text:
Talk:Orlando

Orlando Needs Constant Attention
Anyone and everyone seems to come to the Orlando page to add their own hotel, attraction, or business that is not really located in Orlando. Editors/Admins need to constantly monitor Orlando to either move the business to the correct city or delete it as SPAM. I believe this page should be put on permanent "semi protected" status. (WT-en) gamweb 13:51, 27 August 2008 (EDT)

Where is Disneyworld
There are two hotels which claim to be within the Disneyworld Glorious Leader Compound or something like that. When I click on their website links, they say they are in a city called Buena Vista. So I head on over to the bastion of truth, Wikipedia, and learn that yes there really is such a city; it is owned and operated by Disney and has a population of exactly 16 people. 16. Sixteen. I think Buena Vista should just redirect to Disneyworld, and we should move the Buena Vista hotels into the Disneyworld article. Does that sound right? -- (WT-en) Colin 23:50, 8 Dec 2004 (EST)

 * Yes. (WT-en) Jpatokal 01:38, 9 Dec 2004 (EST)

Sleep section edit war
For the past few weeks there's been an "edit war" going on between at least a couple of editors (anonymous and with changing IP addresses, so it's hard to keep track) over listings in the Sleep section. That approach isn't going to settle it. I encourage you to instead read Project:External links for some guidance on what our policies are for accommodation listings and links, and discuss your viewpoint here, where other editors can offer their perspectives as well. (It would be helpful if you each created an account, and signed your comments (type ~ ) so we can keep track of who's who.) Thanks! - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 09:35, 20 April 2007 (EDT)

 * It would appear that the original "edit war" began when an anonymous user began removing legitimate and long standing references to reputable/notable Vacation Rental Home companies operating in the Orlando area and replacing/supplanting them with links to his own singular, un-notable privately owned vacation rental home. The user is simply trying to use Wikivoyage as promotional vehicle for his own personal benefit/profit. His links were un-notable due to the fact that there are tens of thousands of other similar vacation rental homes in the Orlando area.

 * Therefore, I propose restoring the original, long standing links to the reputable legitimate companies offering vacation rental homes in Orlando and continue to block/removed those private owners of singular properties trying to abuse Wikivoyage as a promotion vehicle for personal gain.

 * 80.44.178.143 13:32, 20 April 2007 (EDT)

 * First, I reverted your edits and restored the comment asking the participants to discuss this before any further edits, because this issue has not been worked out. Can you do that, please?
 * Second, you seem to be applying Wikipedia's "notability" standard here, which isn't part of our criteria. I agree that it's completely inappropriate for one business owner to remove listings for other businesses.  But it is not inappropriate for them to add a listing for their own business, because we want individual listings.  That's part of what Wikivoyage is here for: to give specific, fair recommendations.  See Project:Don't tout for information about how business owners can contribute constructively to Wikivoyage.
 * Third, I'm going to again point out Project:External links, because the web site you keep adding in place of these primary listings does not appear to fit with the site's policy. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 16:44, 20 April 2007 (EDT)

Sleep section needs editing
The sleep section here has gotten a bit out of hand. Yeah, I know: Orlando has hotels on every corner, and there's a demand for them... but this list should at least be split into Budget/Mid-range/Splurge (or is that "Splurge/Second-mortage/Bankruptcy"?) - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 18:23, 1 May 2007 (EDT)

I might of placed a resource (Orlando Vacation Blog) in the wrong section. It might be better suited in the do section. Do others suggest that I move it? Thanks. -- (WT-en) Brent

Orlando vs. Surrounding Cities
I see lots of info placed in Orlando here that should be in surrounding cities (direct suburbs, and Walt Disney World). Orlando has plenty of attractions within City Limits that still need to be listed here. Lets move the info that belongs to surrounding cities to the correct location, otherwise this Orlando page will certainly become too large to manage. I see quite a few hotels that are located in other (surrounding) cities. I am going to start moving them out to the correct location. (WT-en) Gamweb 17:40, 6 August 2007 (EDT)
 * Makes sense to me. Hotels should be in the town/city they are physically in. Dumping stuff in the big city--especially when the city article isn't started is common, but not good practice. The traveler may want to stay outside Orlando, and needs to have the choices out there. (WT-en) OldPine 18:58, 6 August 2007 (EDT)
 * Thanks for doing the moves. -- (WT-en) Colin 19:09, 6 August 2007 (EDT)

The Boggy Creek Golf course is no longer in business.

"A-Team Massage" in Tennis section
This listing is in the tennis section of the article and it is for a massage service. So it doesn't belong there and I want to just delete it, but maybe somebody else can think of a place to put it. (WT-en) Carson 21:48, 19 June 2008 (EDT)
 * A-Team Massage has spammed all of Central Florida with their link (apparently, no address) so I am deleting them all as SPAM. (gamweb nli) 199.72.35.45 19:20, 27 August 2008 (EDT)

How o send Pm?
Hi, how I can send PM?

Understand section
Is there a way to make this private, or moved to discussion? If wikivoyage is supposed to be read as a travel guide, this section with it's reference to wikivoyage and it's guidelines seems a bit out of place. What are people's thoughts on this? --(WT-en) MarinaK 21:00, 24 February 2009 (EST)MarinaK.
 * You're right, the Understand section needs some cleanup. The reference to WT guidelines should not be there, and other attraction references need to be made more concise. I'm gonna make a few changes now, and plan to make more in the future, but feel free to clean things up where you see fit. (WT-en) Jtesla16 22:27, 24 February 2009 (EST)
 * Well, back when I first joined Wikivoyage, I saw that the whole article was just a mess (and still is). Much of what was/in this article is not in Orlando proper but in surrounding areas. However, for most tourists the whole region is considered Orlando...so the plan was to (soon thereafter) create a Greater Orlando article which would contain all this info and keep "Orlando" down to just Orlando proper (ie. within city limits). Of course, I eventually delved quite deep into WIkitravel and forgot about reworking this whole thing. (WT-en) AHeneen 20:46, 25 February 2009 (EST)

Disclaimer in Sleep
I deleted the disclaimer in Sleep for the same reasons as my deletion for the Understand section. Please let me know if you don't agree with this. Thanks. --(WT-en) MarinaK 17:55, 25 February 2009 (EST)MarinaK.
 * The disclaimer was there as every few days a new hotel would come along and write a long, touting entry; put its entry above everyone else's; or even delete another entry. I got sick of seeing new touting so often that I just put that big disclaimer there. It has worked somewhat (there's still a little touting going on), but I've moved on to other areas and have slacked on cleaning up Orlando. (WT-en) AHeneen 20:46, 25 February 2009 (EST)
 * Maybe we can include the disclaimer as a hidden comment on the page, which you will only see when you attempt to Edit the code. I forget the syntax for this. (WT-en) Jtesla16 20:55, 25 February 2009 (EST)
 * (WT-en) LtPowers 20:58, 25 February 2009 (EST)

Sorting, trimming
I took out a bunch of those worthless sleep entries with no information beyond website links, addresses, and phone numbers. But there is still an overwhelming quantity of them in the mid-range, and someone who knows the area better than I do should probably try to trim more of the less worthwhile entries. Ditto for that golf yellow pages section. And the eat section is screaming for sorting by price! --(WT-en) Peter Talk 03:26, 29 March 2009 (EDT)

 * Yes, I have found the same to still ring true for the Eat portion (whether they be split by resto type or price, something is needed...maybe I'll just plug away by listing them by type of resto!). I am going to add a price info box to the Sleep section, after having just doing a lot of cleanup on that and just about every section (a lot in the Do, See, Sleep, etc.). I also added Celcius temps after the F's, but am wondering since there's a nice temperate chart showing the highs/lows for each month, are the Spring/Summer/Autumn/Winter paragraphs needed? I'm all for removing those long paragraphs. Opinions? I'm also going to add some templates to the Sleep and other sections, which will hopefully increase the standardization.  What I find to be really annoying is the phone book-like golf course listings...seriously, how is this any different from a phone book? Anyone else up for editing much of that section (I'm seeking many WTers opinions, so pls give 'em!) (WT-en) Zepppep 11:28, 3 September 2010 (EDT)
 * Putting a Celsius value after every Fahrenheit value seems a little excessive, but maybe that's only due to the excessive number of them. Prose is a good thing to have in a Climate description, but there's no need to duplicate the table, either.  I'd suggest converting some specific values to general descriptions ("comfortable", "hot", "chilly", etc.).  (WT-en) LtPowers 15:54, 3 September 2010 (EDT)
 * Yeah, perhaps by me putting a Celsius marker after pretty much every measure of temperature, it might allow some of the specifics temps to be changed to descriptors like you've mentioned. However, there are a lot of people from cooler states who may or may not agree with "chilly" or "humid," as their own states may have colder winters and less humid summers. I guess that might then confuse some folks, which is again why I was thinking so much of the prose section on climate can be reduced if not removed entirely (save the table).(WT-en) Zepppep 16:13, 3 September 2010 (EDT)

Phone numbers
I just made a ton of edits to the site, and one of the things I had to spend correcting twice was the inclusion of the area code when dialing even local numbers. So if someone is thinking of making it so the area code doesn't need to be included, think again so you don't make the same mistake as me.(WT-en) Zepppep 16:15, 3 September 2010 (EDT)

Links in Do
I noticed under the "Do" section most if not all the entries include a link to the relevant location's external website, but most of these attractions have their own Wikivoyage page. Is there any compelling reason why the name of the location doesn't link to its corresponding Wikivoyage page? (WT-en) Hawkeyefla 16:21, 19 November 2011 (EST)
 * Nothing beyond the general bad shape this article is in. Plunge forward!  (WT-en) LtPowers 17:05, 20 November 2011 (EST)

Banner replacement - Orlando Eye?
The current banner is pretty dull and not very attractive. I'm thinking about File:Orlando "Eye" Ferris Wheel 03.jpg, which was added on Nov 3 to the Central Florida article (but removed on Nov 4). It would need to be cropped, though. What do you think? Powers (talk) 01:03, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

 * Not sure how well the Ferris Wheel would crop, but even so I think it would certainly be a good improvement on the existing. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 01:36, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

 * I've put two options on the right. The first one is reversed to make more room for the page title.  Powers (talk) 13:30, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

 * I've never been to Orlando, but I find the second proposed banner more exciting, partly because it has more to look at, including the lights. Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:43, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

 * I tend to prefer cleaner, more iconic banners myself. Powers (talk) 19:31, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

"Eat" section
The standard first-order subdivision of the "Eat" section is in price categories (Budget, Mid-range, Splurge). Is there a good reason why this "Eat" section, in particular, deviates from that structure? Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:00, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Magical Dining & "Eat" Section
Due to the local significance I added Magical Dining as a subheading for the Eat section since it's a benefit to travelers and the restaurants; however, I noticed this isn't the norm when looking through other WikiVoyage pages, but felt is significant enough to place somewhere. I'd appreciate some insight on where it might fit better. I also noticed that someone else pointed this out a few years ago, but there were no changes to the list order at that time.

Given the standardization established by other pages if I don't get any feedback I may go through later re-organize using the standardized formatting.

Wilforce (talk) 03:54, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

 * I think it's fine and a service to the traveller to include this kind of information. I would generally think this kind of information is best placed before restaurant listings, though. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:05, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Districts?
With 2.5 million citizens, a vast land area and lots of hospitality venues, is it about to districtify Orlando? /Yvwv (talk) 09:30, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Roads
Why does the get in section not mention roads? I understand I-4 is the only way in but it should still mention that. 2600:387:15:1B19:0:0:0:1 21:42, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

 * Then mention it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:51, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I started it but it’s probably not perfect.2600:387:15:1B19:0:0:0:1 22:52, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Orlando


text:
Talk:Orléans

Joan of Arc
I'm fairly certain that Joan of Arc is still celebrated (see Siege of Orléans), and there is a mention of Joan of Arc House (La Maison de Jeanne d'Arc). Perhaps this could be expanded on? Come to think about it, any number of places have Joan of Arc connections, does Wikivoyage have theme categories? The Joan of Arc category could also mention Domrémy-la-Pucelle (birth), Reims (had a place of honor at the Dauphin's crowning), and Rouen (trial & execution). See also, of course, Joan of Arc. (WT-en) AnnaKucsma 12:40, 31 October 2006 (EST)
 * The above comment seems to have disappeared from everything except my User Contributions page. Any reason?   (WT-en) AnnaKucsma 11:47, 1 November 2006 (EST)
 * I'm not sure what you mean by "disappeared"... but you should take a look at Project:Other ways of seeing travel. We don't have "theme categories" as such, but you could put together an interesting itinerary. Let me know if you have any questions! (WT-en) Maj 16:10, 1 November 2006 (EST)

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

title: Talk:Orléans


text:
Talk:Ormoc

Banks and Cooperatives
Here's a useless list of bank names with no information, I've pulled it from the main article so I'll put it here. (WT-en) texugo 09:37, 18 September 2011 (EDT) Cooperatives
 * Allied Bank
 * Bank of Commerce
 * Bank of Ormoc
 * Bank of the Philippine Islands (BPI)
 * China Bank
 * City Savings Bank
 * Coop Bank of Leyte
 * Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP)
 * BDO-Equitable PCI Bank
 * Green Bank
 * Landbank
 * Maybank
 * Metrobank
 * Philippine Savings Bank (PSBank)
 * BPI Family Bank
 * Philippine Farmers Bank
 * Philippine National Bank (PNB)
 * Rizal Commercial Banking Corporation (RCBC)
 * Rural Bank of Dulag
 * Metro Ormoc Community Cooperative (OCCCI)
 * Leyte Fourth District Women's Credit Cooperative (LFDWCC)
 * CFI
 * Macario Primary Cooperative

title: Talk:Ormoc


text:
Talk:Ormond Beach

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

title: Talk:Ormond Beach


text:
Talk:Orr's Island

VFD discussion

 * According to Wikipedia [], this troll-created article is part of a town. Project:What is an article? -- (WT-en) Colin 10:58, 8 May 2006 (EDT)
 * Keep. This is a pretty small island, but it is well known in that area and I think it could be expanded. Bailey Island that is mentioned in the WikiPedia reference is even more well know. I have been thinking of creating a region or sub-region in Maine to cover the many islands. Of course Orr's Island would be included. - (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 18:48, 11 May 2006 (EDT)
 * Looks like the path forward is to redirect to Harpswell, the town allegedly containing this island. I've taken the liberty. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 20:06, 26 May 2006 (EDT)

title: Talk:Orr's Island


text:
Talk:Orvieto

I started off this article by plunging forward and adding content. I don't know if all of the content is entirely accurate, so please correct, update, and add to it.

Michael 8:31 March 26, 2006 (UTC)

Quote
Where is the quote about Luca Signorelli and Orvieto from? It has quotation marks. If we can figure out where it's from, it's incumbent upon us to cite the source. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:52, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

See
What a terrible section! Shall we remove all the mere names? And not a single location is given. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:27, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:43, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Chiesa di sant'Andrea.JPG
 * Duomo di Orvieto 2014.JPG

title: Talk:Orvieto


text:
Talk:Osaka

District change
There's a district redlink and a lot of outline districts in this huge city. This is my proposal for the districts; if someone knows the city, your opinion is welcome.

 * Bay Area = West
 * Kita + Minami + Osaka Castle = Centre
 * Tennoji + South = South
 * Remove the "East" district since it redlinks

What do you think? We would need to change the static map. --Comment by Selfie City  (talk about my contributions ) 14:25, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Good proposal. I would include East in Centre - there may be listings for the East some day. What happens to North? Ground Zero (talk) 15:35, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't think North District needs to be changed. --Comment by Selfie City  (talk about my contributions ) 16:42, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

 * Weak objection. As the lead section mentions, Osaka had developed Manchester-ish character, actually since late 16th century to produce katana swords for clans battling to top others. I will try and find those then sword-smith, who attract increasing tourists fishing for good kitchen knives in East Osaka. Both tourists and natives would be puzzled to find East included in Central Osaka, I am afraid, or try to picture mingling Manchester with Liverpool or York, or San Pedro with downtown LA. (--Omotecho (talk) 15:35, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

 * This article is still on a list of articles with active district discussions. Were the discussions resolved, or is there still something to decide? Also, off-topic in this thread, but is it important to keep the extensive Japanese text on this talk page after all these years, or could it be deleted or at least archived? Most of us can't read it, and it looks like it was based on an intemperate overreaction to language that was not ill-intended. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:10, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Dynamic map
Can we eliminate it, please? The preference in districted cities is to have a static map. If any of the numbered points on the dynamic map need to be moved to the static map, would someone who knows how please do it? Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:03, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree with eliminating it. Looking at the points on the map, Itami Airport is already marked and the others are "Do" listings that have not been moved into districts, so I don't think they need to be put on the static map. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 14:09, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Great. Any objections to simply removing the dynamic map? Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:43, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
 * No objection, so I will delete it. It can always be restored if someone offers a convincing reason for doing so. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:57, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Get In
I will soon work on updating the fares and travel details for this section as a consequence of the October consumption tax hike. We've added lots of important information here over the years. I'm wondering if the section should be condensed/reduced a little bit. Any thoughts are welcome. JRHorse (talk) 13:21, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Osaka


text:
Talk:Osaka (prefecture)

千里という市はないのですが.

Reflection point: the larger administrative area
Here's some reflection point: How can an article on a larger administrative sectioning like Osaka Prefecture, for example, be better handled?

Since Osaka Prefecture and even Osaka City is not necessarily tourism-centric, there aren't really flooding-too-much that can be included in either stand-alone pages. There are already some mentions and descriptions on destinations outside Osaka City in the Osaka City article page. eg. Expo Park (Suita City), Mino Koen (Mino City)

So how do we want this type of place's article grow? Move out each time one finds a topic that does not belong there? Replicate it? Redirect it? Combine the whole prefecture page with the city part? Either way, it would be better to have some common understanding on how to deal with this as as it continues to go, duplication of work can increase.

 * Everything on Wikivoyage is structured around "destinations", see Project:What is an article?. Basically, if it's a standalone town with its own accommodation etc, it gets its own article and then other articles just point to it in "Get out".  So Expo Park would go in Suita, Mino Koen would go in Mino, etc. (WT-en) Jpatokal 05:04, 8 February 2007 (EST)

 * Okay, thank you for your reply. Let me try that out. I've gone through the current Osaka City article, to find out this maybe going to take away a remarkable amout of text. Tell me what you think again after the change. (WT-en) 60dot 05:29, 8 February 2007 (EST)

 * Waitwait -- you're allowed to (required to!) use common sense. For example, if the "city" is a sleeper suburb that nobody would ever visit except for Attraction X, then you can keep X in the main Osaka page.  Likewise, it makes zero sense to start splitting up university listings just because they have a campus or two outside city limits. (WT-en) Jpatokal 05:45, 8 February 2007 (EST)

 * I guess you are getting to my original point actually. Let me ask it a different way then; which one is the "main" page? If Osaka was the one you mean, then nothing really remains in the Osaka (prefecture) page. Even Sakai is in doubt.  Sakai DOES serve as a bed town for commuters to Osaka City, and IS a big city in terms of population, but otherwise a traveller would usually not stay overnight.  So everything would go into Osaka?

 * Yes, Osaka (prefecture) is basically a container, which exists so that you can place cities under it (because cities always belong to regions, not to other cities). (WT-en) Jpatokal 09:47, 8 February 2007 (EST)

 * Let me get this straight. Take the example of Minō:

Minō Koen exists in Minō City. Minō City belongs to Osaka Prefecture but not to Osaka City. So Minō City will get its own page as a link from Osaka (prefecture); a Get Out title only from Osaka (which currently is Osaka City.) Minō Koen is however the only spot I can name for an average visitor to visit. The city does have a couple of accomodations targetted at domestic travellers more or less. It's easily reachable from Osaka City, too. Do you still want a standalone article page for Minō City with virtually Minō Koen the only text in it? Similar situation with Ibaraki City. Thoughts? (WT-en) 60dot 10:25, 8 February 2007 (EST)

 * The short answer is "yes". Wikivoyage is not just for tourists: business travelers and English teachers etc may also end up in Mino, and then they can add restaurants, hotels, obscure little sights, etc. At the end of the day our goal is to conquer cover the world. (WT-en) Jpatokal 11:31, 8 February 2007 (EST)

title: Talk:Osaka (prefecture)


text:
Talk:Osceola National Forest

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

Comments
The website for the Osceola National Forest is:. As a product of the US Government, the text is considered Public Domain. (WT-en) gamweb 22:20, 26 August 2008 (EDT)

Links
Some links as reference points:
 * http://www.fs.fed.us/r8/florida/recreation/index_osc.shtml
 * http://www.fs.fed.us/r8/florida/recreation/index_osc.shtml?p=1.1.9.3
 * http://www.fs.fed.us/r8/florida/resources/index-osc.shtml
 * http://www.fs.fed.us/r8/florida/maps/
 * http://www.fs.fed.us/r8/florida/passes/
 * http://www.fs.fed.us/r8/florida/faq/
 * http://www.dep.state.fl.us/gwt/guide/regions/north/trails/osceola_forest.htm
 * http://www.floridaconservation.org/Viewing/sites/site-ne01.html

Images
Images for reference:
 * http://shared.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Category:Osceola_National_Forest
 * http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Osceola_National_Forest

title: Talk:Osceola National Forest


text:
Talk:Oshakati

VFD Discussion

 * Ondangwa and Oshakati. These are 2 different cities. I redirected Ondangwa to a new page. So, I'm putting it up for deletion. (WT-en) Kingjeff 00:07, 31 Dec 2005 (EST)
 * What are you suggesting be deleted? Ondangwa or Ondangwa and Oshakati or both? The page has no content at present but that is not a reason to delete a page. If Ondangwa and Oshakati is left as a redirect it doesn't need to (and shouldn't) be deleted. Also the way you have put the VFD on Ondangwa and Oshakati but have not changed the Namibia page does not follow the procedure on Project:How to delete a page and means it just gets recreated again the next time someone clicks OK when they visit the link. Besides this place is described as Twin towns in the heart of Owamboland, northern Namibia. The original author thought of these 2 places as one place, a region perhaps? I say make it a region page with a link for each smaller place. Also, you might want to research these place names - there might be a relevant website. -- (WT-en) Huttite 08:38, 31 Dec 2005 (EST)
 * Ondangwa and Oshakati was put onto 1 page. So this is the page I'm suggesting that should be deleted. (WT-en) Kingjeff 11:00, 31 Dec 2005 (EST)
 * These 2 cities may be considered twin cities but Minneapolis and St. Paul are twin cities and have separate pages. (WT-en) Kingjeff 11:11, 31 Dec 2005 (EST)
 * You will notice there is a region called Twin Cities that lists both Minneapolis and St. Paul. Ondangwa and Oshakati can list Ondangwa and Oshakati to explain a similar relationship. Because this is a wiki, pretty much everything is remembered, even everything that is deleted! (I think) There is just no point deleting something that will most likely come back. Deletion should be a last resort, for things completely off topic. I think some articles can be written. A [Google search] says there are at least 170 exact references with the phrase and 16,000+ similar references, looks like a place to me. -- (WT-en) Huttite 15:07, 31 Dec 2005 (EST)
 * I don't think it'll come back. (WT-en) Kingjeff 15:48, 31 Dec 2005 (EST)
 * Why not? I might write about it! If the potential for an article exists, even as a redirect, I see no reason to delete the page. A Wiki is not like other websites where you need to keep things tidy by deleting stuff. You make a wiki tidy by connecting stuff; the more appropriate links the better! In the ultimate wiki every meaningful word would be linked! You might want to also look over the advice at WardsWiki (Ward Cunningham created the wiki concept and has a wiki about wiki) and read, starting with WhenToDeletePages, as you may be suffering CultureShock. -- (WT-en) Huttite 18:24, 31 Dec 2005 (EST)

title: Talk:Oshakati


text:
Talk:Oshkosh

I just wanted to mention that I am in the process of creating this page, so if it looks incomplete-- it is. --(WT-en) Lambticc 16 June 2006 10pm

Airventure coverage
I'm now visiting Oshkosh for AirVenture. There's a lot that could be covered about AirVenture visits. If we put in all the details, it might overwhelm the rest of the article. In that case, it would make sense to create a specific AirVenture article. However, we may not need to get to that point. The airventure.org website has much of this information already, and I'm not sure we need to recreate that here. For now, I propose putting "AirVenture" subheadings in the various sections and accumulating information there. We'll see where it leads. Comments? (WT-en) JimDeLaHunt 01:34, 28 July 2007 (EDT)

title: Talk:Oshkosh


text:
Talk:Oslo

the part about tap water vs bottled water is contradictory and wrong : "Do drink tap water instead of bottled water, which does nothing but drain your pocket of much needed kroners. "

so please correct

What's that section on "most expensive city"? The first part says its #15, then second part of the sentence says #1. ?!?? (WT-en) Shoness 08:37, 23 April 2007 (EDT) -

Hey, so, that was a really really fast first draft, there. I get the feeling it was copy-and-pasted from somewhere else. Anonymous contributor, are you sure that's your original work? -- (WT-en) Evan 14:21, 6 Nov 2003 (PST)

Did a google search on some of the phrases, no match. Doesn't mean it's original, but it was easy to check. Just because your paranoid doesn't mean it's not copyrighted (copywritten?). (WT-en) Majnoona

 * Majnoona it is not nice to label someone "paranoid" just because they ask a question. Since we try to be both polite and correct here, please spell YOU'RE = YOU ARE properly because "your paranoid" is nothing like what you meant. (cuddlyable3) 84.210.139.189 08:27, 29 November 2006 (EST)

 * She's my wife, she can call me paranoid. Anyways, it's a common term for being extra careful with copyright; see . --(WT-en) Evan 17:10, 29 November 2006 (EST)

 * I did a google, too. There's spelling mistakes and a casual style -- I think my initial worries were unfounded. It'd still be nice to hear from the author, though. P.S. "copyrotten". -- (WT-en) Evan 16:45, 6 Nov 2003 (PST)

_____

Answer: No, it was not copied and pasted. I live in Oslo, so it was easy to write. Naturally, I looked at some other sources to get some details right, but it is not copied or pasted from somewhere. Good thing you are checking though...

Great! Thanks for confirming that. You can take our double-checking as a compliment! I lookforward to reading more. (WT-en) Majnoona

centre -> center
I converted all the instances of "centre" back to "center". We prefer American spelling. --(WT-en) Evan 11:01, 29 Dec 2003 (PST)

What's wrong with correct English spelling?

 * See Project:Spelling.

 * There's nothing wrong with it. It's just easier to have one way to spell things in Wikivoyage, and by default it's American spelling. By having a single standard, we keep from having needless edits and arguments.

 * It's not like it's wrong to use Commonwealth spelling -- it'll just get edited to American spelling. See the Project:spelling page for more details. --(WT-en) Evan 11:43, 29 Dec 2003 (PST)

Olympen closed
I deleted all references to Olympen (aka "lompa") as, alas, it's closed. It might reopen, but in a different version than the place we used to know and love.

Get out
I remowed the destination listed under further away. Since Get out is for day-trips, and sugestion of where to head next. Bodø and Lofoten is to far from Oslo to be listed in the get out section. (WT-en) ViMy 17:37, 31 May 2009 (EDT)

border control
When I drove from Sweden into Norway (over the E6 autoway) I got stripsearched and locked up in a jail for over 40 minutes and they made me undress, my car was taken apart (wheels of), lugage was completely messed around with. very really annoying. and for no apartant other reason than being either from Amsterdam and/or not white. Big fat warning, Norwegian border folks are nazi's. 84.215.87.136

Stay safe & healthy
Are we talking about the same country here? oslo is not a dangerous place!

 * It's the most drug ridden city in the Scandinavia, but yeah, while most of it is factually correct, it does seem a bit excessive. Not sure how to tone it down while keeping the integrity, I'd hate to remove good advices.  --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 16:13, 11 February 2010 (EST)

Theatercafeen
The description of Theatercafeen appeared as a review, I changed the subjective wording to a more descriptive one. --Erik den yngre (talk) 19:13, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Districts?
With 50+ attractions, 78 eateries and 43 places in Drink (if I counted them correctly), I think the Oslo article could be divided into some districts, just like other Nordic capitals. While I'm not really familiar with the city, I thought up an organization like this:

1. Sentrum: Inside Ring 1

2. West: Between Ring 1 and Ring 3, and west of Akerselva river.

3. Grünerløkka and Inner East: A triangle east of Akerselva, south and west of Ring 3 and north of the eastbound railway.

4. North: North of Ring 3 and the aforementioned railway.

5. South: South of that same railway. Could also include the islands right south of Sentrum.

Does this sound reasonable? Would Erik or Carsten R D perhaps have something to say? Ps. in case someone wonders, as usual I picked visible things like roads as boundaries rather than official district boundaries because the former are much more visible to travelers both on a map and when they're actually in Oslo. ϒpsilon (talk) 08:26, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

 * Agree that official (administrative) districts (Norwegian "bydel") are not very useful for visitors. Perhaps divide along natural and clearly visible boundaries, and also neighborhoods that feels natural for strolling. The river (Akerselva) and ring roads is a good idea. Ring 1 however is not that visible and for instance the Palace is just outside ring 1. My modifications of the proposal
 * 1. Sentrum: Inside ring 1 but including the Palace/park (until Parkveien behind the Palace) in the west and the including the railway station in the east (the river flows in a tunnel under the railway station tracks). Basically the area around Karl Johan street between the Palace and the station.
 * 2. Looks OK, this would include Bislett/StHanshaugen, Frogner, Majorstua, Vigeland park and Bygdøy museums
 * 3. "Inner east" looks good: Grünerløkka, Sofienberg, Grønland, Tøyen, Gamle Oslo, but perhaps we should include Ekeberg as there is not much of interest to the tourist further south.
 * 4. North or "outer" Oslo. This is a less natural division except that it is far from the centre and transport is needed. This one would include Holmenkollen, Marka (the forest), Bogstad, Groruddalen, Østensjø, Teknisk museum.
 * 5. South including islands, looks good.
 * Erik den yngre (talk) 09:31, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

 * OK, thanks! However for the border between Inner East and South(east), if there are not much to see in the South, then I think it's better to place Ekeberg there to make sure there is at least some content in the South article.
 * Let's move forward with this after a week or so, if no complaints come up. ϒpsilon (talk) 16:37, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
 * If the south includes islands there should be plenty of content, I think. I wider question: Should Oslo be confined to the municipalitity (official borders) or should the article cover areas that in practice are part of the city. For instance islands and Nesodden, and for the visitor there is no clear distinction between Oslo and Bærum/Asker (the two big suburbs in the west): It is one non-stop urban area covered by the same public transport, the metro and the tram runs from Oslo into Bærum. --Erik den yngre (talk) 20:26, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
 * First I actually planned to cover the city of Oslo per the purple borders here. Nevertheless it could be a good idea to also cover Bærum and other places further out, especially as they don't seem to have their own articles yet. ϒpsilon (talk) 20:40, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
 * For the visitor/traveler the distinction between Akershus and Oslo does not make any sense and has no practical significance, the most populus parts of Akershus (Bærum/Asker, Lillestrøm, Nesodden etc) are part of Greater Oslo. For the traveller I think it makes more sense to also cover areas such as Bærum and Nesodden as part of the city, I guess it does not matter if some of these areas are also included in the Akershus article. Erik den yngre (talk) 21:20, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

If there are no objections within a few days or a week (are there any guidelines for this?), I think you can go head and create new articles for districts. --Erik den yngre (talk) 09:40, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Yup, I plan to do that sometime this week, if no objections come up. First, however, I need to add coordinates to the listings to see in which district to put each listing. ϒpsilon (talk) 09:57, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Great. I can help out adding coordinates. Erik den yngre (talk) 10:02, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I appreciate that. It doesn't take much time to add coordinates to one listing, but as there are hundreds of them.... ϒpsilon (talk) 10:16, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

By the way, there is a small error on the map. Wikivoyage map has "Langviksveien" where it should be "Museumsveien", right in front of the entrance to Norsk Folkemuseum. Erik den yngre (talk) 11:22, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I think maps are sourced from some central place in Wikimedia, and originally they're from Openstreetmap, so it's nothing that we can do about. ϒpsilon (talk) 18:51, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Provided that there has been no further comments, I'm going to create the districts today and move listings there. Starting with drawing the static district map first.

Another thing, as of now Oslo is directly sorted under East Norway in the hierarchy. As we per the discussion also will include places in the district articles that are not located in the city of Oslo, I think Oslo should be sorted under Akershus. ϒpsilon (talk) 13:50, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

 * Actually, now looking at how far east the "West" district really stretches, it will sort of look silly. And considering we will include western Akershus too, it's going to comprise quite a huge area. I think I'm going to make an "Inner North" article comprising the sector from Highway 168 (Sørkedalsveien/Bøgstadveien) onwards to Akerselva. ϒpsilon (talk) 16:24, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Yippie! Districts are ✅. Or at least the listings are moved there... ϒpsilon (talk) 18:21, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Great work! Currently there are no listings for Bærum (except Kolsåstoppen summit), not even an article. So I think we should just include main sights in Bærum under Oslo north/west. If an article on Bærum is created, then listings can be copied, I think some overlap is perfectly OK. Perhaps in the end we should include Bærum and Asker in the Oslo article. Perhaps Oslo and Akerhsus should be merged? Erik den yngre (talk) 21:48, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Akershus vs Oslo
I dont think Oslo should be listed under Akershus, if anything it should be the other way around: Oslo metropolitan area includes: (1) City of Oslo and (2) Akershus. The best solution is perhaps to allow some degree of overlap because most visitors have no clue that Henie Onstad kunstsenter for instance is not in Oslo, and visitors to Oslo should be informed that Henie-Onstad is a gallery that can be visited while in Oslo. If listed only under Bærum most visitors will not find it, I think. Erik den yngre (talk) 19:50, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

 * How would this sound?
 * The western wing of Akershus (Bærum, Asker etc.) should absolutely be considered part of Oslo/West (is it better to rename it "Oslo/West and West Akershus"?) as there are just a few listings there now — it can always be split off later if the West article gets unwieldy large.
 * For southern Oslo, Ski, Ås and Drøbak already have their own articles, so Oslo/South perhaps doesn't have to stretch that far.
 * Cities east and northeast of the large forest, along the E6 (Lillestrøm, Jessheim etc.), should IMO get a couple of articles on their own.
 * And the Akershus article could be renamed "Akershus and Oslo" or "Greater Oslo", and still list Oslo as part of this entity, just like Stockholm is part of Stockholm County. ϒpsilon (talk) 04:48, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

 * Ås and Drøbak are too far away and distinct to be included as part of greater Oslo, but Drøbak should be listed as "day out of town" option. Ski is a typical suburb and will soon be connected by a new high speed train. Lillestrøm is a smallish town but a typical suburb and in practice a part of Oslo, municipality borders are not logical around Lillestrøm so anonymous places like Lørenskog and Rælingen can also be included under Lillestrøm. There are few points of interest to the visitor at Lillestrøm, so can be mentioned under Akershus or Oslo or both. When one travel from Oslo to Lillestrøm there is a non-stop urban area (there are even plans to extend the metro towards Lillestrøm). Jessheim and Eidsvoll are too far from Oslo to be considerede part of Oslo proper (even if the airport is up there), and should have separate articles. Lets think about name for a merged article for a while. --Erik den yngre (talk) 06:48, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:39, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Trikkekart Oslo.svg
 * This was not the user's own work and thus we can't have it. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 22:28, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Nettbus to/from Torp Airport
does it still exist?

nettbus.no redirects to vybuss.no/

and is it meant to take that bus to Sandefjord (Fokserød) and from there taking a regional bus to the Torp airport? Flightnavigator (talk) 21:46, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Oslo


text:
Talk:Osnabrück

I am looking for a layout of the train station. I have seen it previously but don't recall where. It would be nice to include this or a link.

Lead paras
TT, please explain your reversion of my lead para, which I feel goes against what we agreed. "Understand" is recommended not required in a page like this. Osnabruck is populous but not a "large city" in terms of its attractions for visitors (though these are poorly documented). Moreover that policy was written with zero expectation of what the lead might contain. It was not the policy intent to retain such a section for its own sake, when the salient points have already been better made - the earlier debate was chiefly about losing relevant info not where it sat. There's hardly a page I light upon in this expedition that doesn't merit several hours work to upgrade, and this is certainly an example, and its present "Understand" is an eyesore. Grahamsands (talk) 10:01, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I added some listings. I think there can be done more for a lede than the lateral move of "converting" the understand section to a lede. Experience teaches that a non-existent section is harder to create than adding to an existing section... Hobbitschuster (talk) 10:43, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

 * Certainly, I'll point to where in the conversation I have drawn my conclusion from:
 * "In some cases I do think it can work to move information from "Understand", but I don't think the "Understand" section should be removed." - Granger
 * "Moving text from Understand to lead paragraph improves the article by making the readers first contact with the article more interesting. The Understand sections shouldn't be removed." - Ground Zero
 * "User:ThunderingTyphoons! raised the issue of the Understand section being pillaged and even eliminated to strengthen the lead. Only User:Grahamsands was doing that. TT has specifically said that he doesn't want to shut down this project. I don't see any objection to expanding the lead by using text from Understand, as long as that section remains a useful section, and no-one could conceivably object to building the article by adding text to the lead." - GZ
 * "While I would be happy to discuss the differences of opinion over Understand sections, that should be somewhere else." - me, and we haven't had that discussion yet
 * "We can't in this exercise try to fix the totality of each page, but any improvements to "Understand" will be time well-spent even though it slows the pace." - you
 * " Let's improve the lead, and improve Understand while we're at it. It takes longer that just cutting from one to add to the other, but the result is better articles." - Ground Zero again
 * I don't know which policy you're referring to, but I am reading Article skeleton templates/Sections, which says "[Understand is r]ecommended in all destination articles." I will grant you this is a recommendation, not a requirement. However, City guide status does require, not recommend, that all Guide-level articles have an 'Understand' section. If we want this article to attain Guide status (and we should want every article to reach Guide as a minimum), the 'Understand' section needs to be either retained or rewritten from scratch. Hobbit put it best above as to why rewriting from scratch is the inferior option.
 * All in all, I think "recommended, not required" is splitting hairs. If something is recommended for all articles, do we make any article better by ignoring the recommendation and removing that something? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:11, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I have improved the lead and expanded the Understand  section with text from Osnabrück to demonstrate that it can be done. Having said that, I did come across one town, Medewi, where I found nothing to say about it beyond what was already in the Understand section. In that case I eliminated the Understand section because I do think that the lead is more important.  Ground Zero (talk) 11:17, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

 * That's fair enough, but I would still contend that if you knew Medewi well enough, you'd find something to say in 'Understand' that couldn't be covered elsewhere. Everywhere that fulfils WV:WIAA has enough history, and/or geography, and/or culture to fill at least a short 'Understand' section, though sometimes it takes local knowledge to be able to do so. Not filling out 'Understand' yet doesn't preclude adding one in future. Thanks for your reworking here; looks good. To be clear, I have no problem with you, Graham or anyone else making the lede longer than it currently is.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:47, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Merging the understand section into the lead doesn't preclude anyone with more knowledge from creating an understand section in the future. In the case of Medewi, it's a beach town with no Wikipedia article, so there may actually be anything to say about it. I have confirmed that it is a real place, though. Ground Zero (talk) 13:15, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Indeed. You've done the best anyone can without having first-hand knowledge.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 13:28, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Osnabrück has been hugely improved, thanks all round, so I’ve added an Understand for Medewi just to improve the shining hour. I apologise to anyone who felt I was flouting the consensus we’d thrashed out. Yet as I read it, it gave considerable scope (indeed opportunity) for lead / understand development, while affirming no change to an existing policy which states what we’ve acknowledged it states. The difference between “required” and “recommended” is not splitting hairs, it’s pretty fundamental in the English language; and it’s not reasonable to take a flexible interpretation of policy in order to deny the same flexibility to another. Grahamsands (talk) 14:02, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Osnabrück


text:
Talk:Osoyoos

"Desert"/"hottest place" - falsehoods/hype
This is utter hogswallop, but common fare in Osoyoos' tourism literature; easily disprovable by the half-hour drive to Keremeos, where there is another "desert" (actually "shrub steppe" - there is no real desert in Canada), and even more by a trip to the Thompson Country between Kamloops and Lytton, and around Lillooet and up the Fraser Canyon to Williams Lake. Also "locally known as Nk'mip" is only in Nk'mip Resort/Winery's tourism bumpf, which consistently ignores the Osoyoos Desert Society's Okanagan Desert Centre on the other side of town, and plays games with particular subspecies and 10'x10' microclimates as if that would define them as any more "unique" than anywhere else in BC.  Hype, hype, hype and lies, Osoyoos is not the hottest place summers, that's much more likely Lillooet, Lytton, Ashcroft and other places (even Whistler); it's only because of its low elevation that it comes across as the highest ANNUAL average.- Skookum1

"Sounds Like Skookum1 is out for lunch
The climate of the Osoyoos region, according to the Köppen climate classification, is semi-arid with summers that are generally hot and very dry. The Osoyoos area does references the fact that it is Canada’s only desert area. Deserts are defined as areas with an average annual precipitation of less than 250 millimetres (10") per year, or areas where more water is lost by evapotranspiration than falls as precipitation. In the Köppen climate classification system, deserts are classed as BWh (hot desert) or BWk (temperate desert). The 50 square km area on the east side of Osoyoos Lake, locally known as the Nk'mip desert meets the criterion of a "temperate desert" and can more accurately be described as a xeric shrubland since grass cover is under 40%. This type of habitat can only be found in the Osoyoos region and varies in its compliance to the above noted classification due to microclimate effects, with the west side of the valley more appropriately called a shrub-steppe. A shrub-steppe is a type of low rainfall natural grassland with shrubs and surface likens, adapted to the environs of the area, due to low precipitation or high evapotransfer rates. Shrub-steppes are distinguishable from deserts, which are too dry to support a noticeable cover of perennial grasses but may support shrubs. Both Lytton and Lillooet receive over 400 millimetres (16") of precipitation per year, support both grassland and forest covers and can not be classified as a xeric shrubland or desert.

The historical high temperature for Lillooet was collected on July 16, 1941 (44.4 °C) using analog thermometers, offering multiple opportunities for human error. However, Lytton's historical high occurred on July 26, 2006 (41.9 °C). Osoyoos had a high of 42.8 °C on July 27, 1998, which is probably as accurate as the Lytton high. However the text said that Osoyoos is the hot spot of Canada many time each year, not the historical high in Canada. That record goes to Midale, Saskatchewan at 45.0 °C. All of the more recent historical high temperatures were collected via calibrated instrumentation managed by Environment Canada. If you review the data you will see the Lillooets high occurred over two days, both at 44.4 °C which leads one to assume that one or both of the analog thermometer readings were in error.

A Commons file used on this page is missing permission
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page is missing permission information and may be deleted: You can see the details at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:10, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
 * BC-3 (Crowsnest).svg

title: Talk:Osoyoos


text:
Talk:Ostia

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

Comments
This is the discussion that led to the merger of Lido di Ostia and Ostia Antica into this new page of Ostia

Tale of two (or three?) Ostias Should Ostia Antica have a see listing here, when it's not actually in Lido di Ostia? This was confusing enough to me where I had to look on Wikipedia to see whether Ostia Antica is located in Lido di Ostia.

And I'm still confused, actually, as there are three wikipedia Ostia articles: Ostia Antica, the archaeological site, the district of Ostia Antica (distinct from Lido di Ostia, but also part of Municipio XIII), and Lido di Ostia (which is what this article covers).

So is the archaeological site located in the district of Ostia Antica? I note that the Ostia Antica article says it's not even located within Rome at all. --Peter Talk 17:02, 3 June 2009 (EDT)

Bump. --Peter Talk 11:22, 20 January 2010 (EST) Peter, You are confused. I am, too, and I live here! 1. Pompeii has a See listing so I don't see the problem there. 2. One of the Ostia Antica hotels is actually in Lido di Ostia 3. Ostia Antica is a very important site and I'd highly recommend a visit. So it has to be given some prominence, but no more than, say, the Roman Forum. 4. The area around Ostia Antica, for which you have to pay admission, is known as the District of Ostia Antica. There are a few other minor ruins that possibly fall within that District and I may have made a mistake by putting them under Lido di Ostia! 5. All these definitional problems could perhaps be overcome by having one article for Ostia. 6. That could be Rome/Ostia or a separate Ostia article with a prominent link in GET OUT of Rome. More likely to be seen if retained as Rome/Ostia ????? Shep 01:04, 21 January 2010 (EST)

Rereading your original piece I realise I misunderstood it. But I think my solution is still valid. Shep 12:16, 21 January 2010 (EST) Having just one Rome/Ostia sounds like a fine solution to me. --Peter Talk 14:45, 21 January 2010 (EST) Done!Shep 14:32, 22 January 2010 (EST)

 * Looks good, but it seems that you have now placed Ostia outside of Rome (in Lazio) rather than in Rome, which would give it the title Rome/Ostia. Was this intentional? --(WT-en) Peter Talk 15:47, 22 January 2010 (EST)
 * No, it was accidental. Wondered whether you would notice! Should I create a new page Rome/Ostia? (WT-en) Shep 16:15, 22 January 2010 (EST)

i will renew the ostia lido page at this link http://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Rome/Lido_di_Ostia as lido di ostia is at the same time part of rome's city council but infact is a different city about 25 km away from rome, i live in ostia so i will do my best to improve this page, just make sure the other links about ostia\ostia antica goes into this page (14 may 2011)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:43, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Castello di giulio II.JPG
 * Panoramica Teatro di Ostia.jpg

title: Talk:Ostia


text:
Talk:Otford

Drink
Are Otford's pubs literally in spitting distance of each other? You would require your sputum to project over 100m for this to be true. 81.174.151.35 09:19, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Redirect
I don't think that this place is big enough to warrant a separate entry on wikivoyage so I'm propsing that this article is redirected to Sevenoaks and any useful information is moved over to there. -- WOSlinker (talk) 12:11, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Otford, New South Wales
I think it makes much more sense to cover it along with Stanwell Park given the interconnected nature of both towns – most of the important POIs, such as Bald Hill Lookout and the abandoned rail tunnel – are much closer to Stanwell Park than Royal National Park, and don't require a fee unlike Royal National Park. , your thoughts? -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 03:53, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
 * From my perspective it makes more sense to visit Otford as a gateway to the national park and to visit Stanwell Park as a separate destination, though I suppose others might disagree. As far as I can tell, it's not easy to walk between Otford and Stanwell Park, whereas it's very natural to get off at Otford train station to walk to some of the Royal National Park trails (which IIRC don't require a fee as long as you're not driving into the park). Our Royal National Park article currently mentions Otford 10 times. It might make sense to cover Bald Hill Lookout as part of the Stanwell Park article regardless (Google Maps thinks it's part of Stanwell Tops, and it's not so close to the main part of Otford). Not sure what to say about the abandoned rail tunnel – I went to the one in Helensburgh instead, which was great. —Granger (talk · contribs) 04:49, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I see – I've only ever visited Otford once and that was by car (apologies for my car-centric viewpoint regarding these two towns and the fee). In that case, it seems like the best solution to list Bald Hill + railway tunnel in Stanwell Park and the rest in Royal Nat Park.
 * As a tangent, I've been to both railway tunnels (actually three, since there's a second short but hidden tunnel next to Helensburgh P+R) – the Otford railway tunnel is much like Helensburgh, but is partially vandalised and unfortunately has no glow worms. They're all great, though. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 07:33, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Actually, the northern section of the Otford railway tunnel is private property (the gates were open on the southern end and I turned back a few hundred metres before the northern end), so it definitely makes sense to list that in Stanwell Park. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 08:24, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Makes sense to me, and thanks for doing the research about the railway tunnel. —Granger (talk · contribs) 13:51, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Otford


text:
Talk:Other destinations

Just think a travel site should really have a list of wonders of the world and a list of top fifty or hundred places to visit before you die type stuff.

I know what the ancient wonders and the natural wonders but a top fifty will take feed back and discusion from lots of the contributors. We should prolly start with just top ten and work up from there.

 * Wikivoyage isn't a "travel site". See Project:About. I'm dubious as to whether "Top 10" lists are really that useful. --(WT-en) Evan 23:29, 6 Nov 2004 (EST)

Other destinations vs travel topics
Are you guys sure that those lists and indices are other destinations and not travel topics? I'm not convinced enough, but I wouldn't like to plunge forward and change it myself before some consultation. Cheers, --(WT-en) Ricardo (Rmx) 06:53, 3 March 2006 (EST)

More listings?
This page is so VERY prominent (selected directly from the top of the main page) yet it appears almost neglected. Discussion doesn't really indicate if there is policy about what should go here. I was about to add several lines, but I know that changes to pages such as Main Page should be made only after discussion. Does that apply here? Is there a nomination process, or just plunge forward?

(WT-en) Bill in STL 21:35, 13 August 2010 (EDT)
 * National Parks
 * African National Parks
 * Canadian National Parks
 * Finnish National Parks
 * Indian National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries
 * Israeli National Parks
 * National Parks in the Benelux
 * Polish National Parks
 * United Kingdom National Parks
 * United States National Parks
 * United States National Walking Trails
 * Sacred sites of the Indian sub-continent
 * UNESCO Creative Cities
 * Alpine skiing destinations
 * Grand old hotels
 * Hot springs
 * Touring volcanos
 * Waterfalls of the world

 * I think this is not for travel topics, but for destinations that do not fall under any continent (such as Space or Antarctica). If it was up to me, I'd remove the whole "Other destinations" thing and replace it with "Itineraries". But that's just me. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 22:27, 13 August 2010 (EDT)

title: Talk:Other destinations


text:
Talk:Other Islands (New Zealand)

New Zealand is an island country and having an other page irks me. I think this page should be called New Zealand islands, and we just drop the other. Then all the islands of New Zealand can be added, including North and South islands. Besides, what islands should not be included on the other page - the one I am living on? or the one I was born on? Whatever island I am on is the other island answer to one of the above questions. So I think all New Zealand Islands should be on this page and the categories be broken down into Main Islands, Larger Islands, Populated islands, Unpopulated islands, Uninhabited islands, Uninhabitable islands, Wildlife Sanctuaries, Volcanoes, Active Volcanoes, Rocks, Semi-submerged Rocks, Reefs, Seamounts, etc. -- (WT-en) Huttite 08:52, 11 Jun 2004 (EDT)

 * No problem moving to New Zealand islands. I think you have too many categories though!. I started the page because I went to Tiritiri Matangi and wanted to include this. This could have been done as part of the Auckland page but there are many other islands hence the "other" e.g. where do you put White Island - Tuaranga, the closest town etc? So go for it. I personally think you should have something like "Major" (NI, SI and Stewart) and Minor (all the rest). --(WT-en) Nzpcmad 04:15, 12 Jun 2004 (EDT)

 * Another thought about this article: What islands should, (and should not), be listed and linked? I think that only islands that have a resident population or a significant wildlife sanctuary that can be visited or toured should have links to separate pages.  Other islands, especially smaller ones with no formal attractions, could be listed here but should not linked to a separate page for the individual island. Indicators for islands that should have a link to a separate page include: they have an accommodation place; they have a shopping place; they have a regular transport service to the island. -- (WT-en) Huttite 06:37, 14 Jun 2004 (EDT)

 * Yes, I agree. Only islands that are of interest to a Wikivoyager should be listed. I think the key is "Those islands that are easy to get to". Rangitoto e.g. has no shops and no inhabitants but has regular, daily ferry trips. Private or restricted (DoC) islands should probably not even be listed. --(WT-en) Nzpcmad 16:06, 14 Jun 2004 (EDT)

title: Talk:Other Islands (New Zealand)


text:
Talk:Ottawa

Beaver Tails
What does "enjoy a beaver tail" mean? -(WT-en) phma 11:05, 16 Feb 2004 (EST)

 * A beaver tail is a round, flat bread thing, which I think is deep fried, and then you can add cinnamon, sugar, icing sugar etc. to it. It's supposedly a uniquely Canadian thing, but I've only ever seen it in Ottawa. I think it was invented for the tourists, but it tastes good anyway. Perhaps that should be added to the page. --(WT-en) Dawnview 14:01, 16 Feb 2004 (EST)

 * Beaver tails are also available at Toronto/Harbourfront, and also in the Food Building during the annual CNE. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 21:51, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Albert House Inn
I moved Albert House Inn from budget to mid-range after seeing that its website lists rates starting at $98/night - hardly budget. (WT-en) Padraic 10:38, 13 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Parliament Hill
Is there any appetite for filling in more info on Parliament Hill? I mean, I would expect there to be some additional info on the House of Commons, Senate and Library. I don't mean political information but things that a travel guide book would have such as things to notice as you are taking your tour. Specifically, I'd like to say more to the Library, it's really special and worth seeing. On the other hand, that might be too much for the Ottawa page but I'm not sure an attraction would qualify as a page. (WT-en) Johnycanal 13:15, 5 August 2006 (EDT)
 * Would it be a legitimate district page? What's the area directly outside of the Hill called? -- (WT-en) Andrew Haggard (Sapphire) 13:36, 5 August 2006 (EDT)
 * Downtown. Inclusion of the Parliament info on a district page may be a solution, though I wouldn't think that Ottawa would have any other travel-worthy districts: almost all of the sites are downtown.(WT-en) Johnycanal 20:55, 5 August 2006 (EDT)

Canada's Capital Museums Passport
Visitors might be interested to purchase the Canada's Capital Museums Passport: 10 Museums, 7 days, 50% off.

The Passport is exchangeable for admission to each of the 10 participating museums as well as 20% off a theatre, dance or orchestra performance at the National Arts Centre. Valid from first museum visit. The Passport is sold at all 10 participating museums as well as at the Capital Infocentre at 90 Wellington Street (facing Parliament Hill) in Ottawa. Details: www.virtualmuseum.ca/passport

Stay safe
The current Stay safe content is confusing. Why should I be afraid of taxi drivers, and what is a "swarming"? (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:25, 21 April 2007 (EDT)

 * Swarming is people surrounding you (as if to attack):)! (WT-en) Edmontonenthusiast 21:35, 22 October 2008 (EDT)Edmontonenthusiast

Also, the crime figures were based on a misreading of the Maclean's crime rankings, it would appear. Ottawa was ranked 6th for population out of the the cities they reviewed, but 56th in the actual crime rankings. http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/03/05/the-most-dangerous-cities-in-canada/. Even if you look at it by population, it should show the actual crime rank on the side. Since this is a huge difference I have changed the number to 56th. I also am not sure if it's fair to call Gatineau one of the most dangerous cities in Canada given its ranking, but I will leave that up to someone else if they want to edit that. --67.70.107.202 10:53, 1 September 2009 (EDT)

 * Since we're not Wikipedia, the correct answer is to say "who gives a shit?" and delete random statistics. (WT-en) Jpatokal 04:50, 2 September 2009 (EDT)

Train station to downtown by foot
Bonjour à tous! I once met a traveling couple who had just arrived at the Ottawa Train station. They were eager to get downtown by foot, but the 417 (6 lane highway) was in their way. There's a way to get downtown through bike paths and Strathcona Park (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strathcona_Park_(Ottawa)). I am not sure where would be the best spot to put this. In the Get In/By Train section? At the bottom of the page? A separate page?
 * Bonjour. As the information is pertinent only to getting from the train station to the down town and not for getting around in general, I'd add at the end of the 'Get in'/'By train' information. (WT-en) WindHorse 01:10, 2 July 2007 (EDT)
 * Those directions are the best tip I've ever found on Wikivoyage -- I've lived in Ottawa for 5 years and didn't know this was possible. I created a map and am working on finding a map with a compatible license so it could be included right in the article. I modified the directions to avoid the "dirt path" east of the river, since one can just follow the loop of the paved path for almost the same distance and not get shoes dirty. I also modified the map to exit the park a little easier (onto Range Rd.), as I just walked this route in the winter and that area isn't cleared very well; however this isn't really easy to get across in words so I left the article directions intact on that front.(WT-en) Padraic 17:46, 18 February 2008 (EST)

Ottawa Train Station
I noticed on the Ottawa page that the main train station in Ottawa was being listed as Union Station. However, I am pretty sure this is the name of the old station on Sussex Drive that was long ago turned into a government conference centre. The "new" station in Alta Vista is officially called Ottawa Station (a name almost as bland as the station itself).

"Ottawa Station" is the name listed on the official VIA Rail station information site and also the Wikipedia page Ottawa Train Station associated with the station.

So, I have changed all references in the article to Union Station over to "Ottawa Station". (WT-en) Yodaki 02:03, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

Districtify?
Is Ottawa ready? I think it has enough information, sadly I cannot do it, maybe a few small edits, but thats it. Any regular article contributers up for the job? Idunt know, what do you think? Honestly I think it just goes down to if anyone want's to do it. It IS hard work. Keep smiling, (WT-en) Edmontonenthusiast 21:45, 28 October 2008 (EDT)

 * No. Articles should not be districted unless it's absolutely necessary, and Ottawa is not at that point yet. (WT-en) Jpatokal 06:25, 29 October 2008 (EDT)
 * OK, my my, I was JUST asking. That no was a little harsh sounding in my mind, and then it kept that tone through out.  Keep smiling, (WT-en) Edmontonenthusiast 18:40, 2 November 2008 (EST).
 * Do not confuse terseness with harshness. (WT-en) LtPowers 08:27, 10 November 2008 (EST)

High Tech References
The industry has mostly collapsed in Ottawa and is a small shell of what it was. Perhaps we should reduce the references to it? —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) Leperkat (talk • contribs)
 * If you feel that's the case, please plunge forward and make the changes! (WT-en) LtPowers 11:15, 10 December 2011 (EST)

walking tours
Several of these are listed both in 'get around' and under 'do'. I'm inclined to delete the former & leave the latter, but arguably we should delete both per the tours policy Activity_listings. What do others think? Pashley (talk) 19:08, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Wrong Photo
The wrong photo is up for the National Gallery. The gallery in Trafalgar square looks very different. I don't know how to edit the article. Hopefully someone can fix that. —The preceding comment was added by 205.193.94.40 (talk • contribs)
 * I've replaced it; thank you! LtPowers (talk) 20:21, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Page Banner
There doesn't seem to have been a discussion about the Page Banner. The one currently up (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bc/Ottawa_banner_National_War_Memorial.jpg) seems okay, but not including Parliament Hill in some capacity seems to be burying the lede a bit. I have a banner uploaded (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fe/Ottawa_Panorama_Cropped.jpg) which is a skyline style image (with Chateau Laurier, Rideau Canal, Parliament Hill (w/Library), Downtown, SCOC, etc), but it is a bit busy at lower resolutions. I think it is an improvement, but I'm not sure. What do you think? Synon0 (talk) 14:53, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

 * Both OK. I prefer yours. Pashley (talk) 16:56, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

 * I think yours is better, I'd say go for it. Globe-trotter (talk) 16:59, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

 * I normally prefer an artful closeup (like the War Memorial banner) to a generic panoramic skyline, but compositionally the memorial banner is problematic; the statue doesn't have a lot of contrast and the pillars are tilted at odd angles. The skyline shot of Parliament Hill, on the other hand, is very striking, compositionally excellent, and makes me want to visit Ottawa.  LtPowers (talk) 19:21, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

 * Banner changed. I do like it. The Rideau Canal gets a bit lost under the ToC, but I'm not sure how many people would have recognized it anyway. And it was me, I forgot to log in first. Synon0 (talk) 20:58, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism?
I'm a bit puzzled by this revert of my edit. My edit contained some wv:tdf corrections and other copy editing trivia, but the substantive change should have been summarised in my edit summary as "(→By train: The template "marker" is better for "in-line" listings since it does not generate the little, grey and intrusive "edit" text)". Do others feel like Powers that it's not best to use the marker template (rather than the listing template) so that the intrusive, little, grey "edit" text does not interrupt the prose but the appropriate symbol still appears on the dynamic map? --61.29.8.41 08:44, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Also,

Franktown radar
Where should I put a place like the Franktown radar? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_weather_radar_network) Its not a long visit. Just 5 minute visit as the place is fenced off and its a bit of a drive to Carleton Place. But its free and any many geeks would enjoy the short visit. Jlam (talk) 02:09, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

 * I think the nearest place we have an article for is Calabogie. Would it fit there?

 * I made an error there, mixed Franktown up with Burnstown. Pashley (talk) 20:27, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

 * Is CFS Leitrim worth a mention as well? That would appeal to a different sort of geek, but no visitors allowed. Pashley (talk) 02:27, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

 * I'd be tempted to put Franktown (45.04101°N 76.11617°W per ) into either Carleton Place (15km) or Smiths Falls (27km) as it's on or almost on the road (Highway 15) between the two. Perth (23km) isn't too far, but Calabogie (78km) is nowhere close.

 * I'll add Franktown radar to Carleton. Jlam (talk) 19:41, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure what one does for excitement in Leitrim, there's Rideau Carleton Raceway and half of Uplands airport but not much else. If CFS Leitrim can't be visited, it might be worth a mention ("understand" section, along with the other Ottawa-area military locations?) but not a listing. K7L (talk) 05:21, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

 * Canada is part of the ECHELON system where the "five eyes" (US, UK, Canada, Oz NZ) intercept more-or-less everyone's messages. This has been going on since the 1960s and became publicly known to those paying attention by the 90s, but is getting a lot more publicity since Snowden. Leitrim is one of our main bases for that. Pashley (talk) 20:35, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Road trip destinations
Continuing the discussion about the Franktown radar, I see that there is an article as well for Eastern Ontario. https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Eastern_Ontario.

Points of Little Interest (http://pointsoflittleinterest.blogspot.ca/) (POLI) is a great blog on free places to visit in Eastern Ontario. *Very* handy guide for good roadtrip & outdoor destinations. I think (in time) I'll add Franktown Radar and other POLI destinations to the Eastern Ontario articles

 * The eastern Ontario article is a region, a container with other regions under it. It's basically a very general overview; it'll name a few key things to see and do, but point to the city pages for the details. Actual detailed listings go into local articles like Ottawa, Kanata, Carleton Place, Smiths Falls, Merrickville. Occasionally, two tiny, closely-spaced points (like Merrickville and Kemptville) might be included together as one destination if there isn't enough for another page. If we're missing a town or city-sized destination (like Manotick, for the chunk south of urban Ottawa but still within the county line) please feel free to create the page using the standard template sections (understand, get in, get around, see, do, buy, eat, drink, sleep, connect, go next...). K7L (talk) 05:32, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

 * That's too bad because it doesn't answer the need for one centralized place (one wikipage or category) for cheap road trip destinations for Ottawa residents like Points of Little Interest does. I'm sure the debate between specialization and geographic generalization has been debated ad nauseum, so I'm not here to start it again, :-) just pointing out a particular need.  Jlam (talk) 19:28, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

 * You could create a travel topic article for them & link to it from both Ottawa and Eastern Ontario. To me, that would be the logical solution. However, that might not be a solution everyone would like; several such topics are currently candidates for deletion, see Votes_for_deletion, and some like A week near Hong Kong have previously been redirected to a region article. Pashley (talk) 20:58, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I would think you could first ensure that the things are all written about in their respective city article (or nearest city article), and come up with a well written prose paragraph or two in an "Off the beaten track" subsection the See section of Ontario and/or Eastern Ontario which points to some of those things. Texugo (talk) 21:04, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Diefenbunker also listed under "Carp"
The Ottawa section lists the "Diefenbunker", a Cold-War attraction which is actually 40km west of Ottawa in Carp, ON. I am torn: I think the listing should be in its local article, Carp, but it should be mentioned in Ottawa because visitors to Canadian national sites should know about it. Does Wikivoyage have a convention for situations like this? JimDeLaHunt (talk) 04:36, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Similar issue for Kanata. The town's Brookstreet Resort, Perspectives Restaurant, and Quality Inn Ottawa West are listed in the Ottawa article also. JimDeLaHunt (talk) 04:39, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I was about to suggest moving the attraction to Carp, and mentioning Carp in Ottawa, but I see it's already there. Attractions should be listed and described in detail only in the article for the place where the attraction is. Also, individual businesses should be listed in one article only.
 * In other words, anything that isn't in Ottawa shouldn't be listed in the article's See, Eat etc. sections, at most it can be mentioned in Go next. ϒpsilon (talk) 08:14, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Annoyingly, everything within the Ottawa-Carleton county line is nominally part of the city of Ottawa. The first points that are still legally outside the city are Hull (Gatineau), Kemptville (North Grenville), Embrun (Prescott-Russell) and Carleton Place (Lanark). That said, there's nothing requiring we follow the official municipal boundary (we often don't, as often an airport or other key piece is outside the town line but included in a destination). This article, however, seems to be written with a certain amount of uncertainty as to whether Kanata and Carp are districts (in which case they should be named Ottawa/Kanata and Ottawa/Carp if we keep them) or whether this article covers some smaller territory (presumably, everything inside the Greenbelt and south of the Ottawa/Outaouais River). I'm not sure why this was structured this way; there's really not that much of interest to the voyager in Kanata (other than the hockey rink) and Carp (other than the bunker) - one's a non-descript suburb and the other a speck on the map out in the sticks somewhere. Conversely, Manotick redlinks and Orléans probably links to the city in France, not the Ottawa suburb.
 * At some point, we need to decide whether Ottawa was intended to have districts (the way big cities like Montréal and Toronto do) or whether it's something that fits perfectly well on a single page (like Gatineau). I'd hesitate to create districts just to accommodate Kanata and Carp as there's too little there of interest to visitors to justify a district for each. K7L (talk) 10:12, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, The traveller comes first, so that says the voyager's interest overrules municipality boundaries. Thus I think the listings located in Carp and Kanata should be migrated to those articles, and Carp and Kanata mentioned in "Go Next". I'll start doing this piece by piece, but I won't try to do it all at once right now. Help welcome. JimDeLaHunt (talk) 03:12, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

 * The Diefenbunker should be mentioned in the Ottawa article, though, with a wikilink to Carp for the details. It is usually visited as part of a trip to Ottawa. Pashley (talk) 03:42, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

 * I'm thinking that Ottawa-Hull should be three articles, Ottawa, Rural Ottawa, Gatineau. That would lump Carp, Manotick and all the outside-the-greenbelt cow pasture in Ottawa-Carleton together if we only have one thing to see in Manotick (Watson's Mill), Munster Hamlet (the Saunders farm), Carp (the Diefenbunker) and a bunch of other tiny places that are within the Ottawa county line but not part of the Ottawa urban area. K7L (talk) 11:49, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Time and date formats
Let's try to use a consistent format for times and consistent abbreviations for days of the week following the conventions listed in WV:TDF. Using a wide variety of formats within an article is a sure-fire way of confusing readers and making the article harder to use. Ground Zero (talk) 01:58, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Monuments/statues
I may have missed it, but I didn't see a listing for the monument on Parliament Hill to the 4 women who successfully sued for the right for women to be senators in 1929, nor the monument to peacekeepers. I found those to be among the memorable sights I saw in a day trip from Montreal last summer. I will eventually list them, but if you know Ottawa better than someone who took one day trip there, please list them. The Ottawa Cathedral with its nice stained glass windows also deserves a listing. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:28, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Confederation Line opening
I have created this section to collect info on public transit changes due to the opening of the Confederation Line hopefully sometime in 2018. Perhaps, we should wait for a firm opening date before making major changes to the article, at which time, I would recommend subdividing the public transit section into two sub-sections describing the system both before and after opening.TheTrolleyPole (talk) 00:14, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

The O-Train Confederation Line is scheduled to open on September 14, 2019. I've updated the article with what I can and made a request in the Map Workshop over on Wikimedia Commons to update the route map. (The only reason I don't update it myself is that I don't have a SVG editor.) --Robkelk (talk) 17:11, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Details

 * OC Transpo has a page giving an overview of OC Transpo and STO bus route changes when the Confederation Line opens.TheTrolleyPole (talk) 00:14, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
 * OC Transpo has a page describing the new O-Train ticket vending machines which are currently being installed along the Trillium Line and will be installed on the new Confederation Line. But would such a machine be available at the airport? Are O-Train tickets like transfers, expiring 90 minutes after purchase? TheTrolleyPole (talk) 00:44, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
 * OC Transpo told me in an email that there are no OC Transpo ticket vending machines at the airport, and that O-Train tickets expire 90 minutes after purchase. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 23:40, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
 * The OC Transpo page on using the new O-Train fare gates says: "Transit is free on Wednesdays for seniors 65+ — but if you're using a fare gate, you will need to use a Presto card set with the senior discount." TheTrolleyPole (talk) 23:15, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
 * What’s changing on Oct. 6, 2019. This affects a few bus routes mentioned in the article, including bus 97 in the "by plane" section, and route 44 mentioned in both the Ottawa and Gatineau articles. Apparently, OC Transpo route 44 will no longer serve the Canadian Museum of History effective October 6. The change page indicates the Gatineau portion of route 44 will be replaced by new route 15. I am not yet sure whether route 15 is an OC Transpo or STO route which is important for visitors to know which fare media to use. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 23:50, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
 * CBC News has a FAQ about fares, transfers to and from buses, and operating times. --Robkelk (talk) 12:05, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Get in and Get around sections
These sections are really long. The reader has to scroll through a lot of detail to get tongue See and Do sections, which should be the meat of the article. Let's refrain from loading Get in and Get around with every possible detail. I have done some trimming, and have removed pictures that don't tell the reader very much. An Ottawa taxi looks like a taxi, a Gatineau bus looks like a bus, and the Ottawa bus station looks like a bus station. Image policy encourages contributors to be sparing in their use of images because travellers may be using Wikivoyage from networks with low bandwidth, or with a cost for every MB used. I willong others who have had an interest in this page Ground Zero (talk) 12:19, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Also, a picture of a shawarma shop that is longer even in Ottawa is not appropriate for this article. This has to stop. Ground Zero (talk) 16:28, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Coverage of Gatineau
I just deleted some, but there's quite a lot of it. Since Gatineau has its own article, I would suggest not going into much detail about what to do in Gatineau in this article. Several points should be made in the Gatineau section of "Go next", but that's all I think we should do. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:08, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Agree. While Gatineau is considered to be a part of Ottawa by people who live in the area, it is at very least like a separate district, and we shouldn't have duplication. Ground Zero (talk) 10:02, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

 * Agree. We also have the extra-hierarchical National Capital Region (Canada); neither article currently links to that & I think both should. Most info on Gatineau, though, should go in the Gatineau article. Pashley (talk) 00:48, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

 * Thanks, guys. I also want to thank Ottawajin a lot for all the contributions s/he's making to these articles and solicit comment from him/her in this thread. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:56, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

 * No worries! Glad to be of assistance. I had a lot of free time due to the pandemic. I agree with linking the article to National Capital Region. It might be useful to take the main attractions from both sides of the river and superimpose them on an overall region map. This could be pointed to from both the Ottawa and Gatineau page so people could get a better overview of overall regional attractions. Ottawajin (talk) 07:05, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

 * That makes sense and is user-friendly. I would suggest doing that with markers, rather than full listings, in National Capital Region. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:37, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure about duplicating things like museum listings that are in the Ottawa article. You do want major Ottawa things like Parliament & the market in a region article map, but that might be all. Region map should certainly have the main attractions outside Ottawa: Museum of History, the Diefenbunker & Gatineau Park. Having said that, I'll happily leave it to the mapmaker to make the detailed decisions. Pashley (talk) 12:03, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

 * I agree. Be selective with what you include markers for in the Capital Region article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:14, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

For Do, or Go next, section?
Site has lists of road trips near Ottawa. Pashley (talk) 07:53, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

 * Another question with 'go next' - the section currently contains this: "Montreal, the largest city in Quebec and the largest French-speaking city outside of Europe, is 200 km east." That's an issue, given that others have argued elsewhere in Wikivoyage that Kinshasa or some other African city is larger than Montréal et parle assez de français pour prendre cette deuxième place. 66.102.87.40 16:11, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

 * Plunge forward and make the appropriate edits. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:01, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Summer activities
NCC has an interactive map for activities Pashley (talk) 09:56, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

"15% are native French speakers"
Is Quebecois considered "French"? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:16, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is. Ground Zero (talk) 15:23, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Mais qui. Pashley (talk) 15:59, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Is "American" considered English? Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:08, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Non, "american" est considéré anglais ;-) -- SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 02:44, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:22, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Centre Block - Parliament Hill.jpg

title: Talk:Ottawa


text:
Talk:Ottawa County (Ohio)

I'm not familiar with Catawba - is it a town near Port Clinton? If it's a really teeny town that is pretty much indistinguishable from Port Clinton (at least from a travelers point-of-view) just go ahead and add the Catawba info to the PC article. Maybe just make a mention in the PC article that it also covers the town of Catawba. -- (WT-en) Fastestdogever 13:06, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

 * Well I am now more confused than ever. (but that's easy.) I have went to "Catawba Island" all my life. Wikiencyclopedia says it is not actually an island, but one of 11 townships in Ottawa County (I think they are right). It would confuse a visitor and offend the merchants if I called it Port Clinton. It is a major tourist area with a state park and plenty of marina's. I think I will wait until someone else create something suitable. How about Region:Catawba Island Peninsula (Ohio) 2old

 * I see what you mean about not being sure where it should go. Is there a collective name for the Marblehead peninsula and Catawba Island?  If you check out this map it's pretty obvious that Port Clinton, Marblehead & Catawba are all different towns gathered on the same strip of land. I think we should probably make a Ottawa County region and add those (along with some of the Lake Erie Islands) together. -- (WT-en) Fastestdogever 15:59, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

 * The scoop on Catawba is - a lot of visitor info, marina's and such is on this peninsula with no towns, villages or inc. area that I can find other than the township. So I created Ottawa County (Ohio) with a region being Catawba Island Penninsula. Watcha think, is that ok? If not, we can delete it, but I do not know how. If I did I would delete catawba island penninsual page which is not spelled correctly. 2old.

 * Just found that Wikipedia calls that peninsula the "Ottawa County peninsula" is this something you've ever heard of? Or is the Catawba Island Peninsula more common?  I think we need just one region page to cover Port Clinton, Marblehead & Catawba. -- (WT-en) Fastestdogever 16:12, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

New one for me. Most refer to this as Catawba or Catawba Island. It has less waterfront than Marblehead Peninsula but 5 times as many business places, sleeping places, beaches and so on. It is much more diverse than Port Clinton. I will await your input before going any further. 2old

 * The naming conventions we use follow the most common English name. I think Catawba Island (even though it's not really an island) is probably used more commonly than Catawba Island Peninsula.  Here's my proposal of how it would be broken down:

 * Ottawa County
 * Ottawa County peninsula
 * Catawba Island
 * Marblehead
 * Port Clinton

 * Don't worry about the other pages (Catawba Island Peninsula (Ohio) and Catawba Island Penninsula (Ohio) - we can redirect those to the Catawba Island page so if anyone does search for them they'll end up in the right place. Whatcha think? -- (WT-en) Fastestdogever 16:29, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

Or we could change it to something more generic, like Eastern Ottawa County instead of Ottawa County peninsula -- (WT-en) Fastestdogever 16:52, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

Ottawa County
Sounds good to me. I looked at the page and it included Put-inBay. There are 7 islands in Ottawa County where Put-in-Bay is on South Bass (one of them). Should they be included also, like Put-in-Bay, or am I missing soemthing? Some of the differences in the area = Part of Catawba now has a sanitary sewer, where little of Marbelhead Peninsula does. This has resulted in a substantial building boom on Catawba since the mid-70's. There are a lot of newer marina's, golf courses, condo's, on Catawba and millions of dollars of private boats, supported by lodging and other services. It is the hot spot, so to say.

(WT-en) 2old12:32, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

Catawba is an ISLAND linked to the mainland by an artficial causeway and wetlands. Pelee Island, at the north end of the Bass Islands is Canadian, the Bass Islands south of Pelee Island, and Catawba, are in Ohio. Check the maps for Ohio's county boundaries.

(I've been going to Lakeside, Ohio on the Marblehead Peninsula from Cleveland, Ohio since 1959.)

—The preceding comment was added by 162.83.219.100 (talk • contribs).

title: Talk:Ottawa County (Ohio)


text:
Talk:Ouagadougou

I just adjusted the price of street meals for Ouaga. I lived there for the past year and am pretty sure that a traveller will not get some decent food for under 200 CFA, although possible I would not recommend it. (unsigned by 86.66.185.135) 18:21, 17 December 2007

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:38, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Place des cineastes Ouaga.jpg
 * Appears to be neither on this page nor any other on Wikivoyage, only on Wikidata. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:57, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:24, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Monument des martyrs.jpg

 * Not an amazing sight, but on the page. This is purely a freedom of panorama issue. Should we upload it locally as fair use? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:34, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ouagadougou