to cause the bends (not one case of bends through SNUBA in over 20 years). 4. No certification - yes, uncertified divers can try DSD scuba courses. However, there are many people that have an unnecessay aversion to diving through stereotypes and myths. After experiencing a truly soft approach to diving they are more likely to feel differently about scuba and proceed or allow children to proceed with scuba diving. 5. No tanks to wear - just as innovative as scuba was to those who wanted more freedom, removing the tanks allows another entire range of participants to try diving. Many people have been given the chance to dive that never would have if the option was not available. The handicapped, obese, elderly, children, people with weak knees / backs. 6. Overall attention to safety - soft weights instead of hard to prevent injuries out of the water and damage to coral should a weightbelt be dropped. Padding on the underside of the raft to prevent head injuries, harness attachment to prevent accidental regulator removal underwater, specialized training in addition to scuba diving theory and training. 7. Planning a trip - you would not believe the number of "family men" that have not been able to scuba dive for years as they respect their wifes belief that scuba is dangerous. There are many such people that are either aware of Snuba or seek out Snuba to provide an avenue to opening their family up to the wonders of diving. Many people want to scuba, but are put off by the cost of training and time involved, especially if they live in an area where there is no diving or only recieve limited holiday every year. Snuba gives them the chance to dive and tehy will seek it out. 8. Scuba is not snuba plain and simple. Other than the tanks and the regulator everything is presented and done in a different manner to provide a unique experience that can be translated into education of the ocean and environment, a chance to bring someone into scuba that previously would not have, and provide memories for a lifetime.
 * Keep Snuba is a completetly unique form of diving that has taken the unregulated form of diving called Hookah diving and applied standards and proceedures to it. Throughout the world there are operators that try to pass off hookah diving as a safe alternative to scuba diving. These operations are not licensed, insured, Do not provide professional instructors and are responsible for promoting irresponsible diving practices (ie. not recieving proper training

I am writing this as a PADI Open Water Scuba Instructor and also a Snuba Guide. From my position as a professional in both areas - they are different and equally noteworthy as holiday activities that should be sought to participate in. Just as scuba and snorkeling are different - Snuba is a seperate regulated activity that has gained quite a lot of recognition in America and Japan as such. With continued development and exposure as a holiday activity it is hoped that more people will become educated about our coral reefs. Some people will go on to become licensed scuba divers, some will remain snorkellers and some will seek out a repeat SNUBA adventure on their next holiday.

Lastly, according to the Goals and non-Goals section of Wikivoyage.org this article would be useful for: - travellers still planning - what activites to do (when seeing Snuba as an available activity in a destination it will allow them to read more about the activity within Wikivoyage.org without having to exit to try to find possibly false or misleading information) - Inclusion in other travel guides as the information for all contacts and destinations is up to date. - For travellers on the road - for anyone who sees a brochure or hears from other travellers about Snuba it will give them a source of information to research. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) AlohaMatt (talk • contribs)

 * Looks to me (non-expert, I only snorkel) like the article should be kept, re-titled, and generalised to cover all "hookah diving". SNUBA is just one company's version; cover that too. but with less touting of that company's service. (WT-en) Pashley 05:54, 8 August 2009 (EDT)

 *  Merge & delete Keep. My mind's open, since I don't totally understand what this is (wikipedia:Snuba was not helpful, since it is an unsourced promotional piece...). But our Project:Deletion policy is pretty clear—no articles for individual businesses. Should this be merged into a Surface supplied diving/Hooka diving article, or just back into the Scuba diving article, I'm not sure. It clearly will have to be both reduced and rewritten to avoid being an advertisement. And Matt, your vfd comment reads like an advert—please read the deletion policy, and explain (succinctly) why your page qualifies for an article.  --(WT-en) Peter Talk 11:41, 8 August 2009 (EDT)
 * A merge and delete would interfere with the attribution history of the text, wouldn't it? (WT-en) LtPowers 13:25, 8 August 2009 (EDT)
 * Not hardly. It's certainly not policy to keep redirects from articles for businesses (the deletion policy states the opposite), and we don't have any consensus behind keeping them around to preserve attribution history. Even if we did, the vfd discussion clearly shows who the author of the article was, and therefore where the content came from in a potential merge. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 10:24, 9 August 2009 (EDT)

 * The similarities with Scuba are far to vast for this to warrant a separate article, even if there were multiple companies offering it. It will fit perfectly as a paragraph or two in Scuba diving. If somehow enough non-fluffy and non-repetitive content is added at some point, we could assess then if it needs to be split out for size reasons. But it isn't even close to that now – (WT-en) cacahuate  talk 17:57, 10 August 2009 (EDT)

 * Firstly, I don't think the similarities with Scuba are sufficient to merge the two. Scuba requires proper training and qualifications.  If you are not interested or have the time for this, then you won't read the Scuba article, but may still well do this stuff.  There is a very different demographic who would be interested in this. I think we just need to find the right article title if we think SNUBA is too linked to one commercial organisation.  We just call the article that, and then reference the commercial organisation within the article if required, and de-tout the article.  --(WT-en) inas 02:19, 12 August 2009 (EDT)

 * Note: Wikipedia's Snuba article has been improved; while the name "Snuba" is trademarked and the process is patented, it does seem to be growing as a vacation activity. (WT-en) LtPowers 08:03, 12 August 2009 (EDT)

 * Keep. Snuba has introduced more non-divers to scuba diving than any other organized and affiliated effort.  And, was done so inadvertently.   Snuba does not offer scuba or is promoted as an alternative to scuba.  The name and program is proprietary and unique only to Snuba.  If this page were to be considered for merging with a generic category it would be "snorkeling" or "water activities."   Snuba is not scuba.  The Snuba market and programs are directly specifically at non-divers and snorkelers.  I know this first hand.  The dive industry should embrace any efforts to promote Snuba. 69.224.222.179 18:47, 12 August 2009 (EDT)

 * The name and program are as proprietary and unique to Snuba as KFC's recipe is to KFC. We are not the dive industry and we have a policy against promoting commercial enterprises. (WT-en) Texugo 03:06, 13 August 2009 (EDT)

 * The issue is not whether SNUBA is promoting a commercial company, but if having an article on it is of interest and benefit to the traveller. We don't exclude the possibility of commercial promotion - after all every private enterprise we list has that possibility - we just put it behind the priority of giving benefit to the traveller.   If we were wikifood, KFC would probably at least rate a mention.  --(WT-en) inas 06:55, 17 August 2009 (EDT)

 * We're not Wikifood, but a search on "KFC" gets many pages of hits. Our China article, for example, has "As everywhere in the world, prices for food and drink at Chinese airports are vastly inflated. Coffee that is ¥25 in a downtown shop is ¥78 at the same chain's airport branches. KFC seems to be the one exception; their many airport shops charge the same prices as other branches. Paying ¥20 or more for a KFC meal may or may not be worthwhile when there are ¥5 noodles across the street, but at the airports it is usually the best deal around." (WT-en) Pashley 11:27, 23 August 2009 (EDT)

 * If the SNUBA article is seen as promoting a specific company, it is largely because they are leader in a field of one. They dont really operate in a field where there is much competition, so the article must necessarily promote the only participant. Not much one can do about that. I think that the differences from SCUBA are more important than the similarities. It really can be seen as an alternative to both SCUBA and Snorkelling. Some of the safety aspects and advantages claimed are debatable, but I dont think that is the function of this forum. I could expound on this topic to drive a non diver to distraction, so I won't unless someone really wants me to. (WT-en) Pbsouthwood 17:17, 25 August 2009 (EDT)

 * Keep. There may be some issues about whether SNUBA is promoting a specific company, but the term is probably becoming a generic for a mode of diving that is significantly different from recreational SCUBA. As one who has been involved in Recreational, Technical, Scientific and Commercial diving, including instruction in all four of these categories for about 25 years, I dont see where else the information would fit in. It is definitively not snorkel, It is debateably SCUBA, in that it is self contained, but equally it is surface supplied, which in commercial diving is seen as a major distinction fron SCUBA, and similarly in recreational SCUBA where it is generally not used at all by the major diver certification agencies. If it were to be merged with SCUBA it would probably be necessary to rename SCUBA to Recreational Underwater Diving, which would not be particularly user freindly. Another option would be to rename to Recreational Hookah Diving. I would accept that without liking it very much. I have some issues with the claims made by the author of the article, but they are issues of fact, opinion and policy, not whether the article is appropriate as a stand alone. To close off, I would comment that I am very new to Wikivoyage in spite of the number of words I have uploaded, and do not consider myself to be in any way knowledgeable on Wikivoyage policy. This contribution is in response to a request to comment here an the basis of my background in diving. I hope this helps. (WT-en) Pbsouthwood 17:17, 25 August 2009 (EDT)
 * I have been back to the SNUBA article and my second impression is that the explanatory sections read a bit too much like an advertising brochure for my taste. There is a constant repetition that the equipment is safe, but nowhere is it mentioned that there is a risk of a lung overpressure or drowning accident, just as for Scuba, and that these are probably the greatest hazards for novice divers. I dont know if this is sufficient to violate Wikivoyage policy, but I would advise toning the hard sell down a bit. Linking to places where it is available seems acceptable, as it is unlikely that this information will be available elsewhere in Wikivoyage. These issues could be corrected easily. I am willing to do them if necessary, but feel that it would be more polite to let the author make the adjustments. (WT-en) Pbsouthwood 18:07, 25 August 2009 (EDT)

 * Related questions: We do not seem to have an article on snorkelling. Should we? My guess would be it is at least as common as scuba, let alone snuba. Currently diving is just a redirect to "scuba diving". Should it instead be some sort of overview/disambiguation page with links to snorkelling, scuba and snuba, plus perhaps a brief mention of the deep diving with full suit & a statement that we do not cover that because it is almost never recreational? Any volunteers to write either page? (WT-en) Pashley 22:26, 7 September 2009 (EDT)

 * I will add them to my 'to do' list. Just to check we are on the same wavelength, Diving is to be a disambiguation page directing to options of Scuba diving, SNUBA, and Snorkelling. Possibly also Free diving which is deep breath hold diving, whereas Snorkelling is often considered to be mainly surface swimming with a snorkel. I am taking it that the consensus is to keep SNUBA? Cheers, (WT-en) Pbsouthwood 15:35, 26 September 2009 (EDT)
 * Diving converted to disambiguation page, with brief explanations and links to Scuba diving, SNUBA, Snorkelling and Free diving. The snorkelling and Free diving topics are a bit outside my expertise and interest, but I will keep an eye on them if anyone else writes them, or may put in a couple of outlines at some stage if no-one else is interested. Cheers, (WT-en) Pbsouthwood 16:15, 26 September 2009 (EDT)
 * Looks good, although I'm still wonder if the SNUBA article should be moved to Hookah diving. I'll leave that question for the divers. (WT-en) Pashley 12:00, 28 September 2009 (EDT)

 * As one of the divers, I dont have particularly strong opinion either way. SNUBA would be a subset of Hookah, as Hookah is usually surface supply from a boat or shore, often from a compressor, whereas SNUBA is surface supply from a compressed air cylinder on a self contained and unmanned float, and I dont know of any conventional recreational Hookah operations. I would say leave it for now, and merge with hookah if it ever becomes appropriate. If someone ever writes an article on Hookah then SNUBA could and probably should be included in it. (WT-en) Pbsouthwood 15:40, 9 October 2009 (EDT)

Outcome: Kept --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 15:29, 26 October 2009 (EDT)

Disadvantages
As this article is, by its very nature, about a recreational activity controlled by a single corporation, could we have a little bit written about the downside? See for example wikipedia:Snuba, and is Snuba safe?. --(WT-en) burmesedays 12:40, 29 August 2011 (EDT)
 * I will look into it • • • (WT-en) Peter (Southwood) Talk 02:42, 30 August 2011 (EDT)
 * Thanks Peter. I figured this would be your realm :). Do you know of any specific cases of a shallow water embolism when using SNUBA equipment? --(WT-en) burmesedays 03:33, 30 August 2011 (EDT)
 * No, I have no information on Snuba accidents. I have added some information from Wikipedia on safety aspects, but haven't checked all their sources. Most of it sounds at least plausible, and I have rehashed to suit our needs. Take a look and see if you think it is sufficient. Cheers, • • • (WT-en) Peter (Southwood) Talk 03:57, 30 August 2011 (EDT)

Advertising?
Wikivoyage is not a site for advertising brand-name equipment. If there is a conflict in using the term Snuba as a generic the article may have to be deleted. I supported the retention of this article in a previous VfD discussion as the information could be useful to a traveller, but if somone is going to insist that the term only refers to a trade-name, then it will either have to go or be renamed to a non-trade-name title. • • • (WT-en) Peter (Southwood) Talk 02:42, 30 August 2011 (EDT)

If this becomes a problem, I suggest we rename to Recreational airline diving, which, though somewhat clunky, is at least accurate as a generic, and create a few redirects for the alternative terms, including Snuba, SNUBA, Hookah diving, and Surface supplied recreational diving. • • • (WT-en) Peter (Southwood) Talk 04:31, 30 August 2011 (EDT)

Capitalization
Snuba is not an acronym and therefore does not require capitalization. Wikipedia doesn't capitalize it, and our article uses the word capitalized and uncapitalized, alternately. I don't know whether the company itself prefers it to be capitalized or not, but even if so, it wouldn't be a mandate for us to do so-- we don't do that for restaurants or hotels or any other non-acronym listing. Besides, we are leaning towards using snuba as a generic term and not as a company name. Anyway, since we usually regard all-caps to be an eyesore, I propose we move this article to Snuba and adjust the article text accordingly. What do you think? (WT-en) texugo 23:02, 7 September 2011 (EDT)
 * Fully agreed. Snuba is a portmanteau and not an acronym.--(WT-en) burmesedays 23:21, 7 September 2011 (EDT)
 * Also agree on all points. Either we use it as a generic or the article name should chang to an equivalent generic. I think the term is useful for searches so would support keeping it as the article name unless someone objects because it is copyrighted, in which case it should be changed to a generic alternative, and all of those that I can think of are a bit clumsy. Cheers, • • • (WT-en) Peter (Southwood) Talk 12:47, 8 September 2011 (EDT)
 * As there have been no objections in the last nine years, I will move the article to "Snuba" in a couple of days. Ground Zero (talk) 03:17, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Snuba


text:
Talk:Snyder County

is this even a real county? --(WT-en) Yutonhills 12:14, 10 May 2008 (EDT)

 * Apparently. (WT-en) Jpatokal 06:54, 11 May 2008 (EDT)

title: Talk:Snyder County


text:
Talk:Sochi

Map link

 * An English online interactive map of Sochi can be found here: .

Removed this link, but it may be useful for contributors, so I'll put it here. (WT-en) texugo 10:06, 4 July 2011 (EDT)

Reversion question
I've had to revert this edit three times already, and so I'm reluctant to do so again, but I can't figure out why this is being removed. Any thoughts? (WT-en) LtPowers 19:06, 16 September 2011 (EDT)

 * It's not clear why the original text is being removed, so provided the info isn't incorrect then your revert seems fine. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 20:35, 16 September 2011 (EDT)

 * The user in question left a note on my talk page explaining the deletion. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 21:53, 16 September 2011 (EDT)

 * Odd that he did so for you but not for me. The explanation is also unsatisfying, for reasons I explained on your talk page.  (WT-en) LtPowers 09:06, 17 September 2011 (EDT)

Olympic article?
I already started creating an Olympic article for the 2018 Olympics in Pyeongchang. If anyone knows Sochi then maybe they could create a similar one? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 15:18, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Alternative banner for this article?
I have previously created an alternative banner for this article (which was initially created for the parallel article at the Hebrew Wikivoyage, but I decided to suggest we'll use it here at the English Wikivoyage article as well). Which banner do you prefer that we'll use on the top of this article? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 13:31, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The current banner would be good for an article about palm trees. The new banner shows us Sochi. Ground Zero (talk) 18:30, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * New banner. The current one feels too generic. --Nelson Ricardo (talk) 02:11, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I assume the original was chosen for the (perceived?) novelty of palm trees in Russia. In that context, they make sense as a banner.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:17, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
 * New banner AlasdairW (talk) 22:27, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sochi


text:
Talk:Socorro

This is a great start to an interesting article! Thanks for the info! -- (WT-en) Evan 16:38, 10 Nov 2003 (PST)

Thanks - just inspired to put Socorro on the map. I hope to maybe register and add more stuff about places I've lived in... Shami

Region
Please note that, by the region definitions used here, Socorro is in the Central (New Mexico) region, rather than the Southwest (New Mexico) one. These things are somewhat amorphous, to be sure, but this seems to fit best. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 00:27, 24 October 2006 (EDT)

title: Talk:Socorro


text:
Talk:Socotra

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) 12:43, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

 * While the first is interesting and unique, I feel like it's not very aesthetically pleasing, so prefer the second. James A ▪ talk 12:47, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

 * I prefer the current banner, which I consider a better composition. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:45, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

 * I prefer the current banner, it has a more catching composition. Danapit (talk) 18:14, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

 * Proposed Syced (talk) 07:40, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Adding Warningbox
Template:Warningbox for Socotra should be applied. The template is meant to be applied when there are travel advisories warning against travel, of which Socotra is not short of. There are non-obvious dangers, since travel influencers have recently been traveling to Socotra to market the destination as being "the safe untouched part of Yemen". However, serious complications exist with regard to its governance by the Southern Transitional Council. Per the US State Department, invalid visa arrangements are the norm for Socotra. There is no viable way to provide consular assistance, and when conflict has broken out in the surrounding region, maritime shipping and civil aviation has seriously affected Socotra - leaving tourists stranded. There is an ever-present risk of harm to visitors in Socotra in the event of the spread of armed conflict and due to the general lack of law enforcement infrastructure. Socotra is not an adventure tourism destination or an oasis of calm, even if tour packages are sold to Emiratis and adventurous Westerners. There are legitimate risks to travel to the region that tourists should consider before choosing to travel there. A possible way to move forward is to add the WarningBox back, but to revise it to include less alarmist language. However, moving it to Stay Safe isn't sufficient to make these dangers visibly clear to visitors. cc @Brycehughes Cyali (talk) 01:44, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * If there are special circumstances for an island that are separate from those in the country in general, as you established above, they merit a separate warning. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:48, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * The U.S. State Department says it can't provide U.S. citizens with consular assistance in Socotra. I don't think this is a valid reason for a warning box. Do you have more links you can provide about the physical danger to tourists in Socotra? I saw that the only link that mentioned Socotra in your original warning was the U.S. State Department link – the other links did not mention it. Brycehughes (talk) 03:57, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Just to confirm - the only thing that would satisfy you is evidence that there is immediate harm to going there? Template:Warningbox does mention non-obvious risk to life and limb, but gives a number of "obvious" or non-immediate dangers for its usage, including travel advisories, death penalty for drug possession, etc. At this point, I think your grievance is more with the wording on the Template itself. Perhaps this discussion should be tabled so you can propose these changes directly on the Template talk, especially since your changes stretch across many pages and the wording of the template is indeed ambiguous. Until the template usage is clarified, I'm not sure you'll ever be satisfied and it's clearly impacting our ability to work towards consensus. Cyali (talk) 04:22, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't have a grievance... we're discussing the content of a webpage on the internet. I'm saying to put a large warning box at the top of the article, we should have a better reason than a lack of consular assistance. Brycehughes (talk) 04:41, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * There are other reasons given above, including "when conflict has broken out in the surrounding region, maritime shipping and civil aviation has seriously affected Socotra - leaving tourists stranded". Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:49, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Yeah I get it, but I just don't see it, e.g. https://www.google.com/search?q=tourists+stranded+in+socotra+-coronavirus+-covid. Brycehughes (talk) 04:53, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I have no view about safety in Socotra, but what I'd wonder is how safe shipping would be from Houthi piracy and missile strikes. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:29, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * This is a reasonably recent report if it's of any interest. Brycehughes (talk) 21:56, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
 * +1 to Brycehughes – I think a caution box would suffice better. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 07:45, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * After thinking about it more, I would be okay with a CautionBox under Stay Safe and Get In too. I do think these risks are legitimate but of course, I can only go off what is said in the UAE. Cyali (talk) 08:14, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
 * If you're suggesting having two cautionboxes that say the same thing, I couldn't agree with that. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:35, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I meant one for the ambiguous visa situation for Get In, and another for the rest. It makes more sense to keep the visa situation outside of Stay Safe - since visa policies are typically covered under Get In. Cyali (talk) 19:46, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
 * You could put the visa stuff in a caution box in the Get In section, and then add anything else that you're privy to as prose in the Stay Safe section – that's what the Stay Safe section is there for – we don't need to box everything. Brycehughes (talk) 21:52, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Socotra


text:
Talk:Soda Springs

A real article?
So this page is an orphan-- can anyone confirm that it qualifies as an article? Thanks (WT-en) Majnoona 09:14, 31 March 2006 (EST)

 * According to WikiPedia:Soda Springs there is a Soda Springs in Idaho. I'll update the article. -- (WT-en) Ryan 14:07, 31 March 2006 (EST)

title: Talk:Soda Springs


text:
Talk:Soen

Comments
I am not sure I understand the relationship between Souen being a city in Hokkaido and it being a region in Sapporo City in Hokkaido in Japan. Is it a separate city near Sapporo or a suburb (or ward) of Sapporo? Also does Souen mean "the mulberry plantation" or is that some other place? - (WT-en) Huttite 07:47, 9 November 2009 (EST)

 * Soen is a district of Sapporo, it's merged now. The name means "mulberry plantation" and the article was machine translated... (WT-en) Jpatokal 10:12, 9 November 2009 (EST)

title: Talk:Soen


text:
Talk:Sofia

It seems that Huttite removes regularly the external links I add. Why is that? Is it wrong? Please tell me, so I do it right in future - mapto (unregisetred), 16 Jan 2006, 11:05 EET

 * See Project:external links. We have a strict policy of only linking to primary sources. --(WT-en) Evan 16:11, 16 Jan 2006 (EST)

Prices
More information about prices (selection "By train" for example) were useful. Thanks!

mobsters
whilst probably true that the crime rate is high (as it is in any major city) and i don't dispute that some police will take advantage of foreigners. i don't believe anyone, pedestrians or otherwise will have problems with mobsters unless they insult one or are one themselves. i would recommend caution crossing the street though.

Deleted listings
I rolled back the deletion of three listings -- although the editor said they looked like advertisements, they don't seem particularly toutish to me, and regardless they should probably be edited rather than just deleted. --(WT-en) Evan 18:39, 13 June 2007 (EDT)

Do
Biggest IMAX cinema in the world ?? Yeah, right.

I don't like the article at all, its completely biased, and not true... I donb't know if the author has been at all in Sofia...(WT-en) DemonX 08:51, 24 September 2009 (EDT)

 * If you love a place, one tend to be a bit rosy, but that is what wikis are for Plunge Forward and make it better and more neutral? --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 09:37, 24 September 2009 (EDT)

Tour listings
I believe all three of these tour listings are at variance with this site's tour listing policy, as anyone could walk, hike or run on these routes without a guide (free or not):

If you think any of these listings should be restored to the article, please explain why an independent traveller couldn't take these walks, runs or hikes on their own. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:13, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Stay safe changes
I've been in Sophia for almost a week now and I feel that some more cautions need to be added to the city, but I'm unsure how these changes will be received.

There isn't really two ways to say it, the gypsies/roma here steal things. I don't want to be accused of racism or breach any policies but the problem of petty theft is so closely tied to Roma communities and they are a distinct threat. The locals are wary of them and I think it's fair to say travelers should be as well. I've tried to word the caution in a way that isn't derogatory, but the traveler comes first and I'm not sure a general warning about thieves is as usefull.

I have also personally witnessed large numbers of nationalist/neo-nazi/far right/paramilitary gangs on the streets in the outer suburbs, covered in swastikas and celtic crosses. I'm unsure how much of a threat they pose to travelers, but they have been involved repeatedly in anti-gay and anti-immigrant protests in the city for years and have often called for violence. you see nazi graffiti everywhere in the southern neighborhoods, and something should probably be said about that as well.

I would welcome any comment on this, because it is a sensitive area. —The preceding comment was added by username/Willthewanderer (talk • contribs)

 * I think you can say locals blame Gypsies, but I don't think you can assume you actually know the ethnicity of the people doing the stealing. I know that in Rome, people say "watch out for the Gypsies", but I understand that quite a lot of the thieves aren't Roma at all, but other kinds of people from Eastern Europe. "Gypsies steal" is a longtime racist stereotype that's prone to confirmation bias, so be cautious. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:54, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

 * I read your edits. I think they're quite problematic, for the reasons I mention, but if we're really positive the offenders are truly Romanies in Romany neighborhoods, the very least you could do is capitalize "Gypsies". But I do find this stuff really troubling, on the order of "watch out for those Jewish cheaters" or any other traditional invidious stereotype. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:07, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

 * I think there is very little to be gained from blaming certain ethnic groups for the crime that's going on. And it is unnecessarily inflaming. Hobbitschuster (talk) 19:22, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

 * Shall we edit these changes? Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:41, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I probably should have posted the discussion before making the edits, I was trying to phrase the warning about thieves in such a way that the ethnicity of the thieves wasn't relevant; but honestly I wasn't sure how else to put it. While I am aware of the risk of perpetuating a stereotype the Gypsies here are a persecuted minority many Gypsies turn to petty crime and I have seen it with my own eyes.

I wouldn't even mention the ethnicity of the thieves but 70% of the prison population here are Roma according to Wikipedia and being frank with travelers about who in a crowd is more likely to steal their camera seems pertinent.

Would there be a better way of phrasing the warning so that it isn't so prejudiced or inflammatory? Would a general warning about thieves suffice here? How else would you designate these bad neighborhoods? Geographically they are generally on the outskirts but there are also a number I passed that are inner city slums. Forgive me if I lacked sensitivity --Willthewanderer (talk) 08:14, 1 September 2017 (UTC) On the basis of what you said and pending discussion I cut my edits to a simple warning, but even reading the rest of the section "If you get in legal trouble with some of the locals, the Bulgarian police and judiciary may not protect you adequately because of corruption and nepotism." It seems inflammatory, but still quiet relevant.

 * I would be very cautious about assuming that percentages of an oppressed minority in prison show what percent of criminals are members of that minority. In the U.S., the percentage of black people in prison (and even more so, in jail because of lack of money for bail) is quite disproportionate to the number of crimes committed by them. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:23, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

I'm only making the caution because of what I have seen myself, multiple thefts,roma selling expensive phones to local gangsters, the pawn shops side by side next to their slums. My only interest is in ensuring travelers aren't victims of theft because they are not aware of the position roma have in Bulgarian society. If there is a non-predjudicial way to convey that then all the better —The preceding comment was added by Willthewanderer (talk • contribs)

 * You could write something like "Members of the Roma minority tend to be blamed for most of these crimes; take that for whatever it's worth." Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:57, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:54, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Catholic cathedral Sofia-2.jpg

 * No FoP in Bulgaria. Do we want this? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:00, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

 * No, the photo sucks, IMO, and the building is of moderate interest at most. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:33, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Weird Dos
I was wondering how you guys feel about these 4 Dos: Free bike tour, Eat with a local host, pub crawl, and The red flat here. They sound like a dozen other arbitrary short lived, pop up thing that wont last very long and dont seem to be particularly worth mentioning, like tour companies and other almost tout like things. I mean if someone is interested in them, they can just look into Google Maps, but why would WV be a good place to mention these particular 4?

Are you fine with me deleting them?

Cheers, Ceever (talk) 18:24, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

 * What is even that weird phone no. for the dinner, and the US$ price??? Ceever (talk) 18:28, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

 * The Red flat is apparently a place that you can visit, like a small-scale theme park or museum, so that one I wouldn't delete.
 * The three tours are a little so and so, undoubtedly someone could be interested in the activities, but I'm not sure they're compliant with our tour policy. The phone number thing and dollar price do look weird, the latter would be understandable in countries where tourists use hard currency. So delete those if you like. --Ypsilon (talk) 18:58, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

 * Bike tours can be listed, though the language should describe the tour and not tout the city. I wouldn't have thought any of the other tours are OK per policy, but if Red Flat is, it should probably be listed under "See," with the question of whether visits are only by guided tour clarified. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:03, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Aren't museums supposed to go under Do? Ceever (talk) 21:15, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
 * No, they are supposed to go under See - and . Daggerstab (talk) 08:03, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I would also remove the "free" bike tour. While most reviews are positive, there seems to be a clear monetary motive and you still need to rent the bikes from them: https://www.tripadvisor.com/Attraction_Review-g294452-d2204523-Reviews-or60-Sofia_Green_Tour-Sofia_Sofia_Region.html
 * I feel, it is a dodgy way to advertise and it is tout like. Also, on Tripadvisor they are even selling normal tours for quite some prices. So, there is no reason to prefer them here over other "free" tours.
 * It just doesnt feel right to use WV to trick travellers this way. Now, I actually feel like mentioning this in a separate paragraph, for travellers to be aware that these tours do expect money even if they claim to be free.
 * Cheers Ceever (talk) 21:37, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Museums are listed under "See." Bike tours, regardless of expense, are considered a value-added activity under this site's WV:Tour policy. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:05, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
 * There's an actual free walking tour in English, https://freesofiatour.com/, but it's not in the article, even though it's been active for at least ten years... Daggerstab (talk) 08:07, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Also looks like a tour to marketeer their other non-free tours. I don't know, I am sceptical about these "free" tours. Don't really think they belong on WV. You will never know how long they exist, at least a sight or museum has some continuance. (Yes, I understand they have been around for 10 years.) They are probably also advertised in hostels or accommodations and can be found on Google Maps. But this is just my opinion. Cheers Ceever (talk) 14:34, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The governing guidelines on what kinds of tours can be listed and in what situations, which you might remember were adopted after a lot of discussion, are at Tour. If there's anything there that you would like to revisit, just start or add to a discussion on Wikivoyage talk:Listings, link it here and consider publicizing it at Requests for comment and the Travellers' pub. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:55, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * As I said, it's just my opinion, not binding in any way . Sorry, I cannot track all discussions here and spend all life on WV, just to make a point. Kind of makes you think how biased such discussions and decisions must be. ... C'est la vie. Thanks for feedback. Ceever (talk) 18:11, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sofia


text:
Talk:Software for travellers

Slippeery slope of travel topics. There's a LOT of crappy and useless software for travellers. Please list really only the best. I've begun with Metro, because I feel it's THE essential software for city travellers. Public transportation in big cities becomes much less confusing thanks to it. try it, I am sure you will find it very helpful. And, hey, it's free. What else can you ask for. ;-) -- (WT-en) Nils 20:54, 2 Apr 2004 (EST)

 * Metro really is an excellent program - I use it a lot myself and have contributed many cities to it and I think Wikivoyage should promote it because Metro is also a contributor-based project. By the way, there is a web-based trip planner called iMetro also by Patrice Bernard which is an exact port of the cities and routes of the Palm version of Metro. Maybe we could link this from every city which is featured on Metro (and, as you probably know, this is a LOT of cities!), so that users can get a nice, convenient online trip planner for each city. Thanks, (WT-en) Ronline 01:26, 3 Apr 2004 (EST)

 * Are any of Wired's selection of apps actually very good? I have no idea since I do not have or want a smart phone. (Yes, I know the page has been deleted, but this seemed worth noting.) Pashley (talk) 23:14, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:Software for travellers


text:
Talk:Sokaraja

VFD Discussion

 * No content (WT-en) –sumone10154 20:03, 30 April 2012 (EDT)

Result: Kept. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 16:14, 2 June 2012 (EDT)

title: Talk:Sokaraja


text:
Talk:Solo

What is a "Sultan Temple"? I cannot find it in the city of Solo. Where is the location of "Sultan Temple"?
 * There's no Sultan Temple. You might mixed it up with something else. Probably you're looking for Sultan's Palace? (Indonesian: Keraton). If you're looking for temples (Indonesian: Candi), i.e. Hindu-Buddhist temples, you can try Borobudur, Prambanan, Cetho, or Sukuh. Cheers. Bennylin (talk) 14:08, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Major revamp
I'm starting a major revamp on this article. Please help after I finished (probably after you saw inactivity). Hopefully someday it can be featured on the main page :) Bennylin (talk) 14:09, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Benny, your work is veery much appreciated. Just to avoid any disappointment, please have a quick look at our MoS. We don't use picture collages etc. Regards, jan (talk) 14:55, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, I'm open to suggestions and edit :). Bennylin (talk) 15:30, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Also, thumbnails are generally always left flush right by default, and their placement in the middle or on the left side of the page is controversial and against site custom, if not necessarily written policy. But aside from issues of site style like that, your edits are great! Thanks a lot! Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:44, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Having read further through, I do have to agree with SatuSuro's remarks that there are some sections with content that isn't specific to Solo, like the general remarks about food. Please concentrate on specific listings of good warung, restaurants, etc., and coverage of local specialties. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:08, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Reading more: Holy Toledo is that "Understand" section overly long! Look at the same section in the guide for Yogyakarta as somewhat of an example of Wikivoyage style. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:51, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

When is a temple a museum and when is it a place of worship?
The Hindu and/or Buddhist temples of Java and Sumatra tend to have been seen as ancient relics/museums, but there is no doubt that some of them are active places of worship. How can this be reflected in the listings? Is it appropriate to put them under a Places of Worship heading? At what point does a temple cease to be a sightseeing location and become a place of worship? If there is any active worship at all going on there? Any thoughts welcome, just starting to think this through. Tawonmadu (talk) 06:18, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

 * The fact that a place is an active center of worship does not in any way make it not a sight to see. Consider, among many examples, St. Peter's Basilica, the Western Wall and Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif in Jerusalem, the ghats in Varanasi. That said, it doesn't make any sense to me to have a separate section for "Temples" that's separated from "Religious buildings". Instead, there could be a "Religious buildings" subsection, divided into tertiary subsections of "Historic temples" and "Modern houses of worship", if that fits (how old the Tien Kok Sie Temple and Masjid Agung Surakarta are so far hasn't been mentioned in their listings). Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:42, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

 * Agreed, being a place of active worship doesn't stop it being a good place to see. My quandry was about whether they are 'just' ancient relics/museums, and whether we should signal they are actively used for worship in how we classify them. Your suggestion to include these ancient temples as a sub-heading within 'Religious building' sounds like it might work. I'll give it a go and see how it looks. Thanks. Tawonmadu (talk) 07:24, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

 * I think the fact that a place is an active house of worship can always be mentioned in the listing's content, but it's not always a neat division. When my parents and I visited the Parthenon in 1977, a single gentleman appeared to be declaiming to Athena. As I recall, the guards confirmed that he was and said that he always did so at the same time every day. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:44, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

 * I too think it's OK to list historic temples, temple ruins etc. under the same heading as actual places of worship. In the description you can say if the site closed to tourists during the times of worship (but otherwise open), if everyone is welcome anytime, or if non-adherents may only see the site from a distance. ϒpsilon (talk) 08:43, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Move to Surakarta
On Talk:Places_with_unusual_names one editor questioned the listing of Solo because this is only the nickname of the city. Now, if the nickname of the city cannot be used even on a tongue-in-cheek article like that, then why should the very article for the city should be using the nickname as opposed to the city's real name, Surakarta? Also the Wikipedia article uses the official name. ϒpsilon (talk) 07:40, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Rather than nickname, I think it is more accurate to call it an alternative name. 'Solo' is widely used including in formal contexts and, in my experience, is the name most widely heard when talking about the city. I think it is the most likely name that a traveller will hear and see, so is most appropriate here. Wikipedia has a different focus - the totality of knowledge about a place, rather than just the traveller needs. I see that for Jogja, also with two names, there is a redirect from Jogja to Yogyakarta, and then an explanation about the various ways to refer to the city. That seems good. However, it then goes on to refer to Yogyakarta throughout the page which, I think does not reflect the actual experience of the traveller, who will hear Jogja almost exclusively. Tawonmadu (talk) 08:04, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree that Solo is not that funny. Tawonmadu (talk) 08:11, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
 * @Ypsilon: Per @Tawonmadu, "Solo" is widely used, even Javanese people called the city as "Solo" rather than "Surakarta". Wikipedia is about knowledge, Wikivoyage is about travelling & travellers. Veracious (talk) 03:32, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah, if you had the choice of using a 4-syllable name or a 1-syllable name, what would you choose? Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:55, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Of course the 1-syllable name :D, saving 0,5 second of my life for each time i have to mention the city. Veracious (talk) 02:39, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
 * What is Solo's one-syllsble name? I haven't heard that. Ground Zero (talk) 03:44, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh damn! Two-syllable, of course. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:45, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
 * It's okay, Ikan – we've all had some sort of syllable-related hiccup at some point in our lives... SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 08:21, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Solo


text:
Talk:Solomon's Island

There are multiple articles about place(s) called Solomons in Maryland, but as no disambiguation page exists on that simplest and shortest name, I assume they are all talking about the same place. Wikipedia calls the place Solomons, with the alternate name Solomons Island, while the gramatically correct would write Solomon's Island.

To avoid confusion I would suggest merging the following articles into an article about Solomons.
 * Solomons (Maryland)
 * Solomons Island
 * Solomon's Island

To avoid confusion with the Solomon Islands, the word Island should not be used in the title, though the alternate names should be mentioned in the body of the article. - (WT-en) Huttite 05:32, 19 January 2009 (EST)

title: Talk:Solomon's Island


text:
Talk:Solomon Islands

For future reference the Project:CIA World Factbook 2002 import can be found at Talk:Solomon Islands/CIA World Factbook 2002 import. -- (WT-en) Huttite 02:18, 2 Apr 2005 (EST)

Currency, time and spelling conventions
Below is a proposed infobox to let readers know which formatting conventions to use in Wikivoyage articles about Solomon Islands. Ground Zero (talk) 19:14, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Moved to the top of this article. Ground Zero (talk) 12:43, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

– Definitely Australian english here. I'm changing all Pacific countries to Australian SHB2000 (talk) 22:28, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Solomon Islands


text:
Talk:Solomons

There are multiple articles about place(s) called Solomons in Maryland, but as no disambiguation page exists on that simplest and shortest name, I assume they are all talking about the same place. Wikipedia calls the place Solomons, with the alternate name Solomons Island, while the gramatically correct would write Solomon's Island.

To avoid confusion I would suggest merging the following articles into an article about Solomons.
 * Solomons (Maryland)
 * Solomons Island
 * Solomon's Island

To avoid confusion with the Solomon Islands, the word Island should not be used in the title, though the alternate names should be mentioned in the body of the article. - (WT-en) Huttite 05:22, 19 January 2009 (EST)

 * Sounds good. I don't know if there's a good way to use to distinguish between here at the Solomon Islands.  (I know I've had to choose my google search terms carefully when planning a vacation here.) --(WT-en) Jonboy 09:26, 19 January 2009 (EST)

 * Done. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 17:37, 3 February 2009 (EST)

title: Talk:Solomons


text:
Talk:Solomons Island

There are multiple articles about place(s) called Solomons in Maryland, but as no disambiguation page exists on that simplest and shortest name, I assume they are all talking about the same place. Wikipedia calls the place Solomons, with the alternate name Solomons Island, while the gramatically correct would write Solomon's Island.

To avoid confusion I would suggest merging the following articles into an article about Solomons.
 * Solomons (Maryland)
 * Solomons Island
 * Solomon's Island

To avoid confusion with the Solomon Islands, the word Island should not be used in the title, though the alternate names should be mentioned in the body of the article. - (WT-en) Huttite 05:31, 19 January 2009 (EST)

title: Talk:Solomons Island


text:
Talk:Soltau

 * see also: Talk:Soltau/Archive

Tours
I removed this I cannot find any mention of it. If can confirm still exist please update information on page. --Traveler100 (talk) 08:26, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Soltau


text:
Talk:Soma Bay

This article is shaping up real nice! Great work. I made a few changes to bring it more in line with our Project:Manual of style. Specifically, we don't use many Wikipedia links (see Project:Linking to Wikipedia for details) or include images of hotels. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! (WT-en) Maj 13:07, 29 December 2006 (EST)

title: Talk:Soma Bay