text:
Talk:Kyoto

Food & Drink
I've added a bunch of stuff and reorganized part of the Drink section, putting in a British pub section. (WT-en) Jfnasati 23:27, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

Westin Miyako Hotel
At a mere 116 years, is this really the oldest hotel in Kyoto? I thought I saw older ones. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 00:52, 1 March 2007 (EST)

 * It may well be the oldest hotel, but I'm pretty sure some of the ryokan have rather more impressive pedigrees... (WT-en) Jpatokal 01:16, 1 March 2007 (EST)

 * I'm sorry,I wrote this sentence. (^^; I want to say " Miyako hotel is oldest hotel in western type hotel in Kyoto ." . In my sense,"hotel" does not contain "japanese-ryokan" . If it is better for deletion the part of sentence,"oldest" ,I will delete this part. I'don't have no idea what is better to explain "Miyako hotel".      by  202.33.162.69  - 20:20, 2 March 2007 (JST)

 * Thanks for the explanation. I think we can mention that Miyako is the oldest Western-style hotel in Kyoto. That might be interesting for some travelers. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 07:49, 2 March 2007 (EST)

Districts
Wondering if it might be appropriate to move toward district sub-pages for Kyoto, as is done for cities like Sydney and Tokyo. While perhaps not as dramatically distinct as Tokyo/Akahibara and Tokyo/Ueno, there's so much ground between Kyoto/Station Area (or Central), Kyoto/Northwest, and Kyoto/Arashiyama - and so much to do in each - that it seems worth separating them out to me. (If nothing else, it would help a traveler decide where to base themselves.) Obviously, I'd be willing to help fill the resulting sub-pages. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 03:12, 11 February 2007 (EST)

 * Yeah, I think it's a matter of time, but as it stands I'm not sure the Kyoto article is long enough to warrant splitting? (WT-en) Jpatokal 07:06, 11 February 2007 (EST)

 * I think it's a tad unwieldly at present, and a couple sections - especially Arashiyama - still have a fair amount more that could be added. (Would be nice to add more eat & drink listings, too, but I didn't eat out much when I lived there.) There are also a few places (like Mount Hiei and Kurama) that could as easily be listed under Kyoto but already have their own pages. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 06:50, 12 February 2007 (EST)

 * Is Kyoto still too sparse for districting? There is enough information about this city out there that I'm thinking it could make a good nomination for Collaboration of the Month, but I wouldn't want to nominate it prior to districting... (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 11:43, 10 May 2009 (EDT)

 * I think it's district-able, as long as it's not broken into too many pieces - something like north, south, west, east, and central. I am concerned about the number of empty listings (name only) currently in the article, though. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 14:54, 10 May 2009 (EDT)

 * Other than the "See" section, I'm not sure if there's enough material for a full set of districts. Eat, in particular, is fairly sparse, and 95% of Sleep would end up in either north or central.
 * I've been thinking - for See, might it make sense to create subheadings for the major attractions in an area (about a full day's worth of sightseeing) and then one for secondary sights? "If you have more than one day in this area, consider...."  That might help organize See more effectively without splitting the article.   - (WT-en) Dguillaime 16:19, 10 May 2009 (EDT)

 * Gorilla Jones: I added most (maybe all?) of the name-only listings. Although I agree their presence makes the page look sloppy right now, I decided added them was a good way to highlight the work that still needs done to make this a good Kyoto guide. The additions are not so obscure (at least most of them). I also had hoped that, because it is so noticeable, people would add the information. I have been to most of the places that I added, although it would take me a while to fill them all in. It's a slow process... (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 08:16, 11 May 2009 (EDT)

 * I'm in favour of districting - perhaps not immediately, but it may be time to start laying the groundwork. Some sections still require some fleshing out, but the article as a whole is getting too long and unwieldy to stand as a single readable unit.  (Here I speak from experience; I was in Kyoto recently and I used this article when planning my stay in the city.)  Scrolling through the Sleep section already seems like a confusing chore, especially for users who might want to consider accommodation options by location and not just by price range.  I also think we have enough material under See to get the splitting process started.

 * ChubbyWimbus: (re: name-only listings) I'll do what I can to help. I've only been to the major sights and most of those are already filled in, but if I see anything I can add to I'll jump straight in. --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 05:28, 21 May 2009 (EDT)

Defining Districts
Even though there seems to be no firm consensus on the matter of splitting up Kyoto, I think we should at least start work on defining districts and setting up a hierarchy. (In any case, we're probably all/mostly agreed on the need for districting; the remaining point of contention is whether we should start now or wait until more information is added to certain sections.) Once the borders are laid, shifting entries off to district sub-pages should be a manageable task.

I propose that we start by defining Central Kyoto, and then use that as a reference point for the other districts. My suggestion is to use the Kamo River as the eastern boundary and the Kyoto Station area as the southern boundary for Central Kyoto; perhaps contributors with better local knowledge can propose the northern and western lines. --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 21:02, 22 May 2009 (EDT)

 * I'm in favor of districting, but I don't know Kyoto well enough to be able to contribute much to this discussion. However, the existing split in See (Northwest, West, Central, Northeast, East, Southeast, Southwest) seems broadly workable, although it would be good to give at least a few of those actual names, eg. Arashiyama for "West". (WT-en) Jpatokal 00:45, 23 May 2009 (EDT)
 * Yes, Arashiyama would be an obvious district name for what is now "Western Kyoto". As for the others, most of them don't have officially designated areas. The travel maps handed out at Kyoto Station, for example, divide them by areas, so they call our Northwest Kyoto "Kinkakuji Area". I don't really like that for our guides, though. The only other areas that do have names are those on the outer edges. I've already stated the names of the two areas in Southwestern Kyoto, which are "Oharano area" and the "Matsuo area". The Southeastern part is also made up of two areas: Fushimi and Daigo. In the Northeast there is the Ohara area, and in the northwest there is Takao.

 * I think separating those regions would be too much, though. I kind of like the directional markers for the links (with Arashiyama as the exception) and then dividing the named regions on their page, (like what is done here with all of the regions). I don't know food or hotels, but I know many of the attractions quite well, and this split gives still leaves each region with a good amount of places to see and things to do. I hope what I'm saying makes sense. I'm a bit tired now. Feel free to ask for clarification if this reads like senseless rambling. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 11:25, 23 May 2009 (EDT)

 * I tend to agree, if I understand you correctly. Better to keep fewer, longer articles rather than a panoply of short ones.  Perhaps a five-way split, Central and the four cardinal directions?  The existing Eastern section might incorporate a few of the entries in NE depending on where the line gets drawn, and SE/SW each have a small enough number of entries (and even fewer must see sights) that they could be merged without much trouble.  - (WT-en) Dguillaime 13:19, 23 May 2009 (EDT)

 * I'm in favor of a five-way split using 'Central' and the four cardinal directions (or 'Arashiyama' for 'Western'). If names are desired, though, it's not unprecedented to call the article by the best known are encompassed therein — such as how Chicago/Hyde Park is called "Hyde Park", but also includes the Kenwood neighborhood. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 13:35, 23 May 2009 (EDT)

I agree with the major proposals put forward so far: five-way split, Central + cardinal directions; using the name "Arashiyama" for the western district (and possibly, as Gorilla Jones suggests, using distinctive names for the others as well); limiting the number of sub-pages.

Another challenge is deciding where one district ends and another begins. We probably don't need to pin them down to the last street or canal border (that would be too restrictive, and in any case some minor overlaps are probably inevitable); all we need is a system precise enough so that all major attractions fall under one district sub-page or another.

For Central Kyoto, I'll reiterate my earlier suggestion: eastern boundary = Kamo River; southern boundary = Kyoto Station area (not necessarily the station itself, more like the immediate neighbourhood). Any recommendations for the northern and western boundaries?

Once we've got Central pinned down, we can use that as a guide for the other districts. --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 20:14, 23 May 2009 (EDT)

 * I wish I hadn't given away my maps! For the southern boundary of the Central district, I'd like to include the hotels that are still within a few minutes walking distance of Kyoto Station by pushing that border down to Kujō-dori.  Keeping the divisions roughly as they are now would put the northern border just beyond the Imperial Palace, which would be Imadegawa-dori.  On the west, perhaps Nishiōji?  Maybe even a little further out, is there any convenient north-south boundary line around JR Hanazono?   - (WT-en) Dguillaime 20:40, 23 May 2009 (EDT)

 * I think Imadegawa-dori is definitely the best northern border for the Central area. It's a major road, and it cuts clean across from the East to the West. Nishioji does the same from North to South on the western side, so it seems like an easy split that way. Actually, although I'm pretty sure these roads are the markers used by Kyoto's tourism maps/books, although none of them explicitly state it.

 * One question: Are you suggesting making Kyoto Station part of the South? To me it makes more sense being part of the Central region (perhaps along with Toji Temple), since much of the Central area is in easy walking distance of the station. The station is fairly removed from any of the other attractions in the southern areas, which are basically all in the southeast and southwest. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 11:58, 24 May 2009 (EDT)

 * No, but I see how it was confusingly phrased at first. Clarified above.  - (WT-en) Dguillaime 13:02, 24 May 2009 (EDT)

 * Imadegawa-dori is a good northern border, and the Kamogawa works for me at the east. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 13:04, 24 May 2009 (EDT)

 * Based on the comments made to date, I think we can tentatively propose the following boundaries for Central Kyoto:
 * North - Imadegawa-dōri
 * South - Kujō-dōri
 * West - Nishiōji-dōri
 * East - Kamo-gawa

 * I don't mind pushing the western boundary a little further to JR Hanazono, as Dguillaime suggests - the only problem is that I've looked at three different maps and can't find a clean north-south boundary marker for that area. If we agree to move the border that far, we can simply work with an imaginary line running north-south through Hanazono.  Another option would be to use the motorway a little to the west of Hanazono (#162, according to Google Maps and a travel map I consulted).  --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 23:06, 24 May 2009 (EDT)

 * I like the boundaries you've listed. If you move the western border, Myoshinji will become part of the Central area, but I think it really belongs in the West. Your list as it is really eliminates any grey areas about where specific destinations should be placed. If that is the Central area, then all we need to decide is where the East/West becomes North/South. On the East, do you want to continue to use Imadegawa-dori? I think it would work until it intersects Shirakawa-dori (which would be the other border distinguishing North from East). I say this simply because I think Ginkakuji should not be separated from the rest of the Philosopher's Path. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 08:23, 25 May 2009 (EDT)

 * Indeed, and what about sights like Shugakuindake (North or East) or even more tricky Hiei-san, is that in North, East or even in Shiga prefecture? --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 09:17, 25 May 2009 (EDT)

 * If we don't have a "Northeast" area, then Shugakuin must be part of the North. As for Hieizan, although many guidebooks like to place it in Kyoto, it is in Shiga. Hieizan and the Enryakuji Temple complex are all part of Otsu. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 09:33, 25 May 2009 (EDT)

 * @ChubbyWimbus: I agree, Ginkakuji should be classed together with the sights in/near the Philosopher's Path.  Beyond that, my knowledge of that part of Kyoto is a little sparse, so I can't comment extensively on the border between north and east.  Imadegawa-dōri makes for a nice, clean break, though - and it's consistent with the northern boundary for Central - so it makes sense to keep using it.

 * @Everyone: At this point, it looks like we've reached a good consensus on the boundaries of Central Kyoto.  I'll add a separate subheading below for the boundaries that contributors on this Talk page have more or less agreed on; this should make it easier to keep track of things.  Discussions are by no means closed, of course - please feel free to keep voicing concerns/suggestions/objections, or indicate your support so that we can determine if a firm consensus has been reached. --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 03:32, 26 May 2009 (EDT)

I've suggested Kyoto as a collaboration of the month, as we seem to have a fair amount of interest in this. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 09:47, 25 May 2009 (EDT)

Let's start working on the boundaries for Eastern Kyoto. In all likelihood, the western boundary will be Kamo-gawa (consistent with Central Kyoto's eastern boundary). Any suggestions for the northern and southern borders? Please feel free to reiterate any comments/proposals you may have already made, especially if they've gotten buried somewhere in our main discussions on Central Kyoto. --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 22:25, 28 May 2009 (EDT)

 * I think we can get the remainder more or less automatically by looking at the existing breakdown of attractions and picking a convenient-looking line between them. For the northwestern edge of the area, the big question is which tributary of the river to go up; I'd say use the Takano as the boundary.  Towards the south, it just needs to keep Sanjūsangendō on one side and Tofuku-ji on the other, which offers plenty of flexibility.  The Tōkaidō Line tracks look good and are always easy to find on a map, and that even gets Tofuku-ji Station (which is some distance northwest from the actual temple) into South.  - (WT-en) Dguillaime 01:32, 3 June 2009 (EDT)

 * For the boundary between North and East, I think Imadegawa-dori is actually okay. Although Ginkakuji Temple straddles the area where the road ends, we can just put it in the East and leave it at that. I don't think there are any hotels or other attractions beyond that. The Tokaido Line seems reasonable to me for the East-South Border but not on the West-South border. I don't have a map that shows the streets that separate Arashiyama from the Matsuo area. Wherever that is, that's where the border should be... (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 12:52, 3 June 2009 (EDT)

 * I'm fine with using the Tokaido Line as Eastern Kyoto's southern border. As Dguillaime pointed out, it's real easy to spot on a map - I have two maps in front of me right now and the railway line makes a very convenient boundary marker.  On the other hand, I agree with ChubbyWimbus about not using it as the West-South border, mainly because it dips too far south after crossing Katsura-gawa.  Shijō-dōri doesn't project far beyond Katsura-gawa, but if we extend it westwards as an imaginary line I think it could make a good West-South border.  That puts all of Arashiyama in the west and everything from Matsumuro/Matsuo down in the south.

 * I don't know enough about the northeast to make any firm suggestions, but Imadegawa-dōri seems like a convenient and easy-to-spot border. --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 02:22, 6 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Re: the north/east line - Convincing! Imadegawa-dori makes sense to me.  - (WT-en) Dguillaime 13:29, 14 June 2009 (EDT)

 * I've added it to the tentative boundaries list (below). With three sides of Eastern Kyoto more or less settled, I've plotted out the tentative boundaries on the districtification project map  (orange line).  The North/East border follows Imadegawa-dōri for the most part, but I've kinked it slightly to the north towards the end to keep Ginkaku-ji in the East. --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 21:21, 14 June 2009 (EDT)

Now that the district boundaries of Central Kyoto are more or less agreed, perhaps we can start work on setting up a district sub-page for that area and moving entries off the main city page. My view is that transferring information for even just this district can already lead to an improvement in the usability of the main city page by reducing the amount of text that users need to process in one go. We can highlight the ongoing districtification effort by adding a new Districts section, and we can insert temporary redirect boxes in each section alerting users to the fact that information relevant to Central Kyoto has been transferred to a different page (as well as advising them to put fresh contributions in the appropriate page). --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 07:26, 7 June 2009 (EDT)

 * I think for the border between North and West, it should drop to Marutamachi-dori (from the Imadegawa-dori) in order to include Myoshinji in the North. It can't follow Marutamachi-dori to the end, because that would cut Arashiyama, but what if it was that street directly on the eastern side of Hirosawa Lake? (sorry, my map doesn't list its name...) If you go ahead with the beginning of the distrification, I'll help move things. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 19:50, 12 June 2009 (EDT)

 * It's not directly on the east side of the lake, but is Yamago-dori the street you're thinking of? There's also route 162, much bigger but further east (at least a kilometer from the lake). - (WT-en) Dguillaime 22:23, 12 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Oh, wait. I guess I meant to say the Western side. Sorry about that! If the roads on the East that you mentioned work well, that would be fine. Basically, I just want to make sure that Daikakuji and other places that are clearly part of Arashiyama are still in Arashiyama after we district them. I am not exactly sure if there is a road or something that we could use to keep Otagi Nenbutsuji a part of Arashiyama/the West as well, but aside from the Takao area (which would be in the North), I don't think there is much near Otagi Nenbutsuji to warrant a great debate, unless specific roads are absolutely necessary to find. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 23:07, 12 June 2009 (EDT)

 * If we use Marutamachi-dōri as far west as route 162, and then route 162 the rest of the way, that puts Myōshinji comfortably within Northern territory. We can keep Otagi Nenbutsu-ji inside the West by using either the Kiyotaki River (natural boundary) or the Arashiyama Takao Parkway (easy-to-spot artificial boundary) as the border on the Takao side.

 * In summary: possible boundary between North and West = Marutamachi-dōri as far as route 162, then route 162 as far as the river/parkway, then the river/parkway as far as we need it to go. --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 08:49, 13 June 2009 (EDT)

 * I think that would work great! My maps are not going as far out on this region as our boundaries are labeled, so I'm glad you've found better sources! I guess you can decide whether the river or road makes a better boundary. Do they both leave the Takao section in the North? Anyways, it looks like we've almost got this all sorted! (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 15:59, 13 June 2009 (EDT)

 * The three major Takao-area temples are more comfortably Northern if we use the parkway instead of the river. There's also the parkway's added advantage of being easier to spot on a map.

 * To help us visualise the boundaries currently under discussion, I've started plotting them on a Google Maps template . Blue is Central Kyoto; red is the tentative boundary between Western Kyoto (Arashiyama) and Northern Kyoto. --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 07:45, 14 June 2009 (EDT)

For the border between Western Kyoto and Southern Kyoto: Based on ChubbyWimbus' recommendation from 03 June ("I don't have a map that shows the streets that separate Arashiyama from the Matsuo area. Wherever that is, that's where the border should be."), we can use Shijō-dōri as far as Katsura-gawa, and then just keep projecting it westwards as a straight imaginary line. This puts Matsunoo-taisha just within Southern territory. Alternatively, we can push the border a little further south, to Gojō-dōri - but this would put some of the Matsuo area (including Matsunoo-taisha) in the West.

Incidentally, we seem to be nearing the end of our district definition project! Once we've fixed West and East, that's pretty much it. North and South are simply everything that fall outside Western, Central and Eastern Kyoto so defining their boundaries (apart from establishing the outer city limits for the Kyoto article as whole) probably isn't a mission-critical task. --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 21:46, 14 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Although in my head, Umenomiya Shrine should be in the Matsuo area, since it's not far from Matsuo Shrine, I can't see a logical way to make that divide, so perhaps it is best to go with Shijo-dori, as you suggested. With that, it seems that we are ready to actually make the districts and move attractions... Am I right, or are there still loose ends? (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 22:11, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

 * That's pretty much it, I suppose. Although it would be nice if a few other people weighed in with their thoughts so that we can polish up the agreed boundaries, I see no reason to put off starting Central Kyoto since the borders for that bit are already nicely and logically defined.

 * As for Umenomiya, you're right - using Shijō-dōri would separate it from the Matsuo area. The only solution would be to kink up the border around that area to take it into the south, but that's pushing things.  Do you think we could get away with pushing the West/South divide down to Gojō-dōri instead, which puts Matsuo in the West rather than the South?  It makes sense geographically, since that part of Kyoto looks more western than southern on a map, although the overall character of the area seems way different from Arashiyama (the "core" West, if we can call it that).  We can get around that by making a subdivision within the Western Kyoto district page:  one for Arashiyama and another for the rest of the district. --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 23:08, 18 June 2009 (EDT)

 * I agree that another opinion would be nice. I suppose that wouldn't be such a bad idea. Looking at this map, that would keep a clean-cut line between the Matsuo area and the Oharano area further south. As you said, having a "Matsuo area" sub-category would still allow for the distinction to be made (and probably allow us to take the liberty of just putting Umenomiya Shrine in the Matsuo area). The Matsuo area could go either way and I'd be okay with it. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 23:30, 18 June 2009 (EDT)

 * As one of the "few other people" from earlier discussions: I don't know that area of Kyoto at all, I'm afraid, and can't contribute intelligently. If the two of you are the only ones contributing here that do have a feel for the area, please don't hesitate to move forward!  Either way, I'd still be in favor of calling the article 'Arashiyama' if that's the large majority of it. - (WT-en) Dguillaime 01:21, 19 June 2009 (EDT)

 * I've updated the map. If everything looks all right, I guess we're ready to start!

 * I'm afraid I have no experience in setting up a new district sub-page, so I think I should leave that to someone who does. Rest assured, once the sub-pages are up I'll gladly help out with moving and editing entries, as well as adding pictures for the new district guides.

 * Is there a notice template we can use to alert users that a districtification effort is under way? --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 23:49, 19 June 2009 (EDT)

 * at the top of sections, and for the reminder at the top.  Come to think of it, there's also a template for "districting discussion in progress", which I will add momentarily.  Better late than never!  - (WT-en) Dguillaime 01:02, 20 June 2009 (EDT)

 * As for page creation: start editing a page with the desired name and throw in the appropriate article template, then start moving. To kick things off, I just created a bare-bones Kyoto/East.  - (WT-en) Dguillaime 22:53, 20 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Just one more thing before we lay down the West/South divide. Does the Katsura Imperial Villa fit better in the West or in the South?  The boundaries as currently proposed put it in Southern territory - but looking at its position on a map, it seems like it could also work (perhaps better) as a Western attraction. --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 08:31, 20 June 2009 (EDT)
 * Previously, I would have said Katsura Imperial Villa goes in the South, and although it's not technically part of the Matsuo area, it is close. If you don't want that bottlneck/fan-affect in the West, we could move it into the West. That would be okay, and then I guess we'd place it in the Matsuo area? If it stays in the south, that's okay, too. Do you prefer it to be in the West? (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 23:58, 20 June 2009 (EDT)
 * Oh, and I created a Central Kyoto page. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 00:05, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

 * No strong opinions on my part, actually. I'm leaning towards a Western designation on purely cartographic grounds, but I'm okay with leaving it in the South.

 * And thanks for setting up the Central Kyoto page! I'll start looking for images we can use. --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 02:55, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Actually, since the East-South border is the only one with discussion, I'll create the Kyoto/North page. As for the South, although neither of us having strong opinions, it seems we have a passive agreeance that the border should be moved down slightly to incorporate Katsura Imperial Villa. If we make Shichijo-dori the border, would it keep Katsura Station with Katsura Villa? It would be strange to separate the station from the areas most famous attraction. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 14:06, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

 * We'll probably need to push the boundary down to Hachijō-dōri in order to accommodate Katsura Imperial Villa, and even then Katsura Station would be left out. But not by much, and in any case it's no different from the Imperial Palace being in Central even though the nearest station (Imadegawa) is just over the border - across the street, in fact - in the North.

 * My inclination at present is to put it in the West, for the reasons stated earlier and also because it's almost parallel with Kyoto Station (in Central). But I don't know that neighbourhood very well, so if the character of the area fits better with the South then I'm all for leaving it in the South (cartographic considerations notwithstanding). --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 03:02, 23 June 2009 (EDT)

I've started a "Districts" subsection on the main city guide. I was logged out for some reason (a technical glitch I've observed from time to time) so it appears as an anonymous contribution. --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 05:40, 23 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Ah yes, Hachi-jo is perfect and perhaps what I meant to say (certainly what I should have said!). It aligns well with the Eastern border, and if we take the road down that dip to make it end at the same point that the current map ends at (Route 9), it would actually include the station in with the villa. I think this is perfect. If you adjust your map, I think we can finally finish creating the other two areas. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 12:38, 23 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Does that still count as Arashiyama? I'd kind of like to stick with the most common (and most readily searched) name for the area, which can plausibly include Matsuo, but I simply don't know its approximate boundaries in the direction of the villa.   - (WT-en) Dguillaime 16:33, 23 June 2009 (EDT)

 * The villa is not in Arashiyama. There isn't much around Katsura Station aside from the villa, actually. I've never really seen the villa grouped into any region, although most likely "Katsura" itself is what the Japanese call that area. Most of what I've read either just list the address or they give the impression that it's far removed from the rest of Kyoto's attractions. Most guides don't even really give mention to the Matsuo area, although there seems to be a tendency to make it seem as though it's in the south. When one looks at a map of the city wide enough to include these areas though, it is visibly in the West. The Katsura Imperial Villa is not technically part of the Matsuo area, but nor is it part of the Oharano area, so I feel like we could place it in either the West or the South and it would not be a problem. If you have strong feelings about where the villa should go OR want to rethink the placement of the Matsuo area, feel free to voice them. Perhaps the map got lost in the discussion, so I'll copy and paste it again here . Take a look at it, and if you want to move the border or if you are against moving it down to include Katsura Villa, let us know! (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 17:02, 23 June 2009 (EDT)

 * I checked several maps (including three I brought home from Kyoto itself) and a couple of guidebooks. As ChubbyWimbus pointed out, the Katsura Imperial Villa is hard to pigeonhole into any specific region:  it just floats there on its own, like a little island in a relatively landmark-bare part of the city.  On a map, it's clearly more Western than Southern (although, at a stretch, it might even pass as Central - knotty problem!), but it's so far removed from Arashiyama that if we were to put it in the West, calling that district Arashiyama would seem like a misnomer.

 * I agree with Dguillaime that Arashiyama is the core of the West, and that it should be given due prominence, but short of creating another district page just for the Matsuo and Katsura areas of the West (not enough sights, eats, sleeps and so on to justify the effort) the only remedies I can think of are:
 * Reassign them to Central.
 * Reassign them to the South.
 * Leave them in the main city page, similar to how two guidebooks I've seen have treated them (part of a "Greater Kyoto" or sights "Further Afield").

 * We could also consider naming the Western district "Arashiyama and the West", and then - as previously discussed - create sub-divisions within the district page to sort attractions between (a) Arashiyama and (b) everything else. (To balance out the names, we might also consider naming the Eastern district "Higashiyama and the East", or just plain "Higashiyama".)  --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 17:53, 23 June 2009 (EDT)

 * I don't think putting Katsura Villa in Arashiyama is a problem. From a practical perspective, one of the most prominent ways to get to Arashiyama from central Kyoto is the small Hankyu Arashiyama Line, which originates from Katsura. I used to work in Katsura — plenty of Arashiyama residents consider it part of their area.

 * Also, it's fine to name a district article after the most prominent section therein; note how Chicago/Hyde Park also includes Kenwood, or Singapore/Bugis includes Kampong Glam, neither of which are included in the article's name. The best and simplest name is Kyoto/Arashiyama. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 18:43, 23 June 2009 (EDT)

 * I definitely oppose putting them in the Central region (our central region is clean-cut and consistent with other guides) and leaving any sites on the main page (it looks sloppy; as if we gave up on trying to make sensible districts). I don't mind calling it Arashiyama and having a Matsuo sub-category. Hachi-jo down to Route 9 is a nice border, I think. The name is not that important to me, because the Arashiyama area will be identified regardless. If we call the region Arashiyama, then I would support renaming the East "Higashiyama", because that is basically what our east is (Tofukuji is technically in Higashiyama, but even Japanese tourists tend to view it as separate) (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 18:59, 23 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Looks like that's settled, then: Katsura goes into the West, and the West-South boundary moves down to Hachijō-dōri/#142 until it joins with #9.  I'll update the map for easy reference and we can proceed with the districtification effort based on the borders discussed so far.

 * Are we also agreed on using Arashiyama for the West and Higashiyama for the East? --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 21:21, 23 June 2009 (EDT)

 * I'll support it. Now that the borders are established, giving names to the area is all that is left, and I think a previous consensus showed support for "Arashiyama" as the name of the West. "Higashiyama" then is appropriate for the East. I can wait a day in case someone has comments. If not, I (or anyone else) will change the name of the East to Higashiyama. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 20:10, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

Related Changes to the Main City Guide
Given that the districtification project is just starting to get off the ground, my habit is to leave the original entries in the main Kyoto city guide intact even after I've copied them into the district sub-pages. Now that the sub-pages are linked (via the "Districts" section), is it safe to delete them from the main guide? --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 07:24, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Just to be safe, I think we should wait until the Western region has a page, so that all content can be deleted at once. I think user Dguillame has already created starter sections for the main Kyoto page once the current content is gone. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 20:26, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Only for the Sleep section, I'm afraid, and I haven't had much time to work on other sections this week. (Have to leave something for the CotM, right?)  At this point, we can probably leave in some temporary text in the main article's subsections as well ("see things to do in Central, North, ...") while moving the specific entries out, and replace them with proper writing as time permits.   - (WT-en) Dguillaime 20:55, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

 * You're right! Perhaps it's not a bad idea to post the reminder here that Kyoto IS currently scheduled as the upcoming July Collaboration of the month, if anyone has any tasks to add to the list or concerns to voice. I don't know how the "counts" operate, but I think the work that has been done over the past week with districting should be added to the tally. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 20:59, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

District Maps
Many thanks to Sertmann for the great new map (below). I've actually been thinking about what to do re: preparing maps for the new districts. I checked OpenStreetMap for raw material but their Kyoto map, while adequate from a distance, doesn't seem like it's particularly well laid out at close range (half-finished street grid, etc.), so I'm not sure if we can use it as a source. Any ideas on where to get good raw material so we won't have to start from scratch? --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 08:28, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Yes, the map seems like a good start, but I have a question about the note "Still needs work": Is there anything you need/want to request from us about the map or is it just a matter of you perfecting it as you see fit? I don't know anything about creating/editing maps, but if you posted that comment with hopes of getting feedback to help you finish it, I'd do my best to offer some (if you can post exactly what your concerns are). (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 16:44, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Mainly it's missing major parks like Nijo, Kyōto Gyoen, the Botanical gardens, Okazaki park etc., I'm quite sure some major streets are missing, and then I was thinking about labelling the major major streets. Other than that, I'm not really sure, but I know I'm not happy with how it looks at the moment - so suggestions are welcome. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 04:50, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Unfortunately, raw material for Japan city maps is hard to come by. I'm working on a Hiroshima map with OSM data as my base, but I've had to draw in quite a few streets that I know from experience the OSM version is missing. (That's not to disparage OSM, mind you, which is a really cool project.) (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 18:34, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Although I'm sure you already know most of the streets and sites worth mapping, I'll just post some here and maybe you or others could add/remove places just to make a list that will (hopefully) be helpful.

Roads to Map East/West:
 * Imadegawa-dori
 * Marutamachi-dori
 * Sanjo-dori
 * Shijo-dori
 * Gojo-dori
 * Shichijo-dori
 * Hachijo-dori
 * Kitaoji-dori

North/South:
 * Kawaramachi-dori
 * Nishioji-dori
 * Higashioji-dori
 * Horikawa-dori

You said you are mapping "parks", so maybe the following is not helpful. If this is the case, feel free to nix it: Sites to *consider* mapping (by area) Arashiyama:
 * Tenryuji
 * Matsuo Taisha
 * Kokedera
 * Katsura Imperial Villa
 * Daikakuji

North (West):
 * Kinkakuji
 * Ryoanji
 * Ninnaji
 * Takao Region OR specific temples in the area (Jingoji or Kozanji)

North (East):
 * Shimogamo Shrine
 * Kamigamo Shrine
 * Shugakuin Imperial Villa
 * Kyoto Botanical Garden
 * Ohara area

Higashiyama:
 * Kiyomizu-dera
 * Sanjusandgendo
 * Ginkakuji
 * Heian Shrine
 * Yasaka Shrine/Maruyama Park

South (East)
 * Fushimi Inari Taisha
 * Daigoji
 * Tofukuji

South (West)
 * Oharano Shrine
 * Yoshimine-dera

Central:
 * Tokyo Station
 * Nijo Castle
 * Kyoto Imperial Palace
 * Toji Temple

Feel free to adjust it as you see fit, since you are creating the map. I assume this list is too long to actually fit everything on the map, but it's probably better to see it and then delete it rather than notice something that should be there that was left out. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 16:50, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

Whilst recognising the need for further work on adding details (key sights, major landmarks, etc.), I think we should consider moving the draft map to the main article so that users can have at least a basic idea of where each district is located relative to the others. In any case, I certainly think Sertmann's Kyoto districts map is way better than the one on the Osaka page, even in its unfinished state. --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 06:18, 8 July 2009 (EDT)

 * Just trying to draw attention to my earlier suggestion (see above). As I wrote previously, Sertmann's districts map - even in its unfinished state - is probably good enough to put in the main city guide, if only to help users get a basic idea of where each district is located.  As it is, the map already looks better than the ones in Osaka and Tokyo, so why not?

 * I'd move it myself, but I thought it best to get a consensus first, especially since some might hold the opinion that the map won't be helpful (or worse, could prove misleading) to prospective users. Thoughts? --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 07:44, 19 July 2009 (EDT)

 * Sorry, been away on holidays without neither inkscape nor internet :) I did some big updates on the map already, and I'll try to get this one finished, and the subway map fixed soon. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 16:49, 19 July 2009 (EDT)

 * Although the collaboration has only attracted one (I think) anonymous contributor, we have got a lot done! Out of the tasks I added to the collaboration page, there are only 4 left (We've done 7 out of 11). If someone could proofread the main page (and add content, if you know something), once the map is finished, we will have completed nearly every task! (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 17:33, 24 July 2009 (EDT)

Proposed District Boundaries (as tentatively agreed by contributors)
''Note: For ease of reference, please list any proposed borders with at least some community support here. The listed boundaries are not necessarily final. Kindly sign off on changes so that everyone can keep track.''

Central Kyoto (last edited by (WT-en) Diego de Manila 03:48, 26 May 2009 (EDT))
 * North - Imadegawa-dōri
 * South - Kujō-dōri
 * West - Nishiōji-dōri
 * East - Kamo-gawa

Western Kyoto (last edited by (WT-en) Diego de Manila 21:34, 23 June 2009 (EDT))
 * North - from the eastern boundary, moving west: Marutamachi-dōri / Route 162 / Arashiyama Takao Parkway
 * South - from the eastern boundary, moving west: Hachijō-dōri / Route 142 / Route 9
 * West - (to be determined)
 * East - Nishiōji-dōri

Eastern Kyoto (last edited by (WT-en) Diego de Manila 21:15, 14 June 2009 (EDT))
 * North - Imadegawa-dōri
 * South - Tōkaidō railway line
 * West - Kamo-gawa
 * East - (to be determined)

The largest wooden structure
It is said in the article that "The majestic main hall of Higashi Honganji, said to be the largest wooden structure in the world". However, I thought that Todaiji in Nara is the largest, and actually in the Nara article it is stated that Todaiji would also be the largest. -- 195.74.26.195 05:49, 15 July 2007 (EDT)
 * I've seen the "largest in the world" claim made about both places. If we want to choose one, I'd go with Todai-ji, especially since Higashi Hongan-ji is covered up and under renovation for the next few years. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 15:29, 15 July 2007 (EDT)
 * I don't think renovations is a viable reason to say one is bigger than the other. If Higashi Honganji is bigger, then you can't just change the facts just because it's not currently visible however, there are more sources that state Todaiji is bigger (although I've also read that Todaiji is smaller than it once was, so perhaps the downsize changes things? (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 01:07, 24 February 2009 (EST)

 * Just call it "one of the largest". End of problem. (WT-en) Jpatokal 02:53, 24 February 2009 (EST)

Train fare from Osaka
uso! the train from osaka to kyoto costs 390 yen, not 540 yen!

 * Depends on which of the many lines you take. (WT-en) Jpatokal 06:14, 24 November 2007 (EST)

Bus number
Wouldn't it be nice, if the bus number is given for each temple. For example: kiyomizu temple, bus 80,202,206,207

122.107.216.210 05:56, 28 February 2008 (EST)

Intro
I didn't write it, but since there have been a couple of recent attempts to soften it, I'm standing up for the intro to this article:

 * Kyōto (京都)  was the capital of Japan for over a millennium, and carries a reputation as its most beautiful city.  However, visitors may be surprised by how much work they will have to do to see Kyoto's beautiful side: the area around the ultra-modern glass-and-steel train station is covered in urban sprawl, and its beauty is mostly hidden away in the temples and parks which ring the city center.

I love Kyoto, but the area around Kyoto Station is butt-ugly. Karasuma is fine, although it's certainly not what visitors have been led to expect from Kyoto. However, hang a right from the station, heading towards the Kamogawa, and there are blocks of rotting, miserable aluminum shacks before you hit your first pretty old machiya. The intro has it right. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 19:12, 25 March 2009 (EDT)

 * To quibble—how much work does it really entail to get away from the train station? As I remember it, I walked out of the station and immediately hopped on a bus, got a day pass, and got around to wherever I wanted very easily. And my impression of Kyoto, granted only for two days, was that of a singularly beautiful city. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 20:39, 25 March 2009 (EDT)

 * Well jumping on a bus, and reach the foot of the hills surrounding town is pretty much all it takes, I concur with Jani and Marc though - it's not pretty - and the fact that they to this day, continue to level the historic wooden buildings, and replace them with bland concrete cubicles should get someone executed. It's staggering how they managed to destroy one the most beautiful cities in the world, in the space of 50 years (nope, wasn't the Americans, they did it all by themselves in their ruthless quest for modernisation), for a people so well viced in esthetiques, I still can't quite grasp how they can not see it --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 20:52, 25 March 2009 (EDT)

 * Yup. I think the reason this needs to be emphasized is that because most people have this preconception of Kyoto as looking like this, when it actually looks like this.  Telling people that they'll see machiya and geisha buying Slurpees in the 7-11 right after they get off the Shinkansen will just lead them to conclude that Wikivoyage's wrong about everything else as well.

 * Incidentally, Nara is much more pleasant right out the station, and I'm tempted to tell people short on time to ignore Kyoto completely and go there instead... (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:22, 25 March 2009 (EDT)

 * Also, I suspect the impact might be much greater on Europeans, as we are so used to superbly preserved historic cities, that we expect cities like Kyoto to be the same. Kyoto requires time and patience to get it's rewards, which indeed are great --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 22:50, 25 March 2009 (EDT)

Subway
The image showing the subway and train lines seems to have the Karasuma subway line and Tozai subway line flipped. Not sure how to fix it. 99.226.38.5 17:14, 20 May 2009 (EDT)
 * Sorted. - (WT-en) D. Guillaime 21:56, 26 January 2010 (EST)

Eat and Drink
I see there are "Eat" and "Drink" listings on some pages... Have they all been transferred from the main page? Are we able to delete the listings or are there some that are still not sorted? (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 02:10, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

Machiya goes backpacker
Interesting lodging choice in Kyoto:   Might be worth adding? (WT-en) Jpatokal 05:40, 2 July 2009 (EDT)
 * I've added it. Thanks! (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 18:10, 2 July 2009 (EDT)
 * Haha, check out the Engrish version of the website - long live computer translations. Some gems: ;)
 * Uronza is owner's home, and it lives, too. Please stay so as not to become troubled of neighbors and the owner.
 * The service can not complete.
 * The owner"A" is not so amiable.I apologize beforehand.
 * In summer very hot, and mosquitoes are! - If you are vulnerable to hot, please do not reservation.
 * We beg you to walk at slowly, because this house is very old.
 * Odd how some of the sentences can only possibly make any sense what-so-ever in Japanese. Oh man, how I miss Japan. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 18:44, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

Buy or Do
I wanted to add listings for the special once-per-month flee markets held at Toji Temple and Kitano Tenmangu Shrine, but I can't decide whether to make them a "Do" or a "Buy". Suggestions? (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 21:34, 3 July 2009 (EDT)

 * (NB: I've never been to either of them so I can't speak with any authority.) The default is probably "Buy", since they're flea markets; that goes for whether tourists drop by mainly to buy or to buy+watch.  But if they're worth visiting mainly for the experience of it, rather than for the bargains or unique finds, then "Do" might be a better choice.

 * How about inserting a detailed write-up under "Buy", then briefly mentioning the markets under "Do" as something worth trying out? --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 00:13, 4 July 2009 (EDT)

 * They belong under "Buy". I've been to the one at Toji — good call to mention them. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 00:36, 4 July 2009 (EDT)

 * I haven't been to either of them personally, so I'll add them, but the listing will probably sound much less generic if you add your personal knowledge about what exactly it's like and what sort of things you find there. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 02:02, 4 July 2009 (EDT)

Rickshaws
This is a similar question to my last post: The Kyoto richshaws are popular and available in at least two regions (Arashiyama and Higashiyama). In a country like India, richshaws are definitely a "Get around" thing, but in Kyoto it seems to be a "Do" thing. Is there a rule on this? What do others think? (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 20:20, 7 July 2009 (EDT)

 * I'd put them under "Do". Hiring a rickshaw seems less about getting from A to B and more about the fun experience of being carted around town like an Oriental potentate.

 * Speaking of rickshaws, I saw quite a few of them around the city but never bothered to ask for a ride, for fear of getting slapped with a monstrous bill at the end. How much does a typical ride cost? --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 06:09, 8 July 2009 (EDT)

 * I also never actually payed for one myself (also fearing the prices, along with slight embarassment with the typical patrons being couples and females who fancy the men pulling the rickshaws.), but from what I can gather from the internet, they have different routes with different prices. I'll list a price range and maybe someone who knows can give the specifics. I've also read many accounts that this is cheaper in Nara, but prices are rarely listed for some reason. I actually saw one female rickshaw puller in Nara. She was tiny, but she could move just like the guys! (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 12:29, 8 July 2009 (EDT)

Uncategorized Bars
The following are bar listings on the main page that I was unable to locate. If you know that they still exist and where they are, please place them in the correct district and add information:

Near the Sanjo end, keep an eye out for Pretty Space, also known as "Mushroom Bar", and be sure to compliment the owner on committing to the theme with his haircut.

Nearby is a cafe owned by the photographer Kai Fusayoshi, who created the book "Beautiful Women of Kyoto." It's called Hachimonjia. Lots of interesting people, from artisans to doctors to people who you can't exactly figure out show up. On Kawaramachi, go north until you see the huge red ball. Look up, and on the third floor, above a blues bar, you'll see a sign for it, although it's in kanji.

Another excellent, and quite hard-to-find, izakaya is Ichariba. It is on the second alley between Kiyamachi and Pontochiyo if you come from Pontochiyo's north end. They serve excellent food for the price and the drinks are good too.
 * Bar Eclipse: near The Museum of Kyoto, this snazzily designed basement bar is tucked away at the back of Restaurant Crescent open 6pm until midnight and closed on Monday. No charge, drinks from ¥800 served by slickly dressed competent bartenders.

Holidays & Festivals
There should definitely be a sub-category for holidays and festivals, but where should it go? Also, how many should be placed there? Should there be mention of them in each district section? (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 18:21, 20 July 2009 (EDT)

Collaboration Tasks
The following task was only partially completed during the collaboration, so anyone looking to improve the page should consider these: Meaningful descriptions for local delicacies in "Eat", clean up "Buy" section, more information in "Drink" section, proofread "Do" and "See" sections (maybe add to them) (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 01:06, 1 August 2009 (EDT)

Free city-provided wifi?
Apparently the city has started a new program for free public wifi in tourist spots and busy areas, just in the last month:  It looks like there's a catch, though: if I'm reading it right, it needs a confirmation code that is sent back to your e-mail to use the wifi, which could be a chicken and egg problem!

If anyone visits and figures out how the service works in practice, please add something to the Contact section of the article! -- D. Guillaume (talk) 04:34, 17 September 2012 (CEST)

"Make sure not to exit through the turnstiles" ?
Hi Worldjet, I don't understand in the paragraph about the "ICOCA & HARUKA" ticket why you suggest to "Make sure not to exit through the turnstiles at Kyoto Station if you plan to transfer.". In what would it be different? (excepted the practical aspect). Context: I am translating it to French. Cheers — Fabimaru (talk) 17:42, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

 * - Hi Fabimaru, I have only been to Kyoto once but noticed it is rather easy to forget to turn left before the exit gates for newcomers. Many might not even realise the transfer option in the first place so I thought it would be good to have a line there. If you think it's unnecessary, we can delete it again. Brgds
 * Worldjet : thanks for the explanation, it makes sense (well, I did not have the opportunity to transfer there so I did not noticed), so I will translate it like that. — Fabimaru (talk) 18:55, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Kurama
Kurama is entirely part of Kyoto, so should either be merged into Kyoto/North or made into Kyoto/Kurama in which case the map would need edited to reflect this. I don't think the Kurama area is large enough in terms of things to see and do to warrant its own article, but my purpose in bringing this up is just to get a decision so that it can either be merged or someone can edit the map. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 06:28, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

ICOCA and HARUKA discount ticket
Sale of the Icoca & Haruka ticket ended on September 30, 2023. There's the Haruka 1-way Ticket instead (https://www.japan-guide.com/e/e2361_jrwest.html). Can someone familiar with this update the article please.Nurg (talk) 01:43, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Kyoto


text:
Talk:Kyoto/Arashiyama

Get in (by train/subway)
When I was in Kyoto, I reached Arashiyama by using the Tōzai subway line as far as Nijō Station, where I transferred to the JR Sagano Line - a logical choice for JR Pass holders. Based on recent transport maps, it looks like travellers can ride the Tōzai line all the way to the new terminus at Uzumasa Tenjingawa, from where it seems possible to transfer to the Keifuku Arashiyama line (NB: if the connexion exists, this could be a good option for non-JR Pass holders as this line's Arashiyama station seems better located than JR's). Since I haven't used the service myself (even though it was already operational during my stay in Kyoto), I can't say whether transfers at Uzumasa Tenjingawa are possible, so I left it out of the article. If anyone has actually used this option, please edit it in. --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 20:04, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

Tasks
Here are some tasks from the collaboration:
 * add listings to "Drink" section
 * more "Eat" and "Buy" options
 * info in "Contact" section needed

Banner
I created several banners and set the first one. I invite you to choose the most representative one, or submit another one.

Fabimaru (talk) 19:29, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

The first one is Nonomiya Shrine, right? Of the above choices, I prefer the bamboo. It's probably the most famous part of Arashiyama, along with Togetsu-kyo Bridge and I like that it is both nondescript and representative of the area. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 03:21, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Exact, Nonomiya. Concerning the bamboo banner, my opinion is mixed about it. On one side it's nondescript and convey a feeling of the area. On another hand, it could be about any place where there is bamboo. - Fabimaru (talk) 19:28, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I have no idea which banner is most representative, but I really like the third one. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:27, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Kyoto/Arashiyama


text:
Talk:Kyoto/Central

Tasks from Collaboration
This article is nearly at guide status, so here are the tasks that still need done before that can happen:
 * Put current listings in manual-style format
 * More "Do" listings if any
 * Contact" section needs content —The preceding comment was added by ChubbyWimbus (talk • contribs), 04:59, 1 August 2009

Why use the American clock when they're going to see times using the 24h clock in Kyoto? —The preceding comment was added by 150.101.89.130 (talk • contribs)

 * By all means, change those times to 24-hour times. Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:50, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Drink: charge
Concerning the following quote, Some places might charge a fee of ¥500-1000, I wonder if the author was talking about the seating fee, or the price of the drink. Any idea? - Fabimaru (talk) 18:13, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Never been to Japan, but to me that sounds like a cover charge/admission fee of some kind. ϒpsilon (talk) 18:51, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Bye Umekoji
Some of the information may still be relevant in the new train museum that will open next year:

Tradition in the intro to the "See" section
The stuff about tradition in the intro to the "See" section is rather muddly. I'd rewrite it, but I'm not entirely sure what it is trying to say. Nurg (talk) 08:10, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

New banner

New banners, which can also be considered for Kyoto, Kyoto (prefecture) and Kansai. /Yvwv (talk) 02:07, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

 * Both are better the old one is terrible and tells nothing about the district,3, 1 then 2 Tai123.123 (talk) 02:11, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

 * 2, 3, 1, and not the current one. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:13, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

 * 3,2,1 but not 0 SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 04:22, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

 * I like 1, The Nijo Castle picture best. I don't like that the other pictures just cut the buildings. I actually think there could be better than all of these (Toji Temple? Toji Temple with Kyoto Tower?). The current (Kyoto Station) banner is low quality and a horrible representation of Kyoto. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 09:41, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

 * The current banner shows the station, which is one of the best modern buildings I have visited anywhere. I used my own photo of this, in part as a contrast to the temple views used in other Kyoto districts. However Commons has many more suitable images than it had 7 years ago, so it is time to change. I like the new views of the Imperial Palace - my preference is 3, 2, 0, 1. AlasdairW (talk) 21:21, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Kyoto/Central


text:
Talk:Kyoto/Higashiyama

Organizing "See" Section
I think the current structure is highly unhelpful. It's okay for Gion to have a category, because it is a region that many are aware of, but I hate pages that list attractions by categories like "Temples", "Museums", etc. I think these types of divisions are generally unhelpful as they give no indication of where they are in relation to other sites, and in many cases are misleading. An example: Kodaiji Temple falls into the Gion area, but it's also a temple, so someone using this guide would not know that they can see Kodaiji as part of their trip to Gion. I'd much prefer listing them from North to South (or something that gives the user an idea of the areas orientation) OR adding area names, like the "Philosopher's Path" or something.

Is there a Wikivoyage policy that accepts these divisions or is this just something individuals do? I would personally prefer a "list of temples" page being separate from actual article pages. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 19:49, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

 * I'm to blame. I don't know about any "rules" about this. I personally found the old layout very hard to read through (and more importantly browse), with that many listings. Normally I'm not a big fan of separating out content by attraction type either, but with the sheer amount of temples in Kyoto, I think it makes sense - But if you can come up with a different way to break up the content I'm all ears.

 * Tragically even though I lived in Okazaki for 6 months, I have no clue where the temples are (or if they are any good) - guess I got fed up with them pretty quickly - is there any more temples we can move to the Gion subsection (Maybe we could move Kiyomizu ji up there)? Are some of the shrines listed, some of the small ones along/near the Philosopher's Path, so we could make another subsection that way (with Ginkakuji)? --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 20:22, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

 * To answer my own question, how about grouping Heian, Nanzenji, Eikando, Ginkakuji and Daimonji into an expanded Philosopher's Path area (map). Just browsed through some online guides, and many seems to do as an itinerary already. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 20:50, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Actually, when you mentioned Okazaki, it reminded me that Heian Jingu, the Zoo, and the two museums are all in Okazaki. What about having the Philosopher's Path, Okazaki, and Gion? That may be nice, because then our Philosopher's Path section can only include the sites along the path (and Nanzenji). I have tried to find some sort of guide as to what exactly is in Gion, but there doesn't appear to be much consensus among various sources. The core of Gion (where the maiko/geisha are) is just beside Kenninji Temple, and Yasaka Shrine is always listed. Aside from that, other sites are rather fuzzy about whether or not they are in Gion...

 * So, if Maruyama Park is designated as part of Gion, I think Wikivoyage's "Gion" should also include Ryozen Kannon Statue/Temple (already there), Kodaiji, Chion-in, and Yasaka Pagoda (there are some temples further back, like Anyoji, Chorakuji, and Shohoji that could also be included).

 * Kiyomizu Temple seems like a stretch for us to put in Gion, since it's well-known and has never been placed in Gion in any guide I've ever read. Is it okay that Kiyomizu-dera does not fit into any sub-categories? And do you like having Okazaki as a sub-category? (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 21:17, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Also, to do a follow-up on my comments: I think we could place Yoshida Shrine and the other shrines around Kyoto University into the Okazaki area. Basically, this would cover the northern area of Higashiyama, leaving Kiyomizu and everything south of it without categories, unless someone knows the lower area's name.

 * I'd say it's about the same degree of a stretch to have Ryozen Kannon in Gion as it is to have Kiyomizu-dera in Gion. It's a short walk to Gion in both cases, but that's about all they have to do with Gion. I feel like there's a good name for that area, but I can't think of it right now... (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 23:36, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Yes, most of the sites surrounding Maruyama Park may not actually be part of Gion, either, but it is nice having them all together in a group, since in reality, they are even closer to the park and Yasaka Shrine than the actual Gion district street. Do you think we should put them in a "Gion" category then? (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 16:49, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

 * I've used parks as organization points in Hiroshima — you could group surrounding sights into "Maruyama Park area" or something like that. Even though Gion's sub-section will be comparatively brief, I think it deserves space of its own. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 18:31, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Alright, I updated the page to show the proposed sub-categories. It highlights a lot of missing entries, so I'll at least add the names of some of them to get a better idea of how many sites each area holds, but how does it look? I left "Gion", but I made it a subcategory of the Maruyama Park area. Feel free to discuss further here or adjust it if you think there is a better way. Also, the sites that don't fit into any of those categories are at the top. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 18:45, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

Japanese Text
As Kyoto is currently scheduled to be the next CotM, and the bug report sent in months ago about edits not working with foreign characters, I was wondering if anyone would object to temporarily moving the Japanese text here until the collaboration is over (with the English names beside them to make it easy to put them back). My thoughts are: With the idea that the Collaboration of the Month should attract new people to make edits and improve the page, receiving the "someone else has edited while you were editing" error constantly will make those people lose interest quickly. I imagine it's a pain for all of us who have had to deal with it, but I think for the collaboration, it could be more successful if everything is easily accessible.

I will also use this to encourage everyone to offer their vote on the "top bugs" page in hopes of whoever fixes bugs actually fixing this problem: (the reports relevent to my comment are "Tech:EditListing script fails on non-ASCII characters in some fields" and "Tech:ListingEditor cannot handle the value of name field in non-ASCII characters".)

Any objections? (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 22:20, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

title: Talk:Kyoto/Higashiyama


text:
Talk:Kyoto/North

Head Zen Temples
I've been mulling this over, but I might as well bring it up here. While most temples are themselves a site to see, some of the top Zen temples are just general names (Daitokuji and Myoshinji being the ones I am currently thinking of), while the sites that people visit are actually sub-temples, each with their own names, sites, and admission fees.

I don't know if there is an established rule for this, but do you think it would be better to organize it like this:

 *
 * Description of sub-temple
 * Description of sub-temple
 * Description of sub-temple

OR just have one attraction listing and then give names, info, and prices for ALL sub-temples open to visitors (like Daitokuji is currently listed)? (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 00:30, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

title: Talk:Kyoto/North


text:
Talk:Kyoto/South

Pictures
I switched this picture for my own: Image:Daigo-ji.jpg

It's a beautiful picture, but I saw it on Wikipedia and since I have some of my own, I thought it'd be best for Wikivoyage to have its own fresh pictures. I'm posting this here in case that picture belongs to someone. I don't want to offend anyone or make them think I'm deleting other people's photos. (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 20:08, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

 * I like your photo more, myself, and I'm fully in favor of swapping out photos wherever it may improve the new looks. ((WT-en) Jani hasn't gotten upset that I already exchanged one of his with one of my own!)  With the new articles flowing differently, rethinking the photos is a necessity.  - (WT-en) Dguillaime 20:40, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

 * They're both nice photos, and distinct enough that you might consider using the other one in the Kyoto article. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 23:39, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Gorilla Jones: I had thought of moving the Ninnaji photo from the Kyoto/North page to the main Kyoto page. It looks awkward on the "North" page as it is, but I personally think the photo is worth keeping. The two pictures unfortunately are really similar, as they are both pagodas and stylistically, they are quite similar. Do you think the Ninnaji photo would be better on the main page or would you prefer leaving the Ninnaji picture where it is (I can post more pictures in the North to keep it from being bare if it is moved)? The picture I uploaded is of the same site as the one I removed (Daigo-ji). My thoughts are that, since Kyoto has so many sites, multiple images of the same place are not necessary...

 * I posted the original Daigo-ji picture, but don't worry about replacing it - yours is 100% better. I figured we needed something for that landmark so I trawled Wikimedia Commons for a PD image and found that one. --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 08:12, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

Since we are on the topic of Kyoto pictures, I am also wondering if there are objections to removing this photo of Kiyomizu Temple from the Kyoto/Higashiyama page? I thought this particular picture was an eyesore even before I joined Wikivoyage. It's interesting to look at, but on the site it just looks strange to me.

I hope I am not sounding pushy. Maybe I'm just thinking too much about these things. I have been posting a lot in the talk pages of Kyoto and subcategories lately... (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 00:12, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Agreed — that's neither a good photo nor a good representation of Kiyomizu-dera. No opinion about the Ninnaji photo, except that there will probably be a wealth of temple photos available for the North page when it's filled out. (WT-en) Gorilla Jones 00:22, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Agreed as well. It actually looks more like "View of Kyoto from Kiyomizu-dera" than "Kiyomizu-dera" to me, so feel free to swap it for a more representative photo.

 * That goes for the picture of Ginkaku-ji as well: just another image I fished out of Commons to show people what it looks like.  (NB:  Lest it sound like I'm papering the guides with unsatisfactory snaps, the Kiyomizu-dera one isn't one of my contributions.)  Does the job well enough but not exactly an award-winning shot.  Sadly, I don't have any pictures of my own to contribute for Ginkaku-ji since the renovations referenced in the guide were well under way when I was there earlier this year - I saw the apologetic sign at the gate and did a quick about-face. --(WT-en) Diego de Manila 08:19, 26 June 2009 (EDT)

title: Talk:Kyoto/South


text:
Talk:Kyrgyzstan

Untitled
For future reference the Project:CIA World Factbook 2002 import can be found at Talk:Kyrgyzstan/CIA World Factbook 2002 import. -- (WT-en) Huttite 03:43, 28 Mar 2005 (EST)

Stay healthy
Why is the 'stay healthy' section so weird? I can't comprehend it, and even if it really refers to 'Stoning', it should be under the safety section, not under the 'stay healthy' section. (WT-en) Chinzh

 * I've removed that random comment. If you see anything else so out of place, please feel free to remove it yourself! --(WT-en) Peter Talk 15:37, 21 December 2008 (EST)

Currency exchange
I have removed the rates for A$, C$ and replaced it with the more relevant currencies in Kyrgyzstan such as Kazakh tenge and Russian rouble, for it is very unlikely that a traveller will have A$ and C$ in Central Asia (besides, the money changers do not accept these currencies too) for he/she will have changed to $/euros/roubles. Please comment if anybody has any objections. chinzh 09:10, 22 December 2008 (EST)

General discussion
Greetings Kyrgyz wikivoyageers... I used to live in rural Kyrgyzstan as a Peace Corps volunteer, so I'd love to contribute to the Kyrgyzstan article. I've got lots of info on how to get around and how to stay healthy. If you have any questions or advice, post on this discussion. I'd love to hear what you have to say about the Unknown Land Kyrgyzstan. -Trent

 * Please plunge forward and start editing—the Kyrgyzstan articles need a lot of work! --(WT-en) Peter Talk 21:03, 14 August 2009 (EDT)

plunged forward with the Kochkor page... since I lived there for 2 years as a Peace Corps volunteer I have lots to share... —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) User:Studiomilam (talk • contribs)

 * Looks great! I'd recommend moving any non-specific-to-Kochkor information to the main Kyrgyzstan article—especially from the drink section. Presumably, bozo will make you warm and fuzzy regardless of location ;) The city/town article should only give information on where to get the drinks, having already been described in this article. By the way, you can "auto-sign" your posts by typing four tildes at the end ( ~ ). --(WT-en) Peter Talk 22:59, 17 August 2009 (EDT)

great thanks, i was thinking that i should move that drinking stuff (WT-en) Studiomilam 00:09, 18 August 2009 (EDT)

Regions
I'm not totally sure this is the best way to divide the country, but here goes:

 * Issyk-Kul and the Tian Shan — 8, 5, and a little bit of 4 & 6.
 * Bishkek and the Northwest — 1, 3, 7, and most of 4.
 * Ferghana Valley (Kyrgyzstan) — 2, 9, the rest of 6, and a bit of 4 (around Jalal-Abad).

Numbers coresspond to this map, and the more fine grained splits will be done along the individual district boundaries. The only worry I have is that 3 regions might be just one too few to avoid any further subdivision, but I'm sure we can wait until that time comes, and then maybe break Issyk-Kul and the Tian Shan apart. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 15:50, 14 January 2010 (EST)

 * And I've plunged forward and added this. I'll be happy to make adjustments in the future if others dislike this breakdown. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 13:51, 15 January 2010 (EST)

August 2011 update
I bought a tourist visa at the Dubai consulate and had to pay 460 AED (appr $125). Not cheap and since they didn't fill it in correctly it took some extra time when entering at the airport.

i brought USD but I am not sure that was a good choice, compared to trusting the ATM system. The notes looked almost perfect but they where rejected by many banks in Bishkek because of very minor defects. (WT-en) Bengt 02:54, 19 August 2011 (EDT)

Adjustment of region definition
Please consider this map: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyrgyzstan#Administrative_divisions

I reviewed the Issyk Kul and Tian Shian region (on WV) and since it has grow a lot, I think it would be a good idea to separate the part of it which actually represents the Naryn region. This would declutter the Issyk Kul and Tian Shian region (on WV), and create potential for the Naryn region, which I feel is under-represented at the moment. Also, the Naryn region really is a separate destination compared to Issyk Kul, taking up half of WV's Issyk Kul and the Tian Shan.

Furthermore, based on the administrative divisions, it would make great sense to slightly adjust the existing region definitions (on WV) to be consistent with these administrative divisions. This would create coherence between WV and WP, and would simplify mapping and especially map shaping. I believe this will not alter the Bishkek and the Northwest nor the Kyrgyz section of the Ferghana Valley.

Anyone opposed to this approach?

Cheers Ceever (talk) 09:17, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

 * I support creating a separate Naryn Region as per above. Gizza ( roam ) 02:23, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Hitchhiking link
I just removed this from the "By autostop" subsection of "Get around", per what not to link to:

A great read on hitch-hiking in Kyrgyzstan: https://www.travelblog.org/Asia/Kyrgyzstan/blog-521774.html

If a consensus considers this so useful to travelers that we should make an exception for it, we should use standard linking format for it. It's kind of old, though, from 2010. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:19, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * There are lots of blogs and other travel guides that have useful information for travellers, but I think it would be a mistake for us to try to set standards for picking which blogs we will link to and which ones we won't. And there are lots of bloggers who would be keen to use Wikivoyage to promote their blogs.
 * It would be better to incorporate the information in a non-copyright-violating sort of way. But since the blog it now ten years old, it is probably not worth doing that. Ground Zero (talk) 10:52, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

New banner
I've cropped some new banners, which these are the first things that come up to mind when I think of Kyrgyzstan. Please don't question why I haven't included banner 2. 5 is a bit different in subject though. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:23, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Didn't give my preference, but it's 3a, 3, 1, and 6. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:14, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

 * 3a, 6, 1 are my choices. (Fourth Bruce: "Rule 6: there is no rule six.") Ground Zero (talk) 12:26, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Very close between 6 and 3a (and I'd like the one that loses to be a banner somewhere), then 4, 3, 5, 1, 0. And I already flipped the first two positions once before posting and might change my mind on some of the rest of the order tomorrow. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:08, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * re to the one that loses, might be a good banner for Central Asia in which the banner is not very appealing. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 07:38, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Good thinking. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:04, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ and ✅. Replaced Central Asia with six since that's more a representation of CA as a whole. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 06:05, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Western Sahara and Kosovo
There was an addition based on the map. I wonder, is this because those territories are not recognised as countries? That is, you are not denied entrance because you are from Kosovo, but a Kosovan passport is worth as much as one you print by yourself? This might be a common problem, best explained on the Passport page. –LPfi (talk) 09:41, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

 * Not sure. I just clarified the info on the map into a box as not everyone will recognise those two countries on a map easily. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:46, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Kyrgyzstan


text:
Talk:L'Acquila (province)

VFD Discussion

 * Delete and redirect. This appears to be a page for L'Aquila (province). There is no unique information on this page to merge into the correctly-named article. --(WT-en) Bill in STL 05:19, 26 September 2010 (EDT)
 * Yes. Speedy delete please.(WT-en) Shep 09:44, 26 September 2010 (EDT)

 * Just redirect. Policy is to redirect plausible spelling errors. (WT-en) Pashley 06:11, 27 September 2010 (EDT)
 * L'Acquila is a plausible spelling error; is the same true for L'Acquila (province)? (WT-en) LtPowers 11:21, 27 September 2010 (EDT)
 * Either way, it refers to a real geographic location, and those should always be redirected. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 19:06, 27 September 2010 (EDT)
 * But that's just a rule of thumb. Is it plausible to think someone is going to type the "(province)" disambiguator?  (WT-en) LtPowers 10:41, 28 September 2010 (EDT)
 * No, but that's neither the issue nor the reasoning behind the policy. Redirects are cheaper than deletions, as they don't need to go through this process. The default option is redirect. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 16:46, 28 September 2010 (EDT)

Result: Redirected. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 21:32, 23 October 2010 (EDT)

title: Talk:L'Acquila (province)


text:
Talk:L'Aquila

I've created a short article on the city of L'Aquila. Most of its is based on what I remember our travel guide telling us when I visited the city back in 1999. L.J. Brooks 17 May 2006 21:28 (UTC)

title: Talk:L'Aquila


text:
Talk:La Alhambra

Hmmmm, should Alhambra get it's own article or is it an attraction in Granada? It technically passes the rule of thumb for Project:What is an article? since part of the ruins have been made into a hotel, but it's pretty thin ground... comments? 207.134.56.158 13:49, 20 Mar 2005 (EST)

 * Since someone provided a lot of information about what seems a significant archeological place and that keeping it would overwhelm the Granada page, I thought it best to leave as a separate article; though I did have doubts when I first saw it and went and read What is an article again before doing anything with it. I think it meets the criteria - just. -- (WT-en) Huttite 07:33, 21 Mar 2005 (EST)

 * Being difficult again, this really is just a medium sized attraction that happens to have a hotel attached. It is right next to the centre of the city and I think it is well down (well, in this case actually up) a slippery slope. I propose that we integrate the content and create a redirect. -- (WT-en) DanielC 13:26, 30 April 2006 (EDT)

 * Merged the content into Granada and proposed for redirect/vfd. (WT-en) WTDuck2 09:16, 13 June 2007 (EDT)

La Alhambra
It's an attraction, and content from this page has now been merged into Granada - make it a redirect? (WT-en) WTDuck2 09:09, 13 June 2007 (EDT)
 * I'd buy this as its own article (it does, after all, have places to stay), but if the content has already been merged, then make it a redirect. (WT-en) Maj 14:54, 13 June 2007 (EDT)
 * Hmmm. Didn't know you can stay there, but you can only visit it for a maximum of 3 hours.... Redirect -- (WT-en) Tim (writeme!) 05:59, 14 June 2007 (EDT)
 * Redirect. This is certainly something people might search for. (WT-en) Pashley 04:14, 22 June 2007 (EDT)
 * But what's the best English name? I'd say "the Alhambra", but am not sure what is correct or common. "La" is "the" in Spanish, "Al" is "the" in Arabic, so I find it odd that we seem to have both in an English title. (WT-en) Pashley 04:20, 22 June 2007 (EDT)

 * Redirect to [Granada]]. (WT-en) WindHorse

title: Talk:La Alhambra


text:
Talk:Labna

Labna
An archaeological site. ~ 219.94.80.130 01:47, 30 April 2007 (EDT)

 * Archeological sites are one of the major attractions of the Yucatan, which had a 3000 year record of pre-Columbian civilizations. Uxmal, only a few kilometers from Labna, is a Unesco World Heritage Site. 219.94.80.130, would you get yourself a login so that we can have some idea of who you are, what your interests are, what you like to edit, and so forth. How can we take you seriously here if you don't log in and use a recognizable name. I have better things to do with my time here than respond to Votes for Deletion. (WT-en) HLM 02:36, 30 April 2007 (EDT)

 * I have seen a large quantity of very well-informed and helpful edits from this IP and am glad to have this contributor on board. Moreover, wikivoyage welcomes and encourages participation from anyone who shares the goals of this site, regardless of whether they sign in or not. What is relevant is not who votes for deletion, but rather whether the article in question meets the criterion for Project:What is an article?. --(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald Talk 09:53, 30 April 2007 (EDT)

 * This is a rather small site, probably best covered in conjunction with other sites in the area... maybe Uxmal? - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 17:21, 1 May 2007 (EDT)

 * Redirect to Uxmal as a "Get out" for that article. Both the relevant Wikipedia article and the primary source quoted there suggest that this thing is most appropriately considered an add-on to the larger Uxmal site.  (BTW, I agree with Peterfitzgerald: opinions from anonymous editors count too.) -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 09:40, 8 May 2007 (EDT)

title: Talk:Labna


text:
Talk:Labrador City

The contents of this page were copied from http://www.labradorwest.com/com_profile/main.htm. I've restarted with a stub instead. --(WT-en) Evan 12:57, 22 Aug 2005 (EDT)

title: Talk:Labrador City


text:
Talk:Labuan

Contributor links: for researching this article try: - (WT-en) Huttite 06:31, 15 Apr 2005 (EDT)
 * http://www.cuti.com.my/guide_labuan.htm

title: Talk:Labuan


text:
Talk:Labuan Bajo

Comments
Sorry. Didn't mean to over write Jpatokal's edits. We were editing stuff at the same time. --(WT-en) David Straub 02:27, 7 July 2006 (EDT)

Major overhaul
I have edited a bunch of stuff. And while I was reluctant to make too many changes to a text I did not father, I did it anyway, thinking if what I am doing is so bad, it can always be reverted.

My reasons for so shamelessly doing so are many: - The perama tour is a well discussed one, and have been considered touting. I disagree. It has been around for so long that it is an establishment in Komodo.
 * Accuracy: How old is this information? Some of it, I know is outdated, and the rest might soon be. Information on flights can be better obtained on their respective websites, so links are better than ephemeral timetables.
 * Importance: What value is added to the article by noting that flights to Denpasar leave between 11 a.m and 3 p.m? And that ATMs dispense 50,000 Rp notes? Doesn't it just make the article more bloated?
 * Style: I'm not saying that I'm a prosaic genius, but any article benefits from having only one author/editor to give it the same style.
 * Bashing: Nobody benefits from negative (and I assume false) comments about boats sinking or airport staff overcharging. So, I removed all negative comments.
 * Touting: I find it amazing that the phrase "the best place to stay, if there is a vacancy, is at the hillside resort of..." has managed to survive. Not only is it the worst form of touting, it is just plain wrong. I have listed the places I found to be worth a look, and listed some more to give a sense of how much and how different the accommodation is.

If you disagree with any of my changes, please contact me, and let's collaborate on the article.

- Nikolaj Lundsgaard. (WT-en) Nikolaj 10:06, 20 June 2011 (EDT)

 * Good work and thank you. Please keep it up! The Get out section needs some work as WT guidelines are for all transport information (to and from a destination) to be given the in Get in section. Get out is for a short list of ideas of where to go next. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 22:01, 20 June 2011 (EDT)

title: Talk:Labuan Bajo


text:
Talk:La Cañada Flintridge

So, everything I can see on Google puts La Canada-Flintridge in the SG Valley. For example, they're in the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments. --(WT-en) Evan 13:30, 17 Dec 2003 (PST)

OK, I personally La Canada, La Crescenta, Tujunga, and Sunland in their own valley(s), but I guess the borders are kind of fuzzy. Not too important. (WT-en) Gjetost 13:34, 17 Dec 2003 (PST)

As soon as I can figure this out, I'll be redirecting this page to "La Cañada Flintridge". Note the tilde over the first "n", and the lack of a hyphen. Both of these niceties are important to the residents. Please excuse me if I mess this up. I might take a couple of days to figure this all out. (WT-en) Bunthorne 23:46, 8 June 2006 (EDT)

title: Talk:La Cañada Flintridge


text:
Talk:La Candelaria

Vfd discussion
A standalone district article for the otherwise-undistrictified Bogotá article.
 * Merge with Bogotá. (WT-en) Texugo 01:06, 6 August 2009 (EDT)
 * Merge then delete (WT-en) ChubbyWimbus 01:23, 6 August 2009 (EDT)

 * La Candelaria is Bogotá's primary tourist destination, the location of many hotels and hostels and of most of the city's historical and cultural attractions. This is a travel website, and La Candelaria is Bogotá's primary tourism travel destination. In contrast, Bogotá in general is primarily a business travel destination. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 190.27.235.247 (talk • contribs)

 * Merge & redirect. The article definitely should not (and may not) be deleted per Project:Deletion policy. I think we should eventually district this city of 8 million, and La Candelaria might make for a good, self-sufficient article, but a districts discussion needs to happen first. See Talk:Bogotá There is not a lot of content in either this article, or the main Bogotá article, so a merge should be fine for right now.  --(WT-en) Peter Talk 19:34, 7 August 2009 (EDT)
 * Looks to me like Peter has it right. Merge & redirect. (WT-en) Pashley 21:58, 7 August 2009 (EDT)

I'd like to add that La Candelaria is qualitatively different from the rest of Bogota, which is known as a business city, the capital of a narcostate, etc. In contrast, La Candelaria is a colonial, artsy neighborhood. Merging it into the rest of Bogotá wouldn't do it justice.

 * No one is disagreeing with you on the notability of the neighborhood. The point is that a districts discussion is needed before district articles should be created. Ad hoc schemes create real messes, that are really hard to clean up—take a look at how awful this one got. If and when we do improve the Bolivia article enough, and complete a districts proposal on the talk page, then we can start creating district articles, and the content you created for La Candelaria will not at all be lost—it will be easy to use it as a base for a new district article. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 00:54, 20 August 2009 (EDT)

Outcome Redirected to Bogotá --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 16:01, 26 October 2009 (EDT)

title: Talk:La Candelaria


text:
Talk:La Ceiba

Stay safe
Concerning the statement:
 * ''Also everyone should avoid the beach area to the west of the old dock that juts out to sea from the end of Avenida Republica. The east side, including Barrio Isla, is safer.'

What is the danger to avoid? Drowning? Rips? Sharp rocks or coral reef and big waves popular with surfers? Crime? Sharks? Poisonous or venomous shellfish? Pollution? - One mans meat is another mans poison. -- (WT-en) Huttite 18:29, 23 Jan 2005 (EST)

The area (el hoyo)is ruled by a local and heavily armed gang, and they sell crack cocaine from there. As a foreigner no one has any reason to go there, as one is in danger of being robbed or murdered for being a white person there. This is not anyone's meat except those with a suicidal nature. Sure, if your meat is buying crack, you speak good Spanish and you like a lot of excitement go for it. Watch out for the police on your way out. I honestly don't think this the type of person who would read this site. You would have to know exactly what you were doing to go to the hoyo, whereas this page is aimed at people who don't know La Ceiba, and this section is aimed at the ignorant who enter that area unknowingly, thinking ooh let's go to the beach. User:(WT-en) Squeakfox.

What gangs specifically? mara 18?

title: Talk:La Ceiba


text:
Talk:Lachen

India Beacons Sojourn
Let's discuss the need for this listing here. I recall there was another remote part of India where it was determined that it was in fact reasonable to list this tour agency, because it was quite difficult for individual travelers to get there on their own, and because the tour really enabled travelers to do things they couldn't do by themselves. That may be the case here, too, but what troubles me is that this tour agency has repeatedly tried to add listings in other places, where it was determined that it was merely advertising. So which one is it here? (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 02:10, 25 October 2011 (EDT)

title: Talk:Lachen


text:
Talk:Ladies Market

Ladies Market
Was marked with a vfd in October. -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 22:07, 20 January 2007 (EST)

 * Delete. -- (WT-en) Jonboy 12:13, 27 January 2007 (EST)

 * Keep (WP) & redirect ~ 61.91.191.2 13:17, 30 January 2007 (EST)

 * Redirected to Kowloon — (WT-en) Ravikiran 04:05, 13 February 2007 (EST)

title: Talk:Ladies Market


text:
Talk:Lady Elliot Island

Images
I've replaced this image

with this one

Neither image is perfect by any stretch, but I managed to get an image without any airplane wing, and at higher zoom you can pretty much make out all features of the island. If anyone feels differently feel free to change or add both. --(WT-en) Inas 07:33, 29 April 2009 (EDT)

 * Looks good. The above picture pre-dates my move to digital photography, so I'm happy to see a newer picture.  --(WT-en) Jonboy 10:17, 29 April 2009 (EDT)

title: Talk:Lady Elliot Island


text:
Talk:Ladysmith

Comments
I suspect that this place has been renamed, but keeping up with map books is an expensive hobie in South Africa at the moment. If it has been renamed, we can move this page and redirect Ladysmith to whatever the new name is.

title: Talk:Ladysmith


text:
Talk:Lafayette (Indiana)

Yeah, I think "Cope" is where laundry stuff should go. --(WT-en) Evan 17:16, 23 Jan 2005 (EST)

Spelling and Typos
Are the following words correct? -- (WT-en) Huttite 17:25, 23 Jan 2005 (EST)
 * Willage - in introductory section - Should it be Village?
 * Farmers marked - in Buy section - is this really Farmers Market?
 * Use of st. - is this the culturally correct way of expressing Street in Lafayette? (as in some French contexts rue (for street) is not always capitalised, as is normally done with Street in English) or is it a Typo.

Fixed Village and St., Farmers market. -- (WT-en) elgaard 13:17, 24 Jan 2005 (EST)

Updates
Removed Cafe Moka, replacing it with Cafe Royale.

title: Talk:Lafayette (Indiana)


text:
Talk:Lagansky district

VFD discussion
(See also Talk:Gorodovikovsky district)

Lagansky district

 * Delete - too small, contains only one town. I don't think Kalmykia needs any subregions since it only has one city and a few towns that anyone might actually visit. --(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald Talk 23:00, 21 April 2007 (EDT)
 * Redirect to Kalmykia (WT-en) WindHorse 23:10, 21 April 2007 (EDT)
 * Redirect. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 08:16, 23 April 2007 (EDT)
 * Still delete as per above. --(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald Talk 00:49, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

 * Keep if the person that created it is ready to start contributing and write something about this place, then let's have an article. Kalmykia is bigger than the lower Peninsula of Michigan. Doesn't a federal republic of that size (it is not highly populated but it is very geographically diverse) have some districts within it? (WT-en) HLM 02:51, 30 April 2007 (EDT)
 * Redirect as in previous case. Redirecting keeps the article name around, in case someone does eventually add content, and is therefore preferable to deleting. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 09:44, 9 May 2007 (EDT)

title: Talk:Lagansky district