text:
Talk:Geneva

Archives

 * 2003 → Talk:Geneva/2003
 * Links 'discussion' → Talk:Geneva/Links

Un-recommended

 * Café Universal, 26 bd du Pont-d'Arve. Friendly spot with a fantastic selection of starter plates and good main dishes with quite a few vegetarian options. One of the most snooty stuck-up places in geneva. overpriced and terrible service. http://www.resto-rang.ch/info.cfm?restono=459

I noticed that someone changed this to an un-recommendation. Actually I've had a bad experience there recently, and since I wrote the original review (I think, or was it MAJ?) I'm going to go ahead an strike the recommendation for this place -- (WT-en) Mark 13:40, 18 Apr 2004 (EDT)

 * Weird, I thought they were really one of the less snooty places in Geneva. Maybe something's changed or I just always got them in a good mood. I agreee I'd rather have no review than a negative one, and it's not like there aren't plenty of other recomendations on the page... but still, it's too bad. (WT-en) Majnoona 18:03, 18 Apr 2004 (EDT)

 * I like the room and the clientel, but lately the staff has just been rubbing me the wrong way somehow. Also while the menu used to be vegi friendly it's not anymore.  I'd prefer to open up the space for a couple of other places in Geneva that have opened in the last six months. -- (WT-en) Mark 20:18, 18 Apr 2004 (EDT)

Can you re-take the "intro" picture? It's a good angle, but unfortunately low quality with odd contrast/shadows/whateveryoucallit. -- (WT-en) Nils 03:26, 15 Jul 2004 (EDT)

 * I think the problem is with the over-abundance of JPEG tiling. I'm afraid the problem though is with the quality of my camera.  If somebody who has a better camera would like to duplicate the shot it was taken from outside of a resto called "Le Terrace Panoramique" in a building on Quai de Sujet.  -- (WT-en) Mark 04:07, 15 Jul 2004 (EDT)

La décadanse
I removed this listing since I thought it was an external guide, thus not appropriate for our external links:

 * La Décadanse. If you want to stay up to date on what is happening in the underground circuit of Geneva, you should definately visit http://www.darksite.ch/ladecadanse At this page you will each week find a program of all the activities in the underground scene of Geneva. From Music to bar-review to cheap cinema (how about watching classics for 2 franc at Kinetik?)

--(WT-en) Evan 12:53, 12 Aug 2005 (EDT)

Removed content
I think the following could be mined for information, but needs to be rewritten to better match our Project:Manual of style, specificly avoiding the first person and negative reviews. (WT-en) Maj 22:30, 13 August 2006 (EDT)

If you are looking for a hotel at the lake, you should consider if you would like a room with view on the lake (vue lac) or city (vue cite) and if you want it the north side of the lake (vue lac would mean having sun all the day on your balcony) or on the south side (usually cheaper, but vue lac would be without sun, but who stays the whole day in the hotel anyway). For the southern border the Hotel Metropole is a good choice, for the northern border the Beau Rivage. Be aware that you may get a room in those hotels for already below 500Chf, but if you want vue lac, it's basically reserved for the better rooms from 800Chf on.

 * Noga Hilton Geneve, 19, Quai du Mont-Blanc, Geneva, CH, Tel: +41-(0)22-908 9081 Fax: +41-(0)22-908 9090, about 1 Km from city center. Upscale, modern 4-star hotel with all the conveniences a business traveler needs, including high-speed internet access, beautiful gift shoppes, fitness center, spa and pool, and a comfortable bar/lounge in lobby to meet business associates. Rates from 350CHF. In my opinion avoid the Hilton, famous name, hotel itself is okay, but it's style is modern for 70s... and do not expect good service or clean toilets in the restaurant on the second floor, it may be part of hilton, but does fail it's standards. Noga Hilton Geneve

 * I removed the following line from Parc des Bastions: "Free wi-fi (Lies! I've been there on 10.05.08. There is one network listed "ville-de-geneve" and it's not free) access in the whole park." I did a quick search on the internet, but couldn't find anything about wi-fi. If anyone knows differently, feel free to add it back in. (WT-en) Kaci 10:32, 16 July 2008 (PST)

Un-recommended

 * Hotel Moderne Geneva, rue de Berne 1, tél: +41(0)22 732 81 00, fax : +41(0)22 738 26 58 -  This hotel is very expensive for what it offers.  (Even if Geneva is an expensive city).  Staff were generally non responsive and unhelpful.  Breakfast was from hell, coffee was the worst I had in my life (A small jug of concentrated coffee was left for everyone in the room to share).  The tea was also terrible, which I tried the next day.  The breakfast staff were so rude, the girl came to our table and lifted our key on the table to check our room number, without looking or talking to us.  Then she made a huge noise cleaning up the breakfast room promptly at 10am on a weekend, encouring us to leave ASAP since breakfast was now closed (We arrived at 9.45).  Staying in this hotel made me feel like a poor backpacker again, although the price was CHF 149 (EUR 100) per night.  Avoid this hotel at all costs.

Needs an overhaul...
..and I keep meaning to do it.

I do think that the article deserves its 'Usable', butr really it needs to be split into two articles, one for Geneva city and one for Geneva canton, they aren't exaclty co-terminous. The main reason for my wanting to do this is that we don't really have room in the article as it exists now for coverage of Carouge, which should be extensive. We should probably also provide some coverage of a couple of other villages like Petit and Grand Saconnex and Petit and Grand Lancy, as well as Chêne Bourg, and of course the outlying vineyards.

I'd like to do this work, but I can never seem to find time. -- (WT-en) Mark 09:57, 4 February 2007 (EST)

Universite de Geneve
Shouldn't there be anything about the Universite de Geneve and HEI in the education section? After all, they are both very renowned (according to Newsweek the best university in the continent), especially compared to those joke english-language universities in the canton...

Languages - Swiss?
I noticed that under the list of languages you can hear in Geneva is "you will also occasionally hear Swiss, German, and Italian." and as far as I know, there is no formal Language called "Swiss" (Unless the editor meant Rumantsch) so either I'm mistaken and there is a swiss language (fully possible) or it is a typo meant to say "Swiss German" or should be removed. Any input? 212.23.248.130 11:03, 17 July 2008 (EDT) Dane Meister

"Eat" section - Regional specialties?
Are there any regional specialties in geneva? Seems like most other swiss cities offer some kind of recommendation. For example "The quintessential Zürich dish is Zürigschnätzlets, veal in a cream and wine sauce. Various kinds of grilled Wurst (sausages) are also popular. These are most often accompanied by boiled potatoes, Rösti, a Swiss potato pancake (grated potato, formed into a pancake then pan fried until crisp in butter or oil) or Chnöpfli, in German sometimes called Spätzle, (small noodle dumplings)." from the Zurich page. —The preceding comment was added by 203.126.210.99 (talk • contribs)

TPG link
http://www.tpg.ch/Internet+TPG/Anglais/EHomepage/Accueil.htm is broken, and has been for at least a few months, as the new TPG site does not, in fact, have an English language version. (The French home page has a link which does nothing but has a tooltip saying "Coming soon".) - Amgine (talk) 11:22, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

 * They have had an English version of the page, but now it looks like they've removed it. I guess we'll have to do with the French version, it's better than nothing at all. ϒpsilon (talk) 14:27, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Districts?
Surprisingly someone has created a very short article for the suburb/village of Meyrin. If we decide to keep it, why not go all the way and chop up Geneva in some districts?Preferably so that the districts would comprise the whole canton. I’m thinking:

 * Rive-Plainpalais: A triangle south of Rhône and north of Arve, and west of Boulevard Helvetique. In other words, the southern downtown.
 * Paquis-Servette: The northern downtown almost to the UN so that it’s delimited by Av de la Paix, Av Giuseppe Motta, Av Wendt and down to the Rhone.
 * Outer North and West: Further west and north of the latter.
 * South: Everything south of Rhône and Arve.
 * East: Everything east of the Rive-Plainpalais district.

Thoughts? ϒpsilon (talk) 09:24, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

 * Anyone? ϒpsilon (talk) 07:36, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Getting in very late here, but I don't think that there's really enough to see in Geneva to justify such a change Nick-D (talk) 23:51, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * As for Meyrin, the article is the barest of bare outlines. While there is a policy to not delete real places, in its current form it does little good... Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:47, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Let's redirect Meyrin to Geneva, then. ϒpsilon (talk) 15:57, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
 * What good does that do? Some people might actually be looking for that place (unlikely, I know) and Geneva does not mention it in any way. Or does it? It seems that it's main claim to fame is its association with CERN. Is there any visitors center or the likes? Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:20, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Meyrin is one out of 45 municipalities of Geneva, i.e. a suburb. If the Meyrin article is kept one may ask why not the other ~35-40 municipalities where there isn't much to see shouldn't each get one too. Yes, CERN is there but not much else and CERN is already described in the main Geneva article. ϒpsilon (talk) 16:33, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Should we create redirects for each of the other municipalities then? Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:37, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
 * No, but as this is a real place, policy is to redirect the article to the closest larger place instead of deleting it. ϒpsilon (talk) 16:43, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Splitting into districts?
Should we include articles on the sub-districts of this city, like the Minneapolis and Chicago articles do, e.g. one for Plainpalais, one for Ariana etc. ? --Walkden861 (talk) 19:08, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
 * In the discussion right above this one, districts were deemed unnecessary as of now. ϒpsilon (talk) 19:26, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Power plugs/sockets
I just found that Switzerland doesn't use the Shucko plugs/sockets, and the article doesn't seem to mention it. I think it would be a worthy addition but I'm not sure where... Any ideas? --O andras (talk) 09:41, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

 * The place to address what type of electric sockets a country uses is Switzerland. (And I just noticed that there is no information about electric sockets in United States of America, a big oversight.) Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:03, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

 * I think it is quite rare for country articles to mention plug type in Cope. It is in the fact box of Understand (quickbar), also for USA, and USA is the first country mentioned in the table in Electrical systems. But in United States of America it says "NEMA 1-15, NEMA 5-15" – and "NEMA" isn't mentioned in Electrical systems. Are those designations synonymous to "Type A/B 'American'", listed in the table?

 * The quickbar in Switzerland says "Europlug, SEV 1011". Neither "SEV" is mentioned in Electrical systems (and Switzerland isn't mentioned either).

 * –LPfi (talk) 19:06, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

 * Of course, when a country has issues with the electrical system, or they use something else than the standard of most countries in the region, such as a European country not using the Schuko, there should be a comment in Cope. Should there be a mention also in Finland? Even if we do the natural thing :-) –LPfi (talk) 19:13, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

 * It's OK with me if the information is in "Understand." Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:33, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

 * It's in the quickbar, not in the running text. –LPfi (talk) 19:51, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

 * I thought the information in the quickbar in the United States article was insufficient because it didn't mention the shapes of plugs in any way I recognized. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:57, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

 * It should link the descriptions in the Electrical systems article, and that article should explain the nomenclature. I think also a note in Cope would be useful, as some Europeans might not expect voltages, frequencies and plugs to be different. But perhaps that should go in Travel basics. I added a paragraph there (in Pack). –LPfi (talk) 21:21, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks everyone for the replies! I didn't think of checking the Switzerland article (obviously should've!), and I didn't know plugs/sockets were already documented in another page. I see that both pages could be improved about this. Maybe after this coming trip :)
 * I digged a bit online about the topic, and from my understanding: Switzerland uses Schuko type J, while most of the rest of Europe uses type F (according to Wikipedia). Type C (a 2-pin plug/socket kinda similar to type J; e.g. phone chargers) is common in Portugal too, at least (according to me). I also saw online that type C plugs are compatible with type J sockets (and type F sockets). --O andras (talk) 10:42, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Geneva


text:
Talk:Geneva/2003

Hey MAJ, I know we've got a lot of bar links on here already, but I'd really like to add a couple more (perhaps some of the others might go?) Particularly Sak's Café, and a brief mention of the area around Rue d'Ecole de Médecin which has 6 of the best bars in Geneva -- (WT-en) Uchuha 05:22, 2003 Nov 7 (PST)

 * dood! Plunge forward. -- (WT-en) Evan 06:04, 7 Nov 2003 (PST)

 * cool. I had just read the prescription against becoming a yellow pages.... ;) -- (WT-en) Uchuha 08:12, 2003 Nov 7 (PST)

 * Yes. We don't need every bar in Geneva, but if you think there are some notable ones missing, by all means add them. The worst thing that could happen is that they eventually get weeded out. -- (WT-en) Evan 08:16, 7 Nov 2003 (PST)

On another note, this article probably needs to be reformatted to match the big city article template. Maj originally copied it from her Geneva guide on Bootsnall.com. It's one of our first actual articles, and predates most of the article templates. Anyways, it could use an update, I think. -- (WT-en) Evan 08:46, 7 Nov 2003 (PST)
 * Yeah, I was just thinking that. I'll probably give the whole thing a once over in the coming days -- (WT-en) Uchuha 08:49, 2003 Nov 7 (PST)

Wow! This article is looking so great, I'm going to link to it from the Main Page. There's still some gaps, but nothing we can't handle. Good job, everyone! --(WT-en) Evan 07:38, 3 Dec 2003 (PST)
 * Can you mention the gaps here? I already know that I should put in a bit about internet access, but what else would you like to see? -- (WT-en) Mark 09:15, 3 Dec 2003 (PST)
 * It needs a mention about the Edelweiss Restaurant. (WT-en) Yann 17:20, 18 Jan 2004 (EST)

 * Plunge forward! --(WT-en) Evan 17:44, 18 Jan 2004 (EST)

I´m no so sure about the change putting the parks in a bullet point list. It doesn´t really communicate the same info as the paragraph it replaces, since that was more about the idea of the parks in general, and resources for finding out more. I think just having a list instead is too terse, and kindof dull -- (WT-en) Mark 06:35, 30 Dec 2003 (PST)

 * Well, I'm the one who broke up the "parks" into the three parks. My feeling was that it was more useful to travellers to have detailed information (location, directions, descriptions) for each park than just a suggestion to visit parks in general. --(WT-en) Evan 15:38, 30 Dec 2003 (PST)

 * It seems like this makes them into tiny little barely worthy See entries instead of the intended Do entry which was meant to tell travellers that Geneva has a lot of parks, and that it's a good idea to invest some time into figuring out where there are, with some examples.

-- (WT-en) Mark 03:12, 31 Dec 2003 (PST)

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

title: Talk:Geneva/2003


text:
Talk:Geneva/Links

Links
We should remove all those "other guides" from the links as per policy. Didn't do it because Mark's like a hawk over this one. May we? -- (WT-en) Nils 09:49, 23 May 2004 (EDT)

 * I really still think that that policy is kind of dumb, since the other links are useful for research at least until we get all of the information we need into our own articles. That said, Geneva is pretty far along compared to many of the other articles, so I don't really care that much if you remove the other links.

 * I still think your fixing HTML lists by taking whitespace out of Wikitext is totally korinthenkacker, because wikitext is not HTML. -- (WT-en) Mark 13:46, 23 May 2004 (EDT)

 * I have no comment on this, except that korinthenkacker is the best word I've seen all day. --(WT-en) Evan 23:35, 23 May 2004 (EDT)

 * Fuck you too. -- (WT-en) Nils 03:31, 24 May 2004 (EDT)

 * Now now kids, just people somebody says "raisin pooper" doesn't mean you need to start suggesting sexual intercourse with them... (WT-en) Jpatokal 06:20, 24 May 2004 (EDT)

 * I think it has a secondary meaning of "fussbudget", but I really shouldn't take chances like that in my third language. That said, I don't think Nils meant what he said quite literally either. ;) -- (WT-en) Mark 06:42, 24 May 2004 (EDT)

 * I keep meaning to start a talk about what we should link to under "External Links" (imho maybe it should be "Offical Link" and all the research stuff could go on the talk page)... anyway, it's just two links, not a big deal-- I'm sure no one would mind if they really bother you, Nils.
 * This is a really great article-- I just can't say that enought. Thanks Mark et al, for such good work! (WT-en) Majnoona 00:11, 24 May 2004 (EDT)

 * I agree -- it's a wonderful piece of work.

 * A couple of thoughts. First, if there are good guides to a place that we want contributors to mine for information, let's put those links on the Talk: page.

 * Second, I'm going to try to get Mark's patch for lists in the next couple of days, so we can see this problem go away. --(WT-en) Evan 12:49, 24 May 2004 (EDT)

 * Thanks! Still I really am unhappy about having chased Nils off again.  We need people like him around. I guess I should hold my comments until I am more sober.  -- (WT-en) Mark 13:01, 24 May 2004 (EDT)

title: Talk:Geneva/Links


text:
Talk:Genoa

Largest Historic Center in Europe????
I have never even been to Genova, but this seems like a pretty darn dubious claim.

 * I have reformulated the statement, but I did not take it out. Anyway this is just one of the things that more than one city claim to have, and something which cannot of course be decided once and for all, like the many "unique Venice of Northen Europe"s. (WT-en) Johann.gambolputty 11:13, 17 September 2006 (EDT)

This is a claim that one hears often about Genoa, but one never hears any further details, ie. on what criteria that is based, or who has determined that its historical centre is the largest. It would be interesting to find the original source of this claim.

It depends on what you mean as historic center. Actually it might be the largest historic center in Europe mantaining its medieval map and structure (about 1 square Km). You may say it's the largest medieval historic center in Europe. Definitely it's not the largest historic center in Europe in a large sense. You may consider Rome as a larger historic center (about 4 square Kms).

Bus transportation
I disagree with the statement that the bus schedule posted is unreliable. The times themselves may not be precise, however most buses run every 7-15 minutes, and this is relatively reliable.

Fishing?
"Most men work at fishing farms and on the boats to raise money for their family" ?!? Whoever wrote this has clearly never been to Genoa, a formerly industrial town turned commercial. Fishing is a less than marginal activity.

Biggest aquarium in Europe
The same is being said on Wikipedia about the Valencia Aquarium, L'Oceanogràfic. I guess the issue should be addressed. I wouldn't know however which one is the biggest. The one in Barcelona is mentioned as 2nd after the Genova aquarium, so probably this needs to be checked as well.

Unsorted apartment listings
What do we do with those? Should they simply be deleted per apt, or should they be categorized? Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:03, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:Genoa


text:
Talk:Genting Highlands

What is the dresscode for Casino at Genting??

What's unusable?
Genting isn't your average destination: it's basically one ginormous building complex, run by one company. There are thus no addresses and no phone numbers. (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:17, 4 November 2007 (EST)

Is Genting really that bad? In my opinion this page casts quite a dim light on what is a major attraction to people coming from all over Asia. Unfortunately, I've not yet been so I can't really comment other than to say I felt this review was particularly damning of this apparently otherwise world-class resort.--110.49.6.200 13:16, 5 October 2009 (EDT)

- Have no idea what that person means by saying there are no addresses and phone numbers. Genting is not that bad, as long as you remember it is a built up area of casinos. But even if you don't want to gamble, its worth going there for the bus and cable car ride which are quite cheap from KL. There are theme parks if you want to go for rides, and the theatres do some excellent shows at times (Air Supply last Sat). The majority of visitors to Genting go for gambling and are mostly Chinese. But you can still enjoy Genting for a day or overnight trip, especially if you get one of the cheap hotel rates. (WT-en) Greenmango 22:44, 6 October 2009 (EDT)

 * The "streets and phone numbers" thing was re: the article being downgraded due to the individual listings not having them — because places in Genting indeed do not have street addresses or phone numbers, you need to go through Genting's central reservation system for everything.

 * If you're expecting anything even remotely like Vegas or Macau, Genting will be a huge disappointment... but if you want cooler climes, the weather is nice and you trust Malaysian maintenance for roller coasters, it could be a vaguely pleasurable experience.  (WT-en) Jpatokal 00:40, 7 October 2009 (EDT)

Language/dialect
Hi SHB2000, the full terms which I wanted to write was ...written in combination of English language, Malay language and/or Chinese language, in which I shorten the 'language' redundant word to become ...written in combination of English, Malay and/or Chinese language. And as per general knowledge, written Chinese (especially in that Genting Highlands' sign boards case) is always considered a 'language'. Spoken Chinese (which are Mandarin, Cantonese, Hakka, Hokkien etc), then only they are considered as 'dialect'. Chongkian (talk) 09:22, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

 * @Chongkian That makes sense. I'll self-revert my edit. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:30, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh I just noticed that you've fixed it. Thanks for the fix :-). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:31, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Nah it's ok, not a big deal. I focus more on expanding the article content by adding more attractions/details or make sure everything is up-to-date. That is kinda lot of works already by itself. The article really needs a complete overhaul after the resort itself underwent full overhaul also recently. Chongkian (talk) 15:06, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Featured destination?
What would it take for this article to be a featured destination? Would it be a Destination of the Month or Off the Beaten Path? /Yvwv (talk) 23:40, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Genting Highlands


text:
Talk:Geocaching

Concensus to retain this article
(Copied from Project:Votes for deletion.)

 * Geocaching - A sport or variant of orienteering? Is it appropriate to have an article when we don't for other sports? -- (WT-en) Huttite 21:22, 21 May 2005 (EDT)
 * We actually do have one for Scuba diving. But I'm not sure geocaching is a similarly travel-heavy activity...? (WT-en) Jpatokal 21:11, 24 May 2005 (EDT)
 * Keep. Travel topic, pretty valid and interesting. --(WT-en) Evan 21:42, 24 May 2005 (EDT)
 * Keep. -- (WT-en) Mark 01:20, 25 May 2005 (EDT)
 * Sounds almost like a consesus to Keep. Further research indicates topic is hugely travel orientated? Pity the original content was not clearer. -- (WT-en) Huttite 07:15, 25 May 2005 (EDT)

As a consequence of the above discussion I have removed the Vote for Deletion banner and made the article a Stub instead. -- (WT-en) Huttite 08:23, 29 May 2005 (EDT)

I translated most of the content from the parallel article on the German Wikivoyage
Please help improve the text as much as possible + add any important missing information you can think of. ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 19:57, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Please help me improve and expand the article Geocaching
I've translated most of the content to it from the parallel article on the German Wikivoyage.

Please help me improve the text as much as possible + add any important missing information you can think of. ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 19:59, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Geocaching


text:
Talk:Geoje

Template, will complete ASAP.(WT-en) Snave 14:21, 22 January 2011 (EST)

title: Talk:Geoje


text:
Talk:George Rogers Clark National Historical Park

Nice start. I'd like to see the Vincennes page, at least a stub, too. (WT-en) Maj 00:34, 22 December 2006 (EST)
 * Thanks! I'll probably put the outline for Vincennes. I'm not as familiar with the area, it has been a very long time since I've visited there, so the more help the merrier :) (WT-en) Missvain 23:57, 22 December 2006 (EST)


text:
Talk:Georgetown

Georgetown / George Town
''The names of these two places are different, so they should probably have their own disambiguation pages (I think, might be wrong). -- Ryan 18:52, 16 July 2006 (EDT)''

 * I think it's more helpful if they are merged, as some (many?) people will know they want one or the other but won't know the correct spelling, or will have a spelling in mind (eg from some other source) that's incorrect. The George Town page only had two places on it, hence I redirected that one. ~ 125.24.2.226 19:02, 16 July 2006 (EDT)

 * I'm feeling lazy today, so I'll go with your solution and copy this discussion to the talk page. -- (WT-en) Ryan 19:17, 16 July 2006 (EDT)

title: Talk:Georgetown


text:
Talk:Georgetown (Guyana)

not much to see in Georgetown?
I don't know how people could have written such negative comments. The wooden buildings are marvellous. Let's have some more info and photos please or I will have to cut and paste from Wikipedia! (WT-en) Shep 10:37, 3 January 2010 (EST)

title: Talk:Georgetown (Guyana)


text:
Talk:George Town (Malaysia)

Food
One of the more interesting things about Penangites is the fact that whenever they meet outside of Penang, a topic that will certainly be raised almost every time is discussing about where to eat in Penang, and which location is best for some particular dish...

 * Like, say, Laksa Penang, for example? --(WT-en) Evan 00:07, 15 Feb 2005 (EST) (who loves laksa)

 * See Penang for an (all too brief...) discussion of the cuisine. What this article needs is places to eat! (WT-en) Jpatokal 00:14, 15 Feb 2005 (EST)

 * The Eat section gives me a headache as a very very poor representation of what Georgetown has to offer and I'm tempted to rewrite the whole lot of it. There's a handy brochure by the tourism board that lists and maps out the famous hawker food stalls and of course the many hungry Malaysian food bloggers, and there's no way this guide will live up to those standards, but it could do a lot better in pointing out more local food rather than Thai and Western.
 * Also, I think the Bakeries section could be moved to Buy, as they function more as shops as compared to cafes, with no place to sit and eat. -- torty3 (talk) 12:35, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

 * Please plunge forward! I regret that since I haven't been to Penang in over a generation and visited only briefly, I won't be able to help much. Is that brochure also online? I think that since it's an official publication, we might be able to justify summarizing and linking it, though that's arguably against our policies. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:48, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I hadn't been back for over ten years myself, and it has changed enough. It's interesting to read it again with fresh eyes to spot gaps in the coverage, and Penang's an even better place with friends and relatives to bring one around. The brochure isn't online, but it should be worth a mention, maybe in the visitor's centre bit, and I can add more based on local advice. -- torty3 (talk) 09:13, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Great. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:33, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Georgetown vs George Town
Google hits (Dec.07):
 * site:tourismpenang.gov.my - George Town = 134, Georgetown = 64
 * + penang - George Town = 102,000, Georgetown = 127,000
 * + malaysia - George Town = 264,000, Georgetown = 468,000

Auto Date entry for all entries
Hi,

i have a suggestion to make.

About all the entries that are going into wikivoyage, i suggest that there should be a auto date entered into every article.

For example in the sleep section, whoever describes the guest house will have an auto date entered showing the last modified or article entered date.\

There are some backpackers which are closed down in penang georgetown.

Ferry to Sumatra?
The "Get out" section mentions Sumatra and the map shows it is reasonably close and "By air" says there are flights to Medan, but are there boats as well? Pashley (talk) 03:45, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Huge city?
It escaped my notice that George Town has encompassed the entire island since 2015. It would be a fairly simple matter to simply make all the articles about places on Penang Island into districts and turn this article into a huge city article. Is there any reason not to do this? Also, in the Penang article, shouldn't places like Ayer Itam be described as "neighbourhoods", rather than "towns"? Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:43, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

 * I second this suggestion. News articles suggest that the city's jurisdiction actually encompasses an area larger than Penang Island itself. Articles should be created for some of the city's suburbs like Pulau Tikus & Teluk Bahang; each has several destinations of note. Ohmskaya russkikh (talk) 13:12, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

 * I suppose we should have a formal districting discussion, so I'll post the appropriate template on the article (when I figure out what it is), but it doesn't sound like much would need to be done other than to change the format of the "Districts" section, make this officially a "Huge city article template", make the component articles officially districts with district article templates, with full listings in this article going to a "Central George Town" district article (or whatever the most appropriate name is), and choosing colors for each district in a static map. Not all of that has to be done the same day. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:02, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

 * If basically the whole island's population is within the George Town metropolitan area, I guess we may as well create a huge city article. --Comment by Selfie City  (talk about my contributions ) 00:23, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

 * When I look at the map, though, it seems that Balik Pulau is separate from George Town. --Comment by Selfie City  (talk about my contributions ) 00:24, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

 * Apparently, since 2015, it no longer is. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:55, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

 * Interesting. That makes it a tough one for me. The satellite images show clearly that Balik Pulau is separated from George Town by a mountain range. I'm inclined to make George Town a huge city and include Air Itam, Bayan Lepas, and probably Batu Ferringhi in it, but keep Balik Pulau as a separate city. --Comment by Selfie City  (talk about my contributions ) 01:02, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

 * There are hills, but there's also a coastal route, and Penang is not a huge island. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:10, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
 * There are issues with this article and others on the Island of Penang but I am not convinced making the whole island a city is the right solution. Is is more that  north to south and some of the towns are distinctly separate from one another. Probably not enough locations to have a separate region for Penang Island, so keep the state of Penang region as is. But do need to move the listings from George Town to the town articles closer to their location. --Traveler100 (talk) 06:29, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
 * This is irrespective of the fact that since 2015, apparently the entire island and then some is actually part of George Town? Granted, there is at least one precedent for not respecting such a political fact - the entire island of Oahu, Hawaii is politically part of Honolulu. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:48, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

 * I do not see any point to making Georgetown a huge city with the island's other towns as districts. It may be that administratively, but why should travellers care? Nor do I think we much need a separate reion article for Penang Island. We have a decent article for Penang and a redirect to a section of it at Penang Island; I think that is enough.

 * What would be useful, I think, would be trying to get the Penang article to Guide so it could become DotM. The main requirement would be bringing all the child articles up to Usable so the parent could become Guide. See Destination_of_the_month_candidates for an example where this CotM->DotM sequence has been tried before. Pashley (talk) 13:00, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

 * We already have a framework for that: See Talk:Penang. The places in Seberang Perai present a greater problem in bringing them up to Usable status. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:08, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

The George Town article should be made into a huge city article, as recent sources confirm that the city's jurisdiction covers the entirety of Penang Island (an area of 293km2), plus a handful of surrounding islets such as Jerejak Island, bringing the city's total area to 305km2. From an aerial point-of-view, Balik Pulau may look separate, but in actual fact, it still forms part of George Town and comes under the governance of the city's local authority. Balik Pulau is not even a city to begin with; it only has a population of less than 25,000, whereas cities in Malaysia tend to contain at least 200,000 inhabitants each.

When looking at Malaysian cities in general, one should note that almost every city in Malaysia covers a larger area beyond the original settlement itself. Take Kuala Lumpur (KL), for instance; the original settlement of KL was centred around the confluence of the Klang and Gombak rivers, but the city of KL now encompasses surrounding suburban areas like Bandar Tasik Selatan, Kampung Baru, Taman Tun Dr Ismail, etc. Same goes to Johor Bahru (JB), where the city's boundaries have expanded beyond the original settlement of JB to include outlying suburban areas like Tebrau & Plentong. Ditto to Iskandar Puteri (which includes the outlying suburb of Skudai) and Malacca City (which also covers the adjacent areas of Teluk Mas and Tanjung Kling). The suburbs within these aforementioned cities are also mentioned within these cities' articles. In this regard, George Town as a Malaysian city should not be treated any differently.

I would suggest that, aside from turning Air Itam, Batu Ferringhi, Bayan Lepas and Balik Pulau into district-level articles, new articles should be created for other notable suburbs/neighbourhoods like Pulau Tikus, Teluk Bahang and Tanjung Tokong. Each of these aforementioned areas contains numerous sites of interest. Pulau Tikus has various places of worship, including Siamese & Burmese temples; Teluk Bahang is famous as an eco-tourism site and Tanjung Tokong, an upmarket suburb favoured by expats, has a marina-cum-shopping mall & a floating mosque. Ohmskaya russkikh (talk) 03:07, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

 * It's true that Wikivoyage doesn't base decisions on political boundaries of cities, counties, etc. unless doing so is perceived by a consensus to be most useful to the traveller. So that's the argument you should make if you'd like to try to convince a consensus, as right now, there is a developing consensus against turning this article into a huge city article encompassing the entire island of Penang and then some. And my suggestion would be to start "city" articles about Pulau Tikus, Teluk Bahang and Tanjung Tokong, even though they are not officially cities. Another thing to keep in mind is that on Wikivoyage, the term "city" is used loosely to encompass any populated area; see Geographical hierarchy (you may have to scroll up a bit for that section, as the link is behaving strangely, at least for me). Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:20, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, I'm profoundly unfamiliar with the area, but my hot take is to prefer the way it is. Although districtification would make sense; however, if new articles were added as Ohmskaya suggests above. I guess my main question is about the amount of content you envision each page having. How many new listings would be added? How much of the Get in/Get around content is duplicated between the Penang and George Town articles? How much could be merged? It's free to create unlimited pages, but a readers attention is finite. Striking the balance between informing and overwhelming is key.
 * I guess I'd agree with what others have mentioned, if someone does have the time and energy, I'd prefer to harness that gumption to polish up the articles relationships with one another. (Penang as more aspirational & planning content; while Batu, Balik, Banyan, etc being more boots on the ground, where do I try this dish info.) If we want to come back and add more articles great, but it doesn't "feel" to me like the whole island is a city. (Not that I know what I'm talking about) --ButteBag (talk) 01:05, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * As no-one has responded to ButteBag in 2½ years, is it reasonable to conclude that their proposal to leave things as they are has been accepted, and we can remove the district discussion template? Ground Zero (talk) 00:31, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I guess so, but this article is pretty long. A cursory look-through seems to show that only a few of the listings are clearly movable to other city/would-be-district articles outside of Georgetown's city centre. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:51, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * It is our 121st-longest article, and shorter than Milwaukee, Ann Arbor, Ottawa, Oakland, and Swansea. I know that "other things exist" is not a good argument, but given the lack of interest or knowledge to do anything about it, I doubt that things will change. I don't agree that it is a good idea to go back to saying that a discussion is underway on districting and then not discussing it. Ground Zero (talk) 01:03, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * "I guess so" isn't a disagreement. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:06, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I misread that. I thought there was a "but" in there. My apologies. Ground Zero (talk) 01:18, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * There is a but, which indicated a concern but not a disagreement. No need for an apology, though. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:22, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:George Town (Malaysia)


text:
Talk:Georgia

I think 'georgia' should redirect to the Georgia country site and should have a disambiguation page.

 * Agreed, and now it does.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 05:59, 23 April 2010 (EDT)

Georgia and disambiguation
Today I took the action as stated above. I received the following on my user talk page:

 * I realize this may be more U.S. parochialism, but I don't agree with moving Georgia (country) to Georgia. At the very least, I would like to see some discussion of it before making that move.  (WT-en) LtPowers 09:06, 23 April 2010 (EDT)

 * A country surely takes priority over a state? I suggest you discuss at Talk:Georgia.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 11:04, 23 April 2010 (EDT)

 * So here it is. If anyone cannot follow what I did, I removed the redirect to a disambiguation page for Georgia and added an otheruses template to the Georgia country article. Therefore anyone searching for Georgia will end up at the country page, from where the otheruses template directs to the disambiguation page for other places called Georgia. It seems blindingly obvious to me that if a country name has more than one use, then the country name takes priority over a state or city or town or whatever. If anyone disagrees, please explain why.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 11:04, 23 April 2010 (EDT)

 * The policy wording is:

 * "As an exception, if one place is so much more famous than others with the same name that the disambiguation is a hindrance rather than a help, leave it without a disambiguator on the end"

 * I'm not sure that Georgia (the country) meets that bar, but I also live in the US so I'm probably biased. Additionally, I think based on our current guidelines that Georgia (the state) should actually be named Georgia (United States of America), no? -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 11:12, 23 April 2010 (EDT)

 * The rest of that policy reads... and if you even have to think about which place is "more famous", go back to rule 1. Examples: Paris is the capital of France; Paris (Texas) is a nice little prairie town in the US. Los Angeles is the megalopolis in southern California; Los Angeles (Chile) is a mid-sized town south of Santiago. Peru is the country in South America; Peru (Indiana) is a town in the Midwest of the United States.
 * To me, Georgia the country is certainly way more famous than the southern state of the USA, and I suspect it would be to anyone who is not American? I would also suggest a clear change to that policy stating that a country name always takes priorty. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 11:19, 23 April 2010 (EDT)

 * As an American I actually think of the state first, so more feedback is probably needed. However, for what it's worth, WikiPedia:Georgia is a disambiguation page. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 11:24, 23 April 2010 (EDT)

 * While I'd prefer that Georgia goes straight to the country, I think it's probably best to defer to WP's convention in this case, to avoid interminable debate. Ryan is right re: the name of the disambiguator. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 12:09, 23 April 2010 (EDT)

 * I absolutely do not support the idea that countries should always take precedence. The goal should be to get people where they want to go as quickly as possible, and we simply cannot assume that the readers of our travel guides are significantly more likely to be looking for Georgia, the country, than they are for Georgia, the state.  It's not like the country is a huge travel destination.  (WT-en) LtPowers 14:34, 23 April 2010 (EDT)

 * Oh, as for disambiguators, I'm not sure how you can say "state" is wrong, when it's used as the example on the policy page. (WT-en) LtPowers 14:35, 23 April 2010 (EDT)

 * I fundamentally disagree with all of that on several levels but there are far more important things to do than argue about it. The Americans won the day at Wikipedia as well, despite Georgia the country receiving more hits and a whole host of other arguments which make sense to me. Assuming there are are no more users who think this is the right thing to do, I will change back to old scheme. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 14:42, 23 April 2010 (EDT)

 * Re: Georgia (United States of America), there is probably a larger discussion to be had about bullet #2 in the naming conventions. The policy page also references Cordoba (state), but as the Cordoba disambiguation page shows the actual implementation has been very different.  Similarly, Midwest (United States of America) is considered correct, but per the naming conventions it should apparently be Midwest (region, United States of America). -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 14:48, 23 April 2010 (EDT)
 * In continental Europe most people will think of the country Georgia and not the American state due to the related history and the proximity to Europe. Most Europeans know Atlanta but not the state so i would side with Burmesedays. I think disambiguation is justified as so many Americans are here around and otherwise we have too many jerks like these: A big hail to Texas ;-) (WT-en) jan 14:58, 23 April 2010 (EDT) P.s. some edit conflicts here. sorry ryan

 * Perhaps Palestine should go straight to a disambiguation page as well? :)--(WT-en) Burmesedays 15:00, 23 April 2010 (EDT)
 * I feared that you would think that *rotfl* This will be the joke tonight in the pub with my friends! slanger (WT-en) jan 15:09, 23 April 2010 (EDT)

Before my rant, I should say that Georgia-the country-is among the top 5 countries I most want to visit, so I'm certainly a Sakhartvelo-booster. I'm too lazy to dig through the policies, but as mentioned above ''... and if you even have to think about which place is "more famous", go back to rule 1. '' I'm sure 99.999% of Americans (and Canadians too) will say the US state is more/as famous and I'd venture a guess that 80-90% don't even know that there is a country called Georgia. Now, this is the English-language Wikivoyage, so the usage of words (in this case a proper name) among native speakers ought to take precedence and given the population of the US, I'd say this is should be a big consideration.

What about Washington, should the state trump the city because its a step higher in the government hierarchy? Among Americans/Canadians the name can be either the state or city, but among others and non-native speakers "Washington" refers to the city...do non-Americans refer (often) to the city as "Washington, D.C." as our article is titled? Same issue with New York, which most Americans refer to as New York City? My point is that usage among native speakers should take precedence and among native speakers neither is more famous...half (mostly Americans and our cousins to the north) will say the state is more famous, the other half (Brits, Aussies, Kiwis, etc.) are more likely to say the country is more famous. So can't we just leave it as a choice? Is it really excruciatingly painful to see a page with two choices and select the page you want to navigate to? Most links should already link to the desired article...which brings up another issue, is anyone willing to go through all the links to this page and correct those referring to the state. (For the record: the state is a little over twice the size at 153,909 km2 in area and nearly 10 million residents, while the country has just 69,700 km² and 4.3 million residents.) (WT-en) AHeneen 03:51, 24 April 2010 (EDT)

 * As an aside (I am trying not to argue this one any further, but it is hard not to cite 3,000 years of recorded history and truly magnificent natural attractions, versus a 270 year old American state famous for growing peaches and peanuts :)), very few links would need correcting. Links to the US state should already go straight to Georgia (state). Georgia now goes to the country with an otheruses template, instead of to the disambiguation page. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 04:35, 24 April 2010 (EDT)

 * We all have different things we value in travel; for you, it's history, but that's not a criterion for everyone. Natural attractions or not, Georgia, the country, just isn't a major travel destination.  Keep in mind, too, that no one is suggesting that the state should get the undisambiguated name; we're just saying that we can't make an assumption that someone typing "Georgia" into the search box is most likely looking for the country.  (WT-en) LtPowers 09:36, 24 April 2010 (EDT)

 * I'd say Georgia is more famous for its cultural/historical attractions than natural ones. And what about Washington? Do you go with the larger entity (the state) which has thousands of years of history or the city with a drastically smaller footprint and population but is more famous worldwide. See the point? LtPowers said it nicely...we're not advocating the state receive preference, just a simple page to painlessly click on the state or the country. (WT-en) AHeneen 14:31, 24 April 2010 (EDT)

Per the above discussion, I've reverted the move. For the record, I encountered some trouble because this talk page (which was originally Talk:Georgia, i.e., the talk page for the disambiguation page) was not moved to Talk:Georgia (disambiguation), as it should have been. As well, Talk:Georgia (country) was essentially orphaned when Georgia (country) became a redirect; it should have been moved to Talk:Georgia. Anyway, I think everything is now back where it should be. I'll be off to fix the links now. (WT-en) LtPowers 19:27, 23 May 2010 (EDT)

title: Talk:Georgia


text:
Talk:Georgia (country)

Travel & Tourist Agencies
I removed these from the main page as I don't believe it meets our goals. Looks like another way to add external links.

(removed - was attracting new spam)

-- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 10:07, 29 December 2006 (EST)

Images
I added images by Mr Marko Petrovic, very talented photographer and he gave permission to use his photos on Wikivoyage article Georgia. I copied his email and attached to each image in the Wikivoyage shared page. Please see description there. You can find collection of amazing Georgian photos here: http://www.trekearth.com/gallery/Asia/Georgia/ Thanks. (WT-en) CanadianTraveler 10:30, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

 * p.s more images to come. (WT-en) CanadianTraveler 10:53, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

Ancient wine traditions
Just to preempt any boring controversy over Georgia's wine traditions, here are (WT-en) CanadianTraveler's sources:

--(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald Talk 16:01, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

''Links removed to avoid spam filter. See archive .''

Geographical hierarchy for Georgia
Discussion moved to Talk:Georgia (country)/Geographical hierarchy
 * The discussion took place in 2008, but hasn't been touched since then. I think that Georgia is an extremely diverse region. If talking about Shida Kartli and Kvemo Kartli -- these two regions are extremely different in landscape, weather and especially ethnic composition. I think that we should separate Kartli into 2 separate articles. I know that it is almost a stub now, but nevertheless: there are tons of things to write about. Soshial (talk) 10:50, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

 * I agree. I have no idea who has been making this region combinations in Wikivoyage. It saves a few pages but it certainly doesn't make it clearer for curious readers. Georgia doesn't have that many regions. Just 9. Make them all separate (I could live with Adjaria and Guria combined) and every reader can relate to the administrative regions without any "?" in all literature they look at. Labrang (talk) 15:36, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Trans-Caucasus Itinerary
I am interested in assisting in creating a 12-15 day trans-Caucasus itinerary with Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Armenia. Would anyone be interested in assisting me with this? (WT-en) Cupcakecommander 02:51, 31 July 2007 (EDT)

Information about Russia-Georgia war
Russian troops are only in Samegrelo in Northwest Georgia (near Abkhasia) and they are doing nothing in thear, CAN WE REMOVE WARNING?

- I'm from Georgia —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 89.232.10.171 (talk • contribs)

 * I understand the desire to remove the warning, but while there is no more active conflict right now, it's very unclear how things will settle. The fact that there are foreign troops in Samegrelo underscores this point. Wikivoyage keeps up warnings when there is something to warn about, even though, for example, I myself would feel perfectly comfortable visiting Georgia east of Gori right now. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 20:59, 28 August 2008 (EDT)

Questionable edits regarding Russian language in Georgia
Some very dubious edits keep cropping up over the years suggesting that Russian is no longer useful in Georgia, and that travelers can get by fine by speaking English with kids. This is ridiculous. Barring the mass murder of everyone over 30 in the country, I doubt so much has changed since I lived there in 2005, when about one in three people speaks Russian competently, and certainly any English ability on the part of schoolchildren was extremely limited, as there is a shortage of qualified English instructors. Some of the information being added is strictly nonfactual, like the notion that Russian language instruction was ever compulsory in Georgia... As a matter of fact, people are much more willing to speak Russian in the Caucasus than in the Baltics precisely because it was never mandatory. If you politely ask someone, უკაცრავად, რუსული იცით?, they will either shake their head no, or otherwise happily assist you.

It is also not useful to keep harping on the Russo-Georgian conflict ad nauseum. Travel in Georgia has little to do with it, and a lot more to do with friendly, hospitable people, delicious food, spectacular and diverse landscapes, and a unique culture and history predating the latest little conflict to the tune of 3500 years. Lets get back on topic.

I'll be reverting a lot of this bunk in the days to come. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 22:06, 6 July 2011 (EDT)
 * Another edit by @ suggested that Russian language is a very sensitive issue in Georgia. I completely disagree, since it is the almost the only lingua franca in the region and many Georgians do not mind speaking Russian. Soshial (talk) 05:05, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I had the same understanding as The dog2 with that issue as well. Had no idea that many Georgians are willing to speak Russian. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 05:14, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I didn't know that. I thought that Georgians will refuse to speak Russian even if they are fluent because Georgia is politically aligned with the United States and the European Union, and Russian is regarded as the language of an unwanted colonial oppressor. The dog2 (talk) 05:20, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I am a Russian citizen and I have travelled to Georgia since 2014 many times and eventually moved here, and I have never met any problem with neither being Russian nor with me speaking Russian to Georgians. I might even add that many Georgians explicitly stressed that Georgian and Russian peoples were and still are friendly nations and Georgians are wise enough to separate notions of Russian people and culture from the Russian state, that they consider as aggressor. This can be explained partially that some patriotic Russians that support the Russian aggression, do not travel to Georgia; besides that many opposition-minded Russians move to Georgia from Russia for political reasons. I think that Georgians are happy to see Russians moving to Georgia because of Putin. A number of big websites have a Russian version (for instance all mobile operators do). Even more than that, many tourists from Ukraine, Belarus and Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia come to Georgia and most of them speak Russian language since it is a lingua franca since the Soviet times; even some Poles try to speak Russian a bit with locals. I don't want to be rude, @, but please check the facts before adding surmises to the article. Soshial (talk) 06:46, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
 * That's interesting. I thought people from the Baltic states refuse to speak Russian for political reasons unless they are ethnic Russians. Because I am from Asia, I am more familiar with Asian language politics, and if you go to Hong Kong, even though Mandarin is compulsory in school, the young people refuse to learn Mandarin as a matter of principle because they consider Mandarin to be the language of China, which they regard as the oppressor. In fact, during the protests, shops supporting the protesters were putting up signs saying that Mandarin speakers were not welcome unless they were Taiwanese, and non-Taiwanese are only allowed to be served in Cantonese or English. I though there might be a similar dynamic between Russia and the more US/EU-aligned former communist states. The dog2 (talk) 07:12, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
 * @The dog2 A little unrelated to Georgia, but would speaking Russian in Estonia get raised eyebrows from the locals? Estonia was once a part of the Soviet Union, but these days they're more aligned with Finland. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 07:18, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
 * No idea since I have never been to Estonia, and I don't speak Russian. But I have noticed that younger Estonians are more likely to speak English than Russian. That said, there is a large ethnic Russian minority in Estonia, and their native language is Russian. Soshial might know the situation in Estonia too. The dog2 (talk) 07:22, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
 * It's best not to type things in articlespace just because you surmise them based on what you think are analogies with things you've experienced. That tendency has led to totally unnecessary controversy before. Just ask on the talk page. I used to have a really, really annoying geometry teacher in my sophomore year of high school, and she had a habit of making the following really rude comment: "Don't assume, because when you assume, you make an a-s-s of you and me." Rude and very blunt, but I nevertheless thought of it. I guess Ms. Webber would be pleased... Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:58, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Currency code or lari
Just to be sure on this, does every one agree on using "lari" instead of "₾", "ლ" or "GEL" as the single currency identifier for all articles on Georgia? Cheers Ceever (talk) 19:18, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, that was a stupid sentence. ;-) I will just go ahead with this approach if no one objects. Cheers. Ceever (talk) 07:27, 14 May 2017 (UTC) Ceever (talk) 07:27, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I object to using . As per Wikivoyage:Currency we should use the notation most frequently used by locals, so that Wikivoyage reader could recognize it in a pricelist/menu. This is a similar case to Russian   Soshial (talk) 09:38, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * A little too late, that answer. :-D But OK, counting: 1
 * Also note, for Armenia and Aserbaidschan we have the same login: dram and manat. And people almost exclusively use the word "lari" in their language. So, this is in line with Currency.
 * Cheers, Ceever (talk) 10:03, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I think that our readers would hear many times and recognize the word "lari" anyway. And it takes only once to read and remember what the currency is called in "Money" section, but it might be quite challenging to recognize prices in different texts, inscriptions, marshrutkas routes' pricelists etc. So I think that some of "₾", "ლ" or "GEL" variants is the best fit for this. Soshial (talk) 18:36, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Advice on pre-booking accomodation
Currently there is advice to arrive without a booking, claiming the owners will give the online price.

I came to edit this page to leave the complete opposite advice, and was very surprised to see what the previous editor sad to say. My experience has been that without a booking prices are likely to be bumped up marginally, especially in the off-season and this advice was also given to me twice by seasoned travelers who were leaving georgia. It is a noble sentiment to help accomodation providers keep more of their earnings, but It may not be in the interest of the traveler.

Does anyone have input on this, because I would like to reach consensus.

-willthewanderer 26/10/2017

 * Without knowing anything about the actual situation on the ground in Georgia, your best bet may be to try to write it to include both sides of the coin. Powers (talk) 21:28, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

 * I was the one who wrote it. Maybe it depends on the kind of accommodation. For me it was mostly budget accommodation. If this was the case for you too, then maybe we could change it towards saying that "when turning up on sight and quoting the price of pages like booking, owners will give you that rate and they will in addition save the fees, even though it might be more expensive when you do not quote the booking website". What do you think? Ceever (talk) 13:08, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Lede
I disagree with assertions that country headers are supposed to be short and dry, even though there are many examples of such elsewhere. But look at USA, look at France, look at Italy, New Zealand, UK. These are good examples in varying lengths of how to write a good introduction to a travel guide. They set the scene, summarise the country, sell the dream. Compare those to "Georgia (Georgian: საქართველო, Sakartvelo) is a country in the Caucasus. Sandwiched between Russia in the north and Turkey in the south, it sits on the coast of the Black Sea." and we're yawning because it's just like Wikipedia and tells you nothing to whet your appetite. Why anyone would think that is preferable over the lovely introduction written by IP User:80.99.57.97 is beyond me. It doesn't matter if stuff gets repeated in Understand, because it is an introduction, that's what they're for.

Quoting Country article template: ''The first section of the country article does not have a heading. This is the place for rhetorical flourish, not a list of dry facts; try to leave detailed information on history, culture, etc, for the Understand section. While some identifying information about the country can be useful (so that the traveller has some idea what you're talking about), the main purpose of the lead paragraph is to hook the reader's interest.'', it is clear that the Wikivoyage gods intended us to write beautiful intros, not stuffy one liners.

Plus, all that white space looks ridiculous and is a dreadful introduction to any article, never mind an entire country.

I would ask that either User:Ceever or User:Ibaman restore the IP's version of the lede, because what you have asserted as fact or policy is neither. Tidy it up if you will to make it flow nicer, but that version should be your starting point. ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 00:04, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

 * I completely agree with you. —Granger (talk · contribs) 00:10, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

 * As it states and you have quoted: "This is the place for rhetorical flourish, not a list of dry facts; try to leave detailed information on history, culture, etc, for the Understand section.". What I moved down to the Understand section was more than just rhetorical flourish, namely a list of dry facts, arbitrary but facts. It was even an incomplete excerpt on history, which I find kind of sad, spreading such facts over various sections of an article, which happens quite often here on WV and creates duplication and chaos in the articles, instead of sticking it where it belongs. If you have been to Georgia, please, feel free to add something rhetorical flourish on people, feel of country and such, but please no facts that belong into the Understand section. Ceever (talk) 12:49, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
 * What, so as opposed to facts, we should only have falsehoods? The "facts" (just true stuff about the country) were not dry, they were interesting, and far superior to what is there now. I haven't been to Georgia, and nor have many other people, yet the IP user clearly has, which is why the IP's intro is a good starting point for improvement. ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:11, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I think the solution is to have a lede that's no more than one paragraph long, with some of the material moved to "Understand" but keeping enough of it in the lede to keep it colorful. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:13, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
 * If the lede is only going to be one paragraph long, I think we need to do something about the formatting to get rid of the big ugly white space. —Granger (talk · contribs) 23:21, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Some information is useful in the introduction, but I don't think such detailed information should be included there. I'd agree with the one paragraph idea, although let's remember that a paragraph doesn't have to be two lines long. Selfie City (talk) 00:06, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Are we talking in general terms, or just for Georgia? I don't think the longer ledes linked above should be shortened. ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 18:56, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not suggesting a one-paragraph standard as a rule, only as a compromise that could work in this article and satisfy both sides of this particular argument. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:45, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
 * A compromise would be welcome from my POV. ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 21:32, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for those of you who expressed support for the longer introduction. As ThunderingTyphoons! correctly guessed, I have been to Georgia on many occasions and I just wanted to make this article more presentable and more worthy of the wonderful country that is Georgia. It is heartbreaking to reduce this introduction to a single, formulaic sentence. I also think we're dealing with a bit of a double standard here. Because Georgia is a small and relatively obscure country at the very edge of the continent, I suspect it is tempting for some to think that a single line would suffice for an introduction. After all, what could be interesting about such a "wretched" place?! On the flip side, I don't see anyone putting up a fight on pages like the Netherlands, which have large introductions replete with information AND praise...Keeping Georgia's introduction as a single, large paragraph, as it is now, is acceptable if people insist. However, I concur that the empty space it creates is hideous and serves no apparent purpose.

Georgia is in Eastern Europe?
Georgians, and perhaps a few other editors here, seem to consider that Georgia is in Eastern Europe. If so, we can and should respect that without stating without qualification that "Georgia is in Eastern Europe", because most of the world will disagree. Traditionally, at least in the West, Eastern Europe was considered to constitute the non-Soviet European countries in the Warsaw Pact - plus, I suppose, neutral Communist Yugoslavia and Albania, which played the Soviets off against the Chinese and maintained a dystopian independent regime - only (with Greece and perhaps Turkey and Cyprus being excluded for political reasons), but certainly nowhere east of most of the Asian part of Turkey. Georgia was part of the Soviet Union, and the region it's in is not the Balkans but the Caucasus. I don't know why it's controversial among some Georgians to state that their country is Caucasian, but this is not the first time we've seen this type of edit. We do have Georgia breadcrumbed to Europe and are treating the Caucasus as part of Europe, but stating that it's in "Eastern Europe" will confuse a lot of people who think of that term as encompassing nations like Bulgaria and Romania.

Is it actually a sensitive issue in Georgia to call the country part of the Caucasus region, and should it be stated in "Respect" that Georgians consider their nation part of Eastern Europe? I'd be OK with that if it's in fact an issue. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:10, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

 * In my experience, most people in the West have no idea what the Caucasus is. In everyday use, these countries are referred to as Eastern Europe. We don't need long and confusing explanation of Caucasus being at the intersection of continents. This is a travel website, not a geographic manual. We should go with what's simple. Georgia's location to the east of Turkey is irrelevant; Moscow is farther east than Ankara.
 * P.S. I'm Russian and the Russian version of Wikivoyage has included Georgia under Easter Europe for many years and no one seems to have objected.--Polinarok (talk) 23:32, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

 * The Russian Wikivoyage has Georgia breadcrumbed as part of the Caucasus. ARR8 (User talk:ARR8 | Special:Contributions/ARR8) 00:22, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

 * Maybe in everyday use in Russia, in spite of what ARR8 points out above, Georgia is considered to be in Eastern Europe, but name a country in the West that so considers it. People who have no idea where the Caucasus are also have no idea where Georgia is, so I think we can dismiss that concern and show them where it is. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:34, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

 * Agree with that conclusion. For some more context, I don't know about colloquial speech in Russia, but Georgia and the Caucasus are almost always mentioned in the same breath in Russian media and in the Russian diaspora - not that, ultimately, the behavior of Russian speakers matters to the Georgians for how they prefer to classify themselves. ARR8 (User talk:ARR8 | Special:Contributions/ARR8) 00:46, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, the Russian site has Georgia breadcrumbed under Caucasus but it also clearly says Eastern Europe in the text. Also, the Caucasus page itself says it's Eastern Europe.
 * In the West, calling Georgia Eastern Europe makes more sense than calling it Caucasus because people at least have some vague associations with Eastern Europe, i.e. being former USSR or bordering Russia. Caucasus means close to nothing. Only Russians and other fellow ex-USSR nations would be familiar with it.--Polinarok (talk) 03:24, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

 * You've expressed your views clearly, and I appreciate that, but neither of us agree with you, so you'd have to persuade a consensus of other people in order to state this in the article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:39, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

 * Western Europeans at least do know where Caucasus is, and that Georgia is located there. Caucasus, in turn, can be regarded as part of either Europe or Asia, and at least the mountain range is according to Wikipedia "today accepted by the majority of scholars as being part of Asia". ϒψιλον  (talk ) 05:31, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

 * Even if it were true that Westerners don't know where the Caucasus is, it would still be irrelevant. We at Wikivoyage are not in the business of dumbing things down to pander to the most ignorant of our readers. They're big boys and girls. If they read a phrase like "Georgia is located in the Caucasus" and don't know what it means, they can look it up. We even have an article on the Caucasus, to which we presumably link from the Georgia article. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 05:55, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Re-opening after COVID
Georgia will reopen for international tourism on July 1 Pashley (talk) 12:50, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Georgian cuisine article?
I just checked out a helpful edit by an IP user improving the article's Eat section. And I noticed the section is quite long with a lot of photos (a little too many of them in an article not specifically about a cuisine) so perhaps its time to split out a separate Georgian cuisine article. Also, German Wikivoyage has a well-developed article about Georgian cuisine from where additional content could be translated and imported. --Ypsilon (talk) 17:04, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. Khachapuri rules. Ibaman (talk) 17:16, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Definitely. Georgian cuisine is delicious and was famous throughout the Soviet Union. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:19, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 * It sure is, I've tried it a few times. :) --Ypsilon (talk) 17:36, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Georgian cuisine article translated from German! :) --Ypsilon (talk) 18:00, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Amazing work, ! Does anyone have an idea, how we can make existing section smaller, so that editors are motivated to edit the full article Georgian cuisine? Soshial (talk) 03:41, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I'd say the lists of dishes, most photos, and maybe some of the Drink section needs to be moved and merged into the cuisine article. The country article should describe the Georgian cuisine from a general point of view, mentioning the most famous dishes (khinkali etc.). --Ypsilon (talk) 05:11, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I'd suppose it must be made real short for annoyingly many not to try to expand it. What needs to be said for those that won't click on the cuisine article? –LPfi (talk) 09:22, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
 * One can model the section after Eat sections in other country articles where the cuisine has its own article. Also, it's foremost the readers we're writing for, then comes the editors, so we shouldn't shorten it down to the extent that everyone will have to go to the cuisine article to get meaningful information (especially not information related to eating in the country in general). Ypsilon (talk) 09:55, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, true. Still, if we cannot maintain the guides properly because of editor mistakes, then that serves travellers badly. –LPfi (talk) 11:56, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Perhaps it is not sot much about what we include, but having a clear structure, which serves both groups. I don't know whether that is easy to achieve in this case. –LPfi (talk) 11:58, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

LGBT
I read some disturbing news on anti-HBTQ actions in Tblisi. What are the general feelings towards HBTQ people? Is there a risk for violence towards openly HBTQ travellers? In the street? In nightclubs? In dark alleys? –LPfi (talk) 17:38, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

 * HBTQ is apparently the Swedish version of LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer/questioning). I had to do a web search because I've never seen "H" as part of any expression about non-straight/cis people. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:19, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
 * We 'omosexuals never use an 'H'. ;-) Ground Zero (talk) 19:31, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
 * :-) I meant any expression of initialisms. :-) Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:12, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry for not checking. Yes, it's the Swedish initialism - I didn't think about Swedish at all, so didn't have my guard up. Fixed the heading. –LPfi (talk) 06:28, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I added a section in the article. Feel free to improve it. Soshial (talk) 07:45, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you Soshial. I did move things around and changed some wordings. I hope the changes were OK. –LPfi (talk) 06:21, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Border-run missing article
Been browsing Wikivoyage and noticed a "border-run" link in the Get in by car section. The page doesn't exist yet, should I make it, and if so what's the exact meaning of this? NotFireMan (talk) 23:48, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

 * There is an article named Visa run and border run with an overlapping subject, so I linked it. Please contribute there instead of starting a new article from scratch. Vidimian (talk) 00:29, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Car rental aggregators in "Get around"
Aggregators can't be listed per External links. Have we decided to make exceptions in this article? Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:40, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

 * No, and they should be removed accordingly. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 08:45, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 08:46, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Georgia (country)


text:
Talk:Georgia (country)/Geographical hierarchy

I would like to sort out the geographical hierarchy for Georgia. I have two possible schematics in mind, one that would simply divide the country into two regions:

1. Western (Colchis) Georgia and Eastern (Iberian) Georgia. This is a very clear cut regionalization based on historical, cultural, climactic, and geographic differences, but gives the traveler only a very macro and rather uninformative perspective on the country.

2. More of a itinerary-based regionalization that would group related and nearby destinations under subregions. Here's an attempt at this:

 * Kakheti
 * Central Georgia (country)
 * Kartli
 * Kvemo Kartli
 * Shida Kartli
 * Tbilisi
 * Mtskheta-Mtianeti
 * South Ossetia
 * Rioni region
 * Imereti
 * Racha
 * Southwestern Georgia
 * Samtskhe-Javakheti
 * Guria
 * Ajara
 * Northwestern Georgia
 * Abkhazia
 * Samegrelo
 * Svaneti

I would love to hear other contributors' input! --(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald Talk 17:02, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

 * I think its a great idea. (WT-en) CanadianTraveler 12:57, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

 * OK, I am still feeling unsure of how to proceed. In general, I like the itinerary based hierarchy better because it conveys a lot of useful information and breaks the country down into more manageable "chunks." The one problem that sticks out, however, is that South Ossetia and Samtskhe-Javakheti don't fit very well into any regional groups, but I don't think they should get their own top-level regions (because South Ossetia is contained within Shida Kartli and Samtskhe-Javakheti just doesn't seem prominent enough). I can also imagine that Ossetes might take offense at being included in "Central Georgia." I've uploaded a png of the two regional schematics and would like to hear what others think. Perhaps I should stop being such a perfectionist and go for the itinerary schematic? --(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald Talk 18:13, 20 May 2007 (EDT)

 * I say go with the more fine-grained division. Creating just two regions doesn't accomplish much, and no matter where we draw the lines, there are always going to be people who don't like being lumped in with ____.  If the name "Central Georgia" is a problem, is there another name you can give the region, related to a shared geographical feature? - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 19:05, 20 May 2007 (EDT)

 * Ok, I think I have settled on the itinerary scheme. I'll wait until next week for any other comments, and then will begin making the region pages. --(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald Talk 01:12, 25 May 2007 (EDT)

 * I think the map looks good. You're right, separating Ossetia from Shida Kartli makes a bit of a statement, but reflects the reality of the situation for the traveler.  Its possible that Samtskhe-Javakheti could stand alone as its own region since Borjomi, Akhaltsekhe, and Vardzia are there, if I'm not getting the regions confused.  The reconstruction of the highway there may also open up more tourist sites and be an entry point from Armenia.  But it really could go either way.(WT-en) Cuttino 09:26, 25 May 2007 (EDT)

 * Actually, now that I think about it...Samtskhe-Javakheti probably fits better with central Georgia. Transportation-wise, Borjomi is only 30-45 minutes from Khashuri (Shida-Kartli) and its often easier to pass through there to get west.  I think its more of a natural fit with Shida-Kartli and central Georgia than Adjara.(WT-en) Cuttino 09:31, 25 May 2007 (EDT)

 * Ah, I forgot that Borjomi is in Samtskhe-Javakheti. I definitely see your point about grouping it with Central Georgia, but that region starts to look to big to me when it is included. I might prefer your first option of giving the region its own top-level category just because its geography is so different from Kartli and because it takes so long to get to Akhaltsikhe (unless that Millenium Challenge road has already been built...). But in any rate, I do think you're right that it doesn't make sense to group it with Ajara and Guria. --(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald Talk 12:53, 25 May 2007 (EDT)

 * Well, I'm going with Samtskhe-Javakheti as a top-level region. In the future, if anyone sees problems with this hierarchy, this is the place to discuss them. --(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald Talk 14:15, 31 May 2007 (EDT)

 * I just changed "Central Georgia" to Kartli, since I just found out that Mtskhetia-Mtianeti is actually considered part of Kartli. --(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald Talk 17:51, 31 May 2007 (EDT)

Current regional hierarchy

 * Kakheti
 * Kartli
 * Kvemo Kartli
 * Shida Kartli
 * South Ossetia
 * Tbilisi
 * Mtskheta-Mtianeti
 * Rioni region
 * Imereti
 * Racha
 * Southwestern Georgia
 * Guria
 * Ajara
 * Samtskhe-Javakheti
 * Northwestern Georgia
 * Abkhazia
 * Samegrelo
 * Svaneti

Disambiguation
We have a sort of disambiguation issue with the regions of Georgia (country) and Georgia (state). When I saw a "new" Northwestern Georgia article, I thought "Waitaminute! I created that region a year ago! But no: that was Northwest Georgia, in the state.  Either one's a perfectly valid way to name them, but I can see people typing one when they want the other.  Should we put some variation of Template:Otheruses on these (and also Southwest/ern and Central)? - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 08:45, 1 June 2007 (EDT)

 * Ah, yes, we definitely should dab these a bit, I'll try and get a useful version of the otheruses template on the Northwest/ern and Southwest/ern pages. Fortunately, I found a way to get rid of "Central Georgia (country)" (--> Kartli). --(WT-en) Peterfitzgerald Talk 14:35, 1 June 2007 (EDT)

 * Yes, but we still have a Central Georgia (state), which people might link to without checking, thinking it'll take them to the the country. We should probably put a pointer on the top of that as well. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 16:25, 1 June 2007 (EDT)


text:
Talk:Georgia (state)

Cities
There are 10 cities listed here, the Albany article is mostly empty and with my limited knowledge of Georgia, it seems like the city of least interest to travelers. I think it should be removed.Godsendlemiwinks (talk) 02:29, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

 * I'd prefer to keep Albany, as its one of the larger cities in Georgia, and the only one in that area of the state. Just because there's no content on it now, doesn't mean there shouldn't be.
 * Instead, how about moving Blue Ridge to the "Other Destinations" section? That one also has 9 listings, but I think Stone Mountain can easily be dropped, as that's really just a park which is easily doable as a day-trip from Atlanta. --Bigpeteb (talk) 14:35, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

 * That makes sense, Blue Ridge doesn't appear to be a city anyway.Godsendlemiwinks (talk) 18:39, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Regions
I plan on creating a region map for Georgia. This way seems pretty similar to what it is now, but I think this map may be better since it gives the Atlanta area its own region and the coast its own region. Any thoughts, ideas, suggestions? -- (WT-en) Fastestdogever 14:09, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

 * I totally disagree with putting the Atlanta Metro in the "Central Georgia" region. Most people that think such a thing are Atlantans who have never bothered to travel out of the Metro area or look at a state map, or are simply uneducated outsiders.  Atlanta is clearly in north-central Georgia.  Macon, over an hour drive south, literally contains the geographic center-point of the state, Tatnall Square Park (at Coleman Ave. and College St.).  That puts Atlanta right between the center of the state and the Tennessee border.  There is also a significant geographic difference between Atlanta and true "central" Georgia.  Atlanta lies in an area that begins the rolling foothills and red-clay dirt of the Appilachians, and shares a climate with most of North Georgia.  Whereas, Central Georgia is characterized by nearly-flat lands with primarily sandy soil, and more beach-like climate except with little surface wind, making the humidity more noticable.  Central Georiga weather is also significantly effected by Tropical events in the Gulf of Mexico.

 * I was born and rised in Northwest Georgia, have lived in Macon for the past 10 years, and often travel the state, so I hope all of you can take my word on it. --(WT-en) Stuston 09:27, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

The Metro Atlanta Region pretty much takes up the central west part of the state, and should be classified in it's own region due to its population and vastness. South of that region around Columbus, to Macon and Augusta is the Fall Line and that region could be its own classifacation (including Athens). I named it Piedmont Plateau, but we could change that to Central Georgia and change what is currently Central Georgia to "Metro Atlanta" or "Greater Atlanta". --(WT-en) joggingman08 01:19, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

 * All the regions of Georgia right now are undefined, and most recently, new ones are being created. Could we please document here exactly what the regions of Georgia will be, and ideally delineate them geographically. The easiest, although perhaps not the best way, would be to do it by county boundaries. If we could settle on the regions & their borders, I would like to draw up a Wikivoyage-style map of the state. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 01:34, 16 June 2009 (EDT)
 * I propose organizing the regions by county this way. [[Image:Georgia (U.S. state) regions.png|thumb|300px|Georgia Regions]]

 * I think these 5 regions are comprehensive enough, but not excessively detailed to hinder usefulness. Names (from top to bottom) could be: Historic High Country, Metro Atlanta, Classic Heartland, Plantation Midlands, and Coastal Georgia.

 * Thoughts? (WT-en) Jtesla16 19:56, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Certainly look nice to me! But having been to the Atlanta area once hardly qualifies me to give an educated opinion on the matter ;) --(WT-en) Peter Talk 21:58, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

 * I'm thinking we can include Greater Atlanta in the Piedmont Region, which includes counties from Floyd to Heard County on the west, and Hart to Lincoln on the East. Geographically, the Piedmont Plateau runs through Georgia around all those counties, including Greater Atlanta. The only other points of interest outside Greater Atlanta in this region are Athens and Lake Lanier Islands. --(WT-en) joggingman08 22:16, 18 June 2009 (EDT)

 * I don't think such a large Piedmont region is a useful organization strategy for this area. Although those counties may share a geographical feature (the plateau), I think they are rarely ever associated for tourism or travel. Furthermore, those outlying counties you mention above are all similar in their traditional southern rural-ness for a traveler; the unique area is the Metro Atlanta region, and I think that should be reflected in our organizational hierarchy. I think the driving factor here should be what is the most useful organization for a traveler, i.e. which grouping best emphasizes the cultural variety that exists within the state. --(WT-en) Jtesla16 20:24, 19 June 2009 (EDT)

 * The thing about the Metro Atlanta region is that it transitions from the urban-ness of Atlanta and Fulton County to the traditional southern rural-ness, and suburban areas in between. Since the Metro Atlanta is made up of 28 counties in the Central West portion of the state, that leaves a few counties left in the Piedmont Region. That is why I figured I could include it all in one page, and have the Metro Atlanta counties and the "Other" counties in sections.--(WT-en) joggingman08 03:04, 05 July 2009 (EDT)

 * That's the heart of the issue. There is no justification for including those 28 counties in the Metro Atlanta area. You admit yourself that they include rural areas which are distinct from urban Atlanta. Do you think for a traveler it's more useful to emphasize this distinction, or to have a larger Piedmont region which includes a culturally unique urban area with many rural towns? --(WT-en) Jtesla16 10:42, 5 July 2009 (EDT)

 * I think having a separate Metro Atlanta article for just the metropolitan area makes sense, and is what we usually do for regions breakdowns. Joggingman, would you mind putting up a color coded map like Jesse's to demonstrate what the regions breakdown that you are proposing would look like. That would be most helpful in trying to resolve outstanding questions. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 15:07, 5 July 2009 (EDT)

 * Sure. Do you know where I can download one those maps?--(WT-en) joggingman08 06:45, 07 July 2009 (EDT)

 * Follow this link. Right click the map, Save Image As. --(WT-en) Jtesla16 06:49, 7 July 2009 (EDT)

Renewed Regions Proposal
I'm hoping to start a fresh discussion since the last one stagnated.

I think its important that we get the Georgia Regions organized in a way that best emphasizes cultural distinctness while maximizing usefulness. My proposal for region definition is to the right, with regions names from Top to Bottom: Historic High Country, Metro Atlanta, Classic Heartland, Plantation Midlands, and Coastal Georgia. (These names are more informative/interesting than NSEW titles.)

This differs from the current organization primarily in that the large Piedmont region (which is based on a geographical feature) is replaced with a tighter Metro Atlanta region, with the remaining counties dispersed among adjacent regions.

This change is important because it highlights the Metro Atlanta area at the top of the region hierarchy, and does not bury it as a sub-region. Its relative importance to the other regions warrants this change.

Lastly, I think these 5 regions are comprehensive enough, but not excessively detailed to hinder usefulness. Breaking the regions down further at this level would add little value to a traveler and just add to confusion. --(WT-en) Jtesla16 19:14, 8 November 2009 (EST)

 * I'm inclined to support this proposal, as it would move us away from a geographical/directional division (which was originally pushed through without a solid consensus) to a more travel-centric division. I also agree, as I said above, that a Metro Atlanta region should be included in any top-level regions scheme. This is a nice, well-defined proposal, so I'd be happy to start on a Wikivoyage-style regions map once we've established a firm enough consensus here. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 04:07, 9 November 2009 (EST)

 * I don't know the first thing about Georgia, but it looks fairly solid to me, and I generally trust you guys judgement on divisions. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 05:46, 9 November 2009 (EST)

 * Here's a new Georgia regions map. If there aren't any objections within the next week, why don't we just go ahead and implement the new scheme! --(WT-en) Peter Talk 07:38, 10 November 2009 (EST)

 * I've moved in the new map, but this site is too unstable/uneditable to sort out all the region pages into the new scheme. So please feel free to go ahead and do it yourself. Otherwise I'll do it once I can load pages with any degree of regularity. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 10:19, 18 November 2009 (EST)

 * And it's done (whew)! --(WT-en) Peter Talk 22:29, 18 November 2009 (EST)

title: Talk:Georgia (state)


text:
Talk:Georgian phrasebook

Viewing Georgian fonts
How do I view these characters in firefox? I see question marks for the Georgian characters.
 * View->Character Encoding->Unicode (UTF-8) should do it --(WT-en) NJR_ZA 14:08, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
 * Not always, there are severe bugs with foreign character display in firefox, this could REALLY use pictures of the characters, something like (Georgian chars for B,O,O) ( [[Image:GeorgB.svg]][[Image:GeorgO.svg]][[Image:GeorgO.svg]] ). This wouldn't require different images for different phrases and would allow any construction. +(WT-en) Hexagon1 (t) 03:41, 8 January 2008 (EST)

 * I'm confused, are you proposing we replace every instance of a Georgian character on this page with a link to an image file? That would take forever to load and would make it difficult to edit for anyone correcting spelling or phrase syntax. Or are you suggesting we just do that for the alphabet list? --(WT-en) Peter Talk 03:51, 8 January 2008 (EST)
 * List only. +(WT-en) Hexagon1 (t) 01:57, 9 March 2008 (EST)

Word stress
I don't think it's a good idea to put emphases on syllables at all in this pronunciation guide (that is, capitalized syllables in the transliterated pronunciation guide). Linguists aren't totally settled on whether there is no stress in Georgian, or whether there is faint stress on the third to last syllable of multi-syllabic words. But either way, we don't need stressed syllables in the pronunciation guide, and the top of the article explains this. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 22:46, 1 February 2009 (EST)
 * Ok, I was browsing the DLI language guides a few weeks ago and added to some of the WT language guides. I simply used the stress that was used in the Georgian guide. (WT-en) AHeneen 22:58, 1 February 2009 (EST)

 * ნათელია ;) --(WT-en) Peter Talk 00:26, 2 February 2009 (EST)

Formality
A well meaning contributor a while back removed the polite versions of hello, thank you, etc. I think it's pretty important to keep both around, as travelers might use a phrasebook for formalities with business partners, just as much as a backpacker might use it to buy fruit in the market. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 17:37, 22 August 2010 (EDT)

Please merge Georgian_phrasebook/alternate
Could someone please merge Georgian_phrasebook/alternate into this phrasebook? There is really no reason for two, especially since it gets reflected into Wikidata. Thanks a lot! Nicolas1981 (talk) 02:53, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Georgian phrasebook


text:
Talk:Central Hill Country

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

Comments
I am interested in fleshing out the articles about the local state parks, but I haven't contributed on a wiki very often in the past. So far I have made edits to Colorado Bend State Park, but before I proceed further I wanted to make sure I am doing this alright. I am very familiar with the area and the parks, it's such a beautiful place to get back to nature. --(WT-en) Aikaimmortal 16:50, 20 January 2010 (EST)

 * The work you have been doing looks great to me, and I would encourage you to continue plunging forward! --(WT-en) Peter Talk 17:37, 20 January 2010 (EST)

Georgetown (Texas)
Seems like this should be added to the list of cities.

title: Talk:Central Hill Country