text:
Talk:Association football in Europe

Which direction is this page going?
Is this a guide to watching football in europe generally? a directory for good clubs? I've put some generic info up about english footy ( my area of particular interest :D ) although this is just to give the page some feeling. I personally think this would work well as a general guide to watching football, ie what to expect, what to do, how to get tickets, teams to see etc... maybe a bit more info than it is possible to put into article pages. (WT-en) Tsandell 18:10, 22 May 2006 (EDT)
 * Well maybe this could be considered a field of pursuit but then the article should focus on the practical travel side of watching football around a continent, and not on the sports side of it. (WT-en) Ricardo (Rmx) 18:25, 22 May 2006 (EDT)

Am I the only one grossly offended by singling out some clubs as "Worth watching"? "Top clubs" is fair enough, but I'm pretty sure any club is "worth watching".
 * Good point and well done for amending that. It would be good to see a bit more information in this article about seeing football outside of the top 4 or 5 clubs in each country. Someone has started to do that in the German section with some details of "interesting" clubs in the lower divisions, and I know the English lower league "scene" (to give just one example) is bigger than that in Germany.(WT-en) Tarr3n 04:18, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Renaming
Shouldn't it be football in europe. In England it's football, in Spain it's futbol so... (WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage • ( Talk ) • ( (WT-en) Travel ) • 03:40, 30 June 2008 (EDT)
 * I have to agree. Even the French call it football. It could be argued that "soccer" fits in with the Wikivoyage spelling policy that says we should use US English wherever another form of English is not normally used (which would apply to Europe other than the UK & Ireland). However I have many friends in places like Germany and Spain who would always use "football" when speaking English. We could go with Association Football in Europe but for me that's a bit dry and wikipedia-ish. I'd back (WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage's suggestion and put in a line or two at the start about this being the version of football known as "soccer" in North America, Australia and NZ. Incidentally I wasn't aware that "soccer" was now a verb until I saw soccering in the introduction to this article - or is somebody taking the mickey?!(WT-en) Tarr3n 04:18, 30 June 2008 (EDT)
 * Soccers a verb! First time I've heard of it! :) (WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage • ( Talk ) • ( (WT-en) Travel ) •
 * I agree with the proposal to rename this page. It's Fussball in German, le foot in France, er, calcio in Italian...(WT-en) Jnich99 12:04, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

OK. That looks like a consensus to me. Nobody has objected so I have renamed the article and made some relevant changes to the introduction. (WT-en) Tarr3n 07:38, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

I fear this ship has set sail long ago, but I think it should be called either association football (in FIFA for example the "FA" part stands for football association) as there is more than one sport called football globally as there were: Rugby football, Gaelic football, American football, Aussie rules football and several minor varieties I am to lazy to look up, and most of them are (also) known as a variety of "footer" "football" or "footy" locally. The argument with Germany is particular BS, as Germans refer to Soccer as Fußball and if they say "Football" it is assumed, that they mean AMERICAN FOOTBALL, which does have a significant fan base in Germany, Roger Goodell's shutting down of NFL Europe notwithstanding. Point is: Go to an average English speaking person ask them what "football" is and unless they are Manchester United hooligans they are rather unlikely to respond with the sport discussed in this articleHobbitschuster (talk) 15:29, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

 * If you're talking about the sport in English with someone from the UK or Europe in general (Portugal etc), don't you refer to it as football? ϒpsilon (talk) 15:39, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

 * I call it soccer. But than again I like to complain about too many scoreless draws. BUT I think that as the traveller comes first, we should consider what people who read this article are likely going to call it. And as Europeans probably know most of the things about soccer in Europe that are mentioned in this article, I would rather think we should have Australians, Americans and Canadians in mind as well as those numerous people who learned in English class in school, that the sport is called "soccer". The term "soccer" originated in England, is unambiguous everywhere and doesn't marginalize other sports or their followers. I could live with association football, as it is also unambiguous "correct" and international, but imho it is too long to put in the title. Soccer on the other hand originated precisely as an abbreviation of "association" (as in "association football") and was (according to WP) the predominant term for the sport in England until about the 1970s.Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:06, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

 * It seems like a variant on the question on using 'British' (commonwealth) or 'American' English in Wikivoyage articles.
 * Also I don't think 'soccer' is that universal. The word 'football' is literally used in many translations such as as 'Fútbol' in Spain, 'Futebo' in Portugal (both by extension covers the whole of Latin America) and Fußball in Germany. It is true that Americans, Canadians and Australians would be more comfortable with 'soccer', but the rest of the world is usually use 'football'. Just to pick out some big countries see: Chinese_Football_Association, Nigeria_Football_Federation and All_India_Football_Federation Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:53, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

 * Well yeah with two exceptions (USA and Canada) all national soccer federations call themselves something that contains the word "Football", however ALL national American Football federation use the word Football. (often unqualified and untranslated as in in the American Football Verband Deutschland AFVD). Therefore the term used by national associations to promote that sport isn't really the source we should turn to to determine the use of the name. There has been a tendency within FIFA to monopolize the "brand name" "Football" as if the Canadian, American or Rugby versions simply didn't exist. The fair solution imho is to either call "Footballs" with their "official" name or use an unambiguous short term (where available) and soccer is such an unambiguous short term. You can say what you want about soccer as a term, but it is not likely somebody will understand any other sport when the word soccer is used. Hobbitschuster (talk) 23:28, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

 * 'Soccer' is unambiguous, however it is not universal. I don't think the majority of the world would know what the term 'soccer' is, whereas the English word 'football' will be correctly understood by most outside Canada/USA.
 * There have been a lot of discussions on English Wikivoyage (which most other languages are fortunate to avoid) about which variant of English to use. This article is about 'association football' which is truly international and therefore not American centric. Andrewssi2 (talk) 00:25, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

 * I would oppose renaming this article "Soccer," on the same basis as Andrew does. If it's important to make this article Association football, with Football as a disambiguation page, that's OK with me. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:07, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

 * I'm not keen on 'Association football' as a title.. it may be correct terminology but it is confusing since nobody actually says 'I'm off to watch an association football match'.
 * Also this article has a prominent disclaimer at the top that makes it clear to North Americans what sort of football it is talking about.
 * I think creating Football as a disambiguation is more than fine though. Andrewssi2 (talk) 02:31, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

 * I created Football as a disambiguation page. Interesting that there are actually almost no articles about any variety of football. Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:44, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

 * I went ahead and created an article on American Football please add information, if you know something that might be useful. If you think some or all of the stuff in the article is superfluous, please let me know. Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 02:16, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

 * I also did the same for Rugby Football. I think the principle is just to keep articles relevant to travellers as much as possible. I don't have any particular knowledge on American football so good luck with that! Andrewssi2 (talk) 02:29, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

 * I would prefer the title Football in Europe. It is short and unambiguous. /Yvwv (talk) 21:00, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Knuckledraggers
Well it was only a matter of time before some of the unsavoury elements in Scottish football started messing about with this page. Well done (WT-en) AndyGers and sundry anonymous Wikivoyage users with blue noses and hilarious patter. I've tidied it back up again. (WT-en) Tarr3n 10:42, 22 July 2008 (EDT)

relatively safe environment
Really? Who thinks that the San Siro's safe, may I ask? Or for that matter, any serie A / la liga stadium? (WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage • ( Talk ) • ( (WT-en) Travel ) • [sorry, forgotten to sign earlier]

 * You have a point with regard to Italy, though I'm not so sure about Spain? I've made an amendment to the relevant part of the introduction to take this on board. Why not plunge forward and write a "Stay Safe" section for Italy. (WT-en) Tarr3n 09:39, 2 December 2008 (EST)

 * Er, I haven't a clue about how to stay safe. I've noticed that in football stadiums, home and away fans never mix; in fact, they keep yelling at each other. So the solution I can think of is not landing up in the wrong stands. I come from India and follow cricket, not football, and there are no home/away stands in cricket stadiums, fans mix and party together. (WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage • ( Talk ) • ( (WT-en) Travel ) • 03:02, 24 March 2009 (EDT)

Page Expansion - Turning it Into a "How To"
I think this page kind of reads like a list of major clubs in the more prominent leagues, and doesn't really provide any help for someone looking to go to match anywhere. Anyone else think it could be worth expanding to include information such as how to get hold of tickets in certain countries? Happy to provide some details myself.

The "stay safe" paragraph in the Scotland section could probably do with being taken out and given its own little section as well, generic stuff like don't wear away colours, don't cheer away goals in the home end, that sort of thing. Any suggestions? --(WT-en) Irishmcbride 17:22, 12 July 2012 (EDT)

Plural of "stadium"
I speak English as a second language, so I don't know the correct plural of "stadium", but "stadia" looks just too "latin" to be real? Is this actually a thing in any existing dialect of English? (I am not all that knowledgeable about British English as many might know). Should we use it if it is a somewhat common form in one variant of English yet unknown in another? Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:34, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

 * In the U.S., "stadia" is so old-fashioned that it's been thoroughly supplanted by "stadiums". I don't know what the situation is in other English-speaking parts of the world. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:14, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Teams supported by the nobility
I am a bit surprised to read in bullet points about Turkey and Greece about teams supposedly supported by the nobility. Is that true? Or is a more bourgeois upper class meant by that? Hobbitschuster (talk) 18:36, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * "Nobility" is an inaccurate word when referring to republics. The Ottomans and the Greek kingdom would have had a nobility; nowadays I imagine Greece and Turkey have an upper class like anywhere else, but nothing more. Whether or not it's true that the wealthier / more powerful classes support specific teams in those countries, I couldn't tell you, but "nobility" is certainly the wrong word. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:23, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The wording explicitly refers to historic associations. And Greece had a king into quite recent times. I also very much doubt your assertion of there never being a nobility in Republics. Just think of Venice or the United Provinces. Both Republics run by the nobility. Hobbitschuster (talk) 12:15, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The nobility is, by definition, aristocracy, and the existence of an aristocracy nearly always entails a monarchy of some sort, unless the aristocratic titles are merely historic or symbolic continuations with no legal status attached to them, as many modern European republics have. The wording in the article to me implies the traditional class associations with teams are ongoing, but that may not be the case. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 13:48, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Tell the thing about no nobility existing in e.g. Germany to the likes of the Yellow Press (especially their weekly and monthly outlets) who still seem to bow as much to the second estate as ultra religious types now to the first. Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:39, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Expand this article
I was wandering if we could expand this article to include other continents. While it is true that the standard of play in Europe is higher than everywhere else, there are also many other countries where football is deeply ingrained in the local culture, and rivalries between local clubs are just as charged as the ones in Europe. Brazil, Argentina, Mexico and Egypt are some of those I can come up with right now, and I would say the Kolkata Derby in India probably ranks pretty highly as well in terms of intensity. The dog2 (talk) 21:09, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Why not create articles for Association football in South America, Association football in Africa, and Association football in Asia? Ground Zero (talk) 01:46, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
 * We could, but I'm not sure there is enough content to justify all those individual articles apart from the South American and maybe the African one. The dog2 (talk) 02:17, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "All those individual articles?" I suggested three.
 * A short, specific article is more useful to the reader than a meandering, omnibus one. Ground Zero (talk) 02:28, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Mexico is in North America, not South America, so I presumed you forgot that one. I'm happy to consolidate it into Association football in Latin America though. Of course, we could in theory have a Association football in North America article, but soccer isn't popular in the United States of Canada, so creating one article just for Mexico seems a bit overkill.

 * Here's a compromise I can suggest. We can create an article just called Association football, but retain this article as a separate one, with a link to it in that new article. We can sort the other countries by continent in that article, and we can create the individual continental article when one of those sections gets too long. How does that sound? The dog2 (talk) 02:42, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay. Ground Zero (talk) 02:53, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

England - "Touts" illegal?
I was going to add the following under the notes in England, but wanted a second opinion, as to it's accuracy before doing so.

"Do not buy tickets from unknown sources, 'resold' football tickets are generally illegal in the UK, and 'touts' outside the ground are breaking the law."

I've seen mention that there are also some European level anti-tout rules as well, is this true? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:10, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
 * The rule is generally (though I don't know whether that is legally enforced) that tickets cannot be resold above their original purchase value... Hobbitschuster (talk) 20:29, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Association football in Europe


text:
Talk:Foreign exchange

Is this really necessary? Isn't the Money page enough? (WT-en) Jpatokal 03:28, 2 June 2006 (EDT)

 * Sapphire was just replacing spam with a template -- I'm not sure he cares. I'll redirect.  If anyone thinks forex is a worthwhile topic on its own, they can replace the redirect with an actual article. - (WT-en) Colin 03:31, 2 June 2006 (EDT)

 * I agree with you. I didn't know Money was already created. I was just trying to salvage an article created by a spammer. Should we redirect? - (WT-en) Andrew Haggard (Sapphire) 03:33, 2 June 2006 (EDT)

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

title: Talk:Foreign exchange


text:
Talk:Forest Grove

''I've moved the following content here cause it doesn't quite jibe with our Project:Goals and non-goals and Project:Manual of style. Specificly, we try to format things consistantly and avoid the first person... That said, it's got a ton of great information. much of which I think can be copied back into the article template and some of which may need some tweaking. I hope the contributor also considers becoming a Project:Docent since s/he has such great insider knowlege.... Of course, lemme know if there are any questions/comments! (WT-en) Maj 23:10, 5 August 2006 (EDT)''

There are two Forest Groves: the one gleaming in the resplendent gloss of Pacific University pamphlets and the one burgeoning with spiritual and intellectual poverty. Physically, the town is not much larger than a mining camp that overgrew its boundaries in the late 1800's, and literally the town began as a crossroads between mining camps purging copper from the foothills of the Cascades. Furthermore, the town became populated by the outlying religious farming communities of Verboort and Gaston, evolving into today's attempt at reconcilitation between the suburban environment of Beaverton and the former fur-trapping outpost of Timber.

Currently, Pacific University, Oregon's oldest college, maintains dominance over the broken spirited community. It is as typical to witness schizophrenics stumbling through university commons with bottles of poorly concealed malt liquour, as it is to see college students stagger through government housing complexes with bottles of Wild Turkey and poorly concealed disdain for all they encounter. Certainly, Forest Grove serves as an excellent example of social and racial stratification, housing white college students and professors while keeping minorities under lock, key, and behind a two foot wall in the city of Cornelius. In the dual nature of this humble and humiliating town we also find diverse souls in exile, stuck to the firmament and begging for rich loam. Jews are ostracized, as are african-americans, mexicans, and even asian-americans. The only exception are Hawaiians and persons of polynesian desent, whom are worshipped by the University for their willingness to pay 21,000 dollars a year for a tepid and brackish education.

Commercially, the town obtains most of its revenue through alcohol sales, as the food is of the quality one discovers in a prison or a psychiatric ward (food poisoning from local restaurants remains a tragically uncorrected problem). Otherwise, the downtown area boasts a wide array of antique stores, for it is standard practice by shop owners to buy out furniture and valuables from the elderly while they lay on their death beds in Jennings McCall assisted living center. If not for the elderly or for college students, the town would die financially. Additionally, the few banks in the area struggle so visibly at meeting their quotas that fraud is prevelant and rampant. One college student named Mr. Hoffman attempted to found his own bank after a personal demonstration, suffice to say Mr. Hoffman is no longer amoung the living.

Besides the college and the commercial sector, the town is home to a Grand Masonic Lodge, that operates under the auspices of a business. Linking it to the West Gate by a community of Masons, their force on the town maintains a truely disgusting effect. The moral and spiritual ramparts of the town are non-existance, by virtue of a close relationship to the secret society, which subsumes wealth and young bodies like a maniacal Moloch devouring through the resistant and open-hearted. Truely disparaging is the fact that cocaine use is rampant through out the town, particularly in the Masonic lodges. It is not uncommon to witness the mayor waltzing through the streets in a frenzy early in the morning, white snot dripping from his nose and his pupils as wide as dinner plates. Truely, the Masons have wrought nothing but starvation of the spirit on the town.

On the other hand, Forest Grove serves as the perfect atmosphere for lovers, in that a boy may find a girl to be gorgeous and ephemereal in contrast to the stark disgust of setting. Romance is often the only way to alleviate real and imagined sufferings, and this holds truer for the town of Forest Grove. Fall in love, but upon the production of children, a terrible loss, for the Masons will educate them in summer camps and force them to watch one unfortunate child get hacked to pieces by a well-trained torture artist. Still, in the depths of hell, romance blossoms and is made all the more beautiful.

My advice to persons who unceremoniously discover themselves trapped in the town of Forest Grove is to fight like tomorrow will never come, to embrace the bravery of the sword with an iron heart, to hack your way from the oily pits of rural despair with the mammoth tusk of truth and courage. The roads are disorientating and filled with pick-up trucks boasting machine-guns, so escape by vehicle is rarely effective. Rather, I recommend walking through the middle of traffic, thereby stunning the crowd with your knight-like resolve...but otherwise for visitors, the only advice I can really give is not to remain for you will hate there like you have never hated before, and if you remain long enough to need a job, you will work as if you were rowing in a slave's galley.

title: Talk:Forest Grove


text:
Talk:Formosa (Argentina)

Re: (WT-en) OldPine - In fact, according to disambiguation rule #1, if two places are on the same level of the geographical hierarchy (e.g. both are cities), we should put the country of each in parentheses after their names. Therefore, this article should be a disambiguation page with links to Formosa (Argentina) and Formosa (Brazil) (instead of Formosa (Goiás)), right? -- (WT-en) Ricardo (Rmx) 22:39, 29 October 2006 (EST)
 * Damned if I know. I would think the disambiguation page should be Formosa. Use your judgement, I'm going to sleep now. (WT-en) OldPine 22:43, 29 October 2006 (EST)
 * Oh, this is tricky. I guess we should probably have Formosa (province), Formosa (city, Argentina) and Formosa (Brazil). We'd also have Formosa (country) redirecting to Taiwan. All of them referred to from Formosa, a disambiguation page. Anyone into a puzzle tonight? 8-) (WT-en) Ricardo (Rmx) 22:57, 29 October 2006 (EST)
 * Well, it works the way it's set up now. Formosa (city) is not really needed. I have to admit, I'm not feeling too confident about how it's supposed to be. I suspect the country is just being called Taiwan and the reference to Formosa for that can just point there. (WT-en) OldPine 23:02, 29 October 2006 (EST)

title: Talk:Formosa (Argentina)


text:
Talk:Formula One

Race-specific information of the "getting in and away" type should be in the articles themselves, not here. This should just provide more generic information... (WT-en) Jpatokal 02:39, 21 Oct 2005 (EDT)

Fair enough - not sure about the Monaco stuff - whether it should go here or in Monaco itself (WT-en) Hkpatv 06:10, 21 Oct 2005 (EDT)

Have moved the sleep & travel info to Monaco section, but left the race info here, didn't want to overwhelm the Monaco page with tips for GP fans - also linked the Monaco page to here (WT-en) Hkpatv 06:19, 21 Oct 2005 (EDT)

To Guide Status
User:Ordovician442 has made a lot of good edits to this article, such that it may be a Guide already. The listings are slightly different in appearance from the usual, though that's fine to me. What, if anything, do you think needs to be added or changed for this article to be a Guide? Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:23, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure I like the format of the "Grand Prix locations" section anymore. Why wouldn't we want these listings to use normal listing templates? The "contact" tab is particularly bothering me. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:34, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

title: Talk:Formula One


text:
Talk:Forney

Still need
See:

List attractions that people come to this city for, such as museums, palaces, churches, temples, historical buildings, squares, parks, monuments, statues, streets, zoos, etc. You can also note here general information about attractions, such as discount tourist admission passes, need for a guide, weather warnings, good walking routes, general areas to hang out in, etc.

 * Name of Attraction, Address (extra directions if necessary), phone number (email, fax, other contact if possible), . Days and times open. One to five sentences about why this attraction is worth seeing, things to pay special attention to, warnings, notes, historical or other background information. $entryprice (extra price info).

Eat
Brady's Burgers

Chick-Fil-A

Chili's

Christina's

Whataburger

Subway

Panda Express

Dairy Queen

Napolli's Italian

Contact
(WT-en) Jdblundell 03:13, 8 February 2012 (EST)

This needs work
This one needs some work. Doesn't meet the formatting and information is incomplete. Changed this from usablecity to outline for now. - Xltel (talk) 20:21, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Forney


text:
Talk:Fortaleza

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

Maps on city bus routes
I have drawn a number of google maps on city bus routes, mostly for my own personal reference. Due to some Wikivoyage policies, I cannot link to these from the article. I hope that someone with more time and/or skills than myself could convert these into an acceptable format.--(WT-en) Mariusm98 06:32, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Did you get GPS traces of bus routes, or just copied the bus routes from some other map? If you have raw GPX files, I could use them.
 * I've been working on the OpenStreetMap map of Fortaleza. I gathered a bit more data while I was there last week. It needs a lot more basic street coverage before we start adding bus routes to the data though.
 * -- (WT-en) Harry Wood 21:14, 5 January 2010 (EST)

 * I have simply followed the local transport authorities' description of the routes, as found here
 * http://www.etufor.ce.gov.br/sit_web/itinerarios.aspx
 * and then drawn them into google maps. Absolutely no GPS involved.
 * (WT-en) Mariusm98 16:29, 17 July 2010 (EDT)

Good Information
I lived in Fortaleza for 6 months and learned the area pretty well. Whoever wrote this article knows his stuff. I would also probably add that the areas around Dragão do Mar can be dangerous at night, but as long as you stay within the main plaza (which also has armed guards walking around), you'll be fine. —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 24.252.35.195 (talk • contribs)

 * Please feel free to plunge forward and add what you think is missing from the article. – (WT-en) Vidimian 06:59, 2 December 2010 (EST)

DotM/OtBP nom?
This article is classed as a Guide, but is it ready for a front-page feature nom? It looks like it could use a few more well-chosen photos and some copy editing (e.g., I think this means Subway is sharing the space, but "cohabiting" means living together and refers to people: "Babagula, more sandwiches, playground for children. Subway is cohabiting."). I also changed some external links in the deprecated footnote style to front-linked, but I may have missed some, and some external links still in the article might not be in keeping with external links. What else? Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:58, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

 * Maybe new banner? I don't find the port too inviting. Jjtkk (talk) 09:48, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

 * Yeah, that's an improvement. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:21, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Let's change the banner, says the creator of it. The port can maybe be reused in Ceará? ϒpsilon (talk) 11:02, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Absolutely, given that that article has no banner. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:37, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Map
Since the map already constituted an entire screen of the article, I widened it and recentered it so as to include the Praia do Futuro, which seemed important, as it's described in the article as "the most attractive urban beach". I think this is absolutely the largest number of POIs that can be shown on one screen of a map, as resetting the zoom level to 13 would cause a whole bunch of POIs to be behind yellow plus signs. My only question is whether the map on the page is now such a large file that it will make it difficult to download the article on cell phones, but if that were the case, surely a page-sized map wouldn't load, and this onscreen map covers enough POIs to make that step unnecessary except when you want to see the airport or a few other POIs that are off the map.

What do you all think? Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:20, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, last night when I first saw it, it was so huge in my screen that got my browser a horizontal roll bar, not very sightly. Today I have no horizontal bar but still lots of yellow plus signs. I happen to like big dynamic maps onscreen, and for me, a map of this size can be said "non plus ultra". Cannot comment on cell phones, as I never see maps when I go "mobile" on our pages. Ibaman (talk) 12:50, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

 * That map is absolutely too large, the largest one on the whole site, and unjustifiably so. The city doesn't even have the peculiar east-west linear orientation that necessitates centering. In trying to show the maximum number of non-collapsed POIs, if there were a mandate strong enough to chase everything else off the screen and go full-screen to achieve that, then we'd be going full width and height like that for every large city article we've got, but with dynamic zoomable maps, there is no need for us to go that far. This one at right is entirely sufficient and fully in keeping with the way we've done maps across the site so far. I'm going to put it in the article at this more standard size, and I hope that's okay, because if we're going to blast it full volume like that, I think we need some consensus for that kind of exception here first. Texugo (talk) 13:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, the map server seems to be on the fritz again, so I can't see the map you added. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
 * OK, now I can see the huge regional map you restored. I think it ill-serves the traveller. It's OK if you don't want a map file as large as I made it last night, but with the caveat that I haven't been to the area, it seems to me that a map that covers some of the city center at zoom level 14 is much more useful than this. Rather than this, I'd almost prefer eliminating the map from the article to save loading time and substituting a "click here" button for a popup map. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:58, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

title: Talk:Fortaleza


text:
Talk:Fort Carson

vfd discussion
I'm not convinced Fort Carson should have an article. Unless I'm missing something, it's simply a military base with no attractions or amenities for the traveler. Would someone care to make a case for it before I put it up for VFD? -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 23:35, 16 September 2006 (EDT)

Fort Carson

 * Not an article. Fort Carson is a military post that is not open to travelers unless they're on official military business.  Delete or redirect to Colorado Springs. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 19:40, 17 September 2006 (EDT)
 * Redirect ~ 203.144.143.6 05:56, 18 September 2006 (EDT)
 * Redirect to Colorado Springs. -- (WT-en) Ryan 17:23, 27 September 2006 (EDT)

title: Talk:Fort Carson


text:
Talk:Fort Collins

I was unable to connect at the McDonalds at Drake & College tonight. Would be curious to hear about others' experiences. <>< (WT-en) tbc 01:24, 9 Feb 2005 (EST)

We didn't even try, because the sign on the door said it was a Wayport location, and that you had to pay. -- jafo

They give away time when you buy stuff there. <>< tbc

Measured Dazbog data rates: 414kbps up 918kbps down. <>< (WT-en) tbc 23:38, 8 Mar 2005 (EST)

title: Talk:Fort Collins


text:
Talk:Fort Langley

I've been thinking we should merge this article with the Langley (British Columbia) article, mostly for a couple of reasons: I'm proposing to copy the content from this page to the Langley article and then redirect this article to Langley as well. Any thoughts, objections? (WT-en) Shaund 00:07, 22 March 2010 (EDT)
 * it's a day trip kind of destination from Vancouver and area (if there are any accommodation options, they're limited to a one or two B&Bs), and
 * it's not a separate municipality -- Fort Langley is part of the Township of Langley, which is covered in the Langley (British Columbia) article.

title: Talk:Fort Langley


text:
Talk:Fort Lauderdale

Nonsense
"Fort Lauderdale can be very safe but there are some parts of town you should probably avoid if you are on foot at night. Like all cities, you should ask advice on what areas are safe and what to avoid. The areas likely to be frequented by the tourists, along the beach, shopping along Las Olas and down town are safe. This would be the NE and SE parts of the city. You should use more caution if the address is on the West side of the city NW or SW. The intersection of Andrews Ave and Broward Blvd designates the NW NE SW SE sections of the city. Avoid the NW and SW areas, especially at night. The central part of Broward County West of Andrews Ave to the Florida turnpike is not a place for tourists. Suburban cities that should be avoided include Lauderdale Lakes, Lauderhill and especially Sistrunk."

All of this is nonsense. There are some homeless people, like there are in every major city, but it hasn't been a huge crime central since the late 90s, early 00s. Lauderdale Lakes and Lauderhill are just residential areas that happen to be majority black, with no significant pockets of crime. This BS is dipped in racism. —The preceding comment was added by 165.225.32.69 (talk • contribs)

 * You obviously have current information about the city, so plunge forward and make the necessary edits. Thanks in advance. (Also, on talk pages, please sign your posts by typing 4 tildes [~] in a row at the end of each post.) Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:53, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Fort Lauderdale


text:
Talk:Fort McMurray

image does not work. --130.111.98.200 14:47, 24 October 2008 (EDT)

Fort McMurray
Our page on Fort McMurray is suddenly getting 100-150 page views daily, up from almost nothing, due to the current wildfire situation. At some point we're going to need to determine which of these places are still standing, but at the moment that's a moving target. K7L (talk) 13:00, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Back down to about 10 per day, which is more than before the fires but not much. Powers (talk) 01:12, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Fort McMurray


text:
Talk:La Fortuna

Tabaconcito Hot Springs
Some one deleted it from the article, I do not understand why. It is a great place to enjoy the warm water Tabacon river with out the need to pay a single penny. There is more informtion about the place in http://superbackpackers.blogspot.com/. There are no official guides or government published sites that talk about this place. (WT-en) Daniel32708 14:54, 27 January 2009 (EST)daniel32708

title: Talk:La Fortuna


text:
Talk:Fort Washington

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

Comments
I have a few issues about what is being written here at the moment. - (WT-en) Huttite 06:03, 18 March 2009 (EDT)

Wikipedia copyright violation
The text copied from Wikipedia is a copyright violation. Simply ammending the text does not fix the original issue, but only compounds it. And some of it is still a copyright violation, even after being ammended! Frankly, if I want to know about the history of Fort Washington I would be better off going and reading the Wikipedia article. The changes that have been made actually have removed all the historically significant information and the article is the poorer for it. Since the purpose of a copyright notice is to obtain a copyright release, and no release has been forthcoming, even though the page has been edited, I can only presume that the contributor does not hold or claim copyright, so the copyrighted text should be removed. The most effective way to do this is to delete the History section and distribute the facts into the rest of the article. - (WT-en) Huttite

Template headings
Template headings are to serve as a guide for what we write about. They should not be deleted. If you cannot fill out the template sections then it suggests that Fort Washington does not deserve to be an article and should be deleted. - (WT-en) Huttite 06:03, 18 March 2009 (EDT)

Focus
So much of what has been written so far is not about Fort Washington but is really about other places. If you want to write about those places the write about them in articles about those places, not Fort Washington. Don't distract me with irrelevant information that is not about Fort Washington, tell me about Fort Washington. In an article about Fort Washington, focus on Fort Washington! This is a travel guide, tell me why I should go to Fort Washington, not why I should avoid or leave it. - (WT-en) Huttite 06:03, 18 March 2009 (EDT)

Get out section
I have moved everything I thought was about other places into the get out section. It would be a good idea to merge that information into the other articles, or write new ones about those places if need be, rather than not writing about Fort Washington in this article. - (WT-en) Huttite 06:03, 18 March 2009 (EDT)

title: Talk:Fort Washington


text:
Talk:Fort Wayne

Comments
Probably one of the more sarcastic articles I've read on Wikivoyage. Pretty funny, though.

From a Fort Wayne native, whoever wrote this article was dead on. You will never see a tourist in Fort Wayne... unless for a funeral, wedding, or simply trying to get somewhere other then the 'Fort'. Such a pity, seeing that it's the 2nd largest city in Indiana.

title: Talk:Fort Wayne


text:
Talk:Fort Worth

The eat section here needs serious help! I have here a very incomplete list of places that need to be added, at the very least a representative of each category should be present. People do think about things other than price ranges when deciding where to eat!

Mexican: Uncle Julio's, Benito's, La Playa Maya, Fuzzy's Tacos, Tres Jose's, Lanny's Alta Cocina Mexicana, La Familia,

Salvadorian: Gloria's,

French: Saint-Emilion,

Italian: La Nonna Tata, Bella Italiia,

Vegetarian: Spiral Diner,

Southwestern: Bonnell's, Reata, Michael's,

Eclectic: Central Market, Chef Point Cafe (Watauga gas station), Sapristi,

Sushi: Pirana Killer Sushi,

Seafood: Daddy Jack's 66.169.155.226 13:53, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

title: Talk:Fort Worth


text:
Talk:Fountain Valley

Vandalism?
OK, there was a lot of silly stuff in there, but eg. the restaurant info would still be useful. Somebody with time to spare might like to extract the nuggest from here. (WT-en) Jpatokal 00:00, 19 October 2006 (EDT)

 * It was two people: a vandal and a contributor. The contributor made this change which confused me into thinking it was two vandals.  I think the whole "Shadow Pig of Green Valley" needs some ellaboration lest it baffle the intended readers. -- (WT-en) Colin 04:40, 19 October 2006 (EDT)

The Post Office, Police Station and City Hall entertaining for weeks? Give me a break.

title: Talk:Fountain Valley


text:
Talk:Four Corners

Not a destination
I question whether this article belongs here. No way is this dinky little park a destination; not only can you not sleep there, you can't spend more than about 20 minutes there without retracing your steps. However, it's "iconic" to some small extent and maybe should be grandfathered in with an article. Opinions? -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 16:03, 12 August 2006 (EDT)

 * Agree, I think it should just be mentioned in the "See" or "Get out" section of the relevant towns that you would access it from... definitely doesn't need an article... (WT-en) - Cacahuate 18:38, 24 February 2007 (EST)

 * Disagree. Small isn't a disqualification. Four Corners is still a cartographic curiosity, even if it doesn't have much to offer. I'm imagining a minuscule guide about the length of (WT-en) cacahuate's Tobacco Caye. (WT-en) WineCountryInn 22:37, 27 January 2009 (EST)

Save an Endangered Article
This article has been granted a temporary stay of execution of two weeks. If it's not in working order by February 10, 2009, someone will summarily delete this article out of existence. If you have any creative ideas on how to save the Four Corners, now is the time to contribute. Personally, living in Colorado, I'd hate to live in a three cornered state. ;) Admittedly, this article is a bit of a conundrum. There's not a hell of a lot to do here, and yet, "Four Corners" is a term used so universally within the region. If you've been to the area before, please tell me your stories/information to make this a better article. (WT-en) WineCountryInn 00:38, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Mesa Verde Tours
To meet our inclusion criteria, this company needs to have a physical office address. Otherwise I think we need to delete it. (WT-en) Texugo 01:18, 28 January 2009 (EST)
 * Done! (WT-en) WineCountryInn 11:35, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Stay healthy
I don't really think anyone is going to stay at this site long enough to warrant warnings about dehydration and sunburn. These warnings likely belong in the region section if anywhere. (WT-en) Texugo 00:37, 29 January 2009 (EST)
 * I'll pare it back to a minimal one or two lines. Thanks! (WT-en) WineCountryInn 11:13, 29 January 2009 (EST)

 * Actually you might want to just remove the section entirely - since this article is using the Project:Small city article template and "Stay Healthy" isn't a standard heading for that template, if there isn't much information to include it's probably better to just leave it off. In general, "Stay Healthy" is only for places with important health concerns ("Destination X has recently seen an outbreak of cholera, and the drinking water may not be safe.") or for large regions. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 11:30, 29 January 2009 (EST)
 * Deleted, with a few sentences in the "Understand" section, instead. Thanks for the feedback. (WT-en) WineCountryInn 12:02, 29 January 2009 (EST)

National Park or Small City Template?
As Four Corners is a Monument, shouldn't it follow a National Parks template rather than a Project:Small city article template? What do you think? (WT-en) WineCountryInn 18:28, 29 January 2009 (EST)

Why Four Corners is a Destination
Since this issue may arise again about Four Corners, since it is a limited destination where you can't sleep as per Project:What is an article? policy, here is the debate and consensus that was reached during January 2009's Project:Votes_for_deletion. For posterity's sake (since at some point this text will be archived at "Votes for Deletion"), I have posted the full transcript of that discussion. (WT-en) WineCountryInn 11:55, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Four Corners

 * Delete - In case you don't already know, Four Corners is a small landmark in the middle of nowhere where four states meet at the same point. While it is an attraction, it's hardly a destination worthy of it's own article and should just be mentioned as an attraction in the Get out sections of the nearby towns (which I've already taken care of). There was already some agreement towards getting rid of it (see Talk:Four Corners), but no action was taken, so I decided to go through the formal process here to get rid of this stub once and for all. (WT-en) PerryPlanet Talk 22:23, 27 January 2009 (EST)

 * Redirect. While not article-worth the site is noteworthy, and due to its popularity I suspect that if we delete it then it will be recreated by another contributor in the future.  To avoid that scenario a redirect makes sense - the most logical redirect target seems to be Navajo Nation, which contains and administers the park, although if anyone has a better target then I'd be fine with using it. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 22:31, 27 January 2009 (EST) Keep.  User:(WT-en) WineCountryInn did a great job of turning this into a useful article, so there is no reason to get rid of that work. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:58, 31 January 2009 (EST)
 * (Slaps forehead) Of course! The Navajo Nation! And here I was thinking we wouldn't be able to redirect it, but the Navajo Nation article would be perfect. Okay, I support a redirect. ' (WT-en) PerryPlanet Talk 23:10, 27 January 2009 (EST)
 * Hold off on that, please! I plan at taking a whack at the article at some point. In the back of my mind, I was imagining a collaboration of the Four Corners Wikivoyage users, an effort between you, User:(WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill and me to save this stub from itself. Four Corners is still a cartographic curiosity, even if it doesn't have much to offer. I'm imagining a short, oh so short guide about the length of (WT-en) cacahuate's Tobacco Caye. (WT-en) WineCountryInn 22:34, 27 January 2009 (EST)
 * The problem is that I don't think there's any way you could get the Four Corners article to the length of Tobacco Caye. Virtually everything useful you could say about the Four Corners site has already been said in this article. You could add some directions and a picture, but that's about it and it still wouldn't be nearly enough. Anything useful that can be said about the site can easily be said in the Get out sections of the nearby towns. (WT-en) PerryPlanet Talk 23:19, 27 January 2009 (EST)
 * Doing some preliminary scrounging around, I have found a decent public domain photo and enough adequate information to save this turkey. I think a 700-800 word "History" section under "Understand", as well as a better write up of the other sections will grow it into a usable guide. It's actually got some interesting history behind it. Besides, the article does a woefully inadequate job about explaining how "Four Corners" describes a wider region of the Southwest. (Not analogous with Wikivoyage's regional definitions, but still widely used). (WT-en) WineCountryInn 23:36, 27 January 2009 (EST)
 * 700-800 words?!? That alone would be about three times as long as the Wikipedia article on the monument. Four Corners might have some interesting history, but I wonder if Wikivoyage would be the right place for such detailed history (as compared to say, Wikipedia), considering that we are just a travel guide. But if you're confident that you can make something out of this article, I am willing to cancel this nomination and wait to see what you come up with, and then we can decide whether or not to keep it at a later date. Would anyone else object to this? (WT-en) PerryPlanet Talk 23:52, 27 January 2009 (EST)
 * I don't see why we shouldn't let Mr or Ms Wine take a stab on a write up, if it fails we can always put the information in a nearby town, and I've been quite impressed with his/her ability to write good guides so far. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) Talk 23:56, 27 January 2009 (EST)
 * Thanks, (WT-en) Stefan (sertmann)! It'll take a little research. But give me the full two weeks and I'll try to hammer it into something interesting. (WT-en) WineCountryInn 00:08, 28 January 2009 (EST)

 * First Draft Finished - Please take another look at Four Corners. I have upgraded the article to usable. I nominate that this article be removed from the "Deletion" list. Your feedback is appreciated. Thanks, (WT-en) WineCountryInn 17:51, 29 January 2009 (EST)
 * I'm all for that. I'm almost in shock, you just did an absolutely, unbelievably, incredible job on this article! I vote to keep. (WT-en) PerryPlanet Talk 18:56, 29 January 2009 (EST)

 * Keep. Nice. --(WT-en) Inas 21:23, 29 January 2009 (EST)
 * I'm going to play devil's advocate here, and point out that most of the information in the Buy, Eat and Respect sections is general information that should probably go in the Navajo Nation article or in the respective region articles instead. Despite my surprise at how much can actually be said about this attraction and (WT-en) WineCountryInn's fantastic effort in making it look spiffy, I'm still concerned that this article still violates the spirit of our policy against having articles for singular attractions. I think it would be hard to argue that this monument is anything but a very small attraction most travellers won't spend more than an hour at. The argument that "Four Corners" is used by locals to refer to the whole region around it doesn't help anything, since if this were considered a region article then it would create overlap, which violates another of our policies. I'm even a little concerned that the Navajo Nation article is already a form of overlap. (WT-en) Texugo 22:31, 29 January 2009 (EST)
 * Well put and point taken, but to rebut, there are plenty of national parks and monuments that are small, singular destinations and yet immensely popular due to their cultural and historical significance. ( George Washington's Birthplace National Monument in Virginia comes to mind). They aren't written up yet in Wikivoyage because no one has bothered to take the time. If Four Corners were solely a commercial tourist trap like the Big Texan in Amarillo or Casa Bonita in Lakewood, Colorado, I would tend to agree. But it is a monument, and size alone can't be a criterion for eliminating a popular park. Also, if you delete this article, it will only come back from the dead periodically because people expect there to be an article for the geographical locus of this attraction-crowded region. (WT-en) WineCountryInn 22:49, 29 January 2009 (EST)
 * I know that we don't debate policy here, we just follow it, but there are some places that have specific ways of getting in, and things to see, that they just don't seem to belong in the article that they are being visited from. Muir Woods is another classic example.  Sure it is just a single destination, and is an attraction rather than a destination, but the redirect is just wrong.  A whole article could be done on the former, and there is little to write about the latter.  Perhaps this is similar situation. --(WT-en) Inas 23:30, 29 January 2009 (EST)
 * There also comes a time in any taxonomy where it simply breaks down because something defies categorization. Mount Rushmore is a single attraction, with no place to stay. And yet it is featured in the lead photograph on the main page of the United States article and is up for possible inclusion in a revamped Other Destinations section (See Talk:United_States_of_America). A majority of people at Mount Rushmore enter the park, take a picture and leave within an hour, just like at Four Corners. Wikivoyage also has an article about Minuteman Missile National Historic Site, where you go and look at old nukes. Where do you put Four Corners since it is in four states at once, also in two separate national regions, four state sub-regions, and could be included in Blanding Utah, Teec Nos Pos, Arizona, and Cortez Colorado, as well as the "Get Out" sections of about two dozen national parks and monuments in the area? It seems tidier to keep the article, as is. (WT-en) WineCountryInn 23:42, 29 January 2009 (EST)
 * In general I'm leaning towards WineCountryInn's view here. Two examples of attraction articles come to mind: Pipe Spring National Monument and Pu'uhonua o Honaunau National Historical Park. In both cases, questions arose about the legitimacy of the articles because they were very small and you can't sleep there. However, they were kept because you could say a lot about the destination and they were quite far from the nearest town. So there was too much material in these articles to seriously consider squeezing them into a Get Out listing. Four Corners is much the same way, except originally I thought you couldn't say much about it (which obviously has been proven wrong). (WT-en) PerryPlanet Talk 00:50, 30 January 2009 (EST)
 * Yes, it seems the Project:What is an article? policy breaks down a bit when a small attraction is located far from any named settlement. It would seem a consensus is developing to allow articles for small but well-known attractions that can't be said to be located within any other destination article.  (WT-en) LtPowers 08:25, 30 January 2009 (EST)
 * The policy doesn't break down, it is overridden by the prime directive that the traveller comes first. If travellers go there, bugger the policy, make it an article. - (WT-en) Huttite 06:51, 31 January 2009 (EST)
 * If it needs to be overridden, I think my point stands that it doesn't adequately address such a situation. (WT-en) LtPowers 09:43, 31 January 2009 (EST)

 * Keep. If I chimed in at the beginning, I would have voted to merge & redirect to Navajo Nation, but it works just fine as a standalone article now because of WCI's work and is anyway a special case because it breaks our geographical hierarchy. In general, though, I think sites such as this that don't merit their own article (for lack of accommodations) and are too far away from other destinations should be described in the region article that contains them under "see." If that description gets too long, create an entire subsection just for it. Only when those two options have been tried and found wanting, I think we should consider giving a "non-destination" its own article. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 00:53, 2 February 2009 (EST)

 * Keep. It could be useful (WT-en) elgaard 19:11, 1 February 2009 (EST)
 * Removed vfd tag from Four Corners article, as this is the 14th day of review, there is a consensus to keep, and no further comments have been generated. (WT-en) WineCountryInn 11:57, 10 February 2009 (EST)

Outcome: Keep. (WT-en) WineCountryInn 16:12, 10 February 2009 (EST)

title: Talk:Four Corners


text:
Talk:Four days in Bangkok

Great job on the itinerary, although personally, I think going to the Grand Palace and Wat Pho on subsequent days is too much — they're quite similar and both extremely touristy.

At any rate, I think we can safely redirect "my" old One day in Bangkok here, since it appears to have been reborn here as Day 2. (WT-en) Jpatokal 11:30, 14 August 2009 (EDT)

 * I think maybe we can split this up into three or four itineraries:
 * One day in Bangkok
 * Yaowarat and Pahurat Tour
 * One Weekend in Bangkok (for Thonburi, Chatuchak, Phayathai Palace and other stuff that can only be done in weekends).
 * The only stuff I got left then is the "Day 1" part. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 09:13, 3 April 2010 (EDT)

Chatuchak
I wouldn't recommend Chatuchak in the afternoons -- it's broiling hot, packed, and many stalls close. Much better to hit it the first thing in the morning and get out by noon. (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:52, 18 August 2009 (EDT)

 * Agreed, it's better in the morning. But the same goes for Taling Chan, so I think they're best visited on separate days. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 09:13, 3 April 2010 (EDT)

title: Talk:Four days in Bangkok


text:
Talk:Four Days in Newport, Rhode Island

Guide?
How come this article is a "guide"? It's very, very full of broken Wikivoyage rules, and totally TOUTY, in my opinion. —The preceding comment was added by 187.36.127.92 (talk • contribs)

VFD discussion

 * Keep (for now). This one was tagged VFD by User:(WT-en) Jc8136 but not listed here (probably due to the horrid database problems the site is now experiencing).  I don't think there is a justification in the current Project:Deletion policy for removing this one unless it sits at outline status for a year.  That said, I've proposed a change to the itinerary article criteria at Project:Itineraries and would be grateful if others could comment on that proposal (not here though please, this page is for article deletion discussions). -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 11:25, 7 March 2012 (EST)
 * *Delete Ryan, thank you for this support, the database issues hindered me to add this vfd here. I vfd'ed that article because it is very promotional for certain local business and not really an itinerary. I think a proper article can stay but i think the editor just did it for marketing and one year free marketing is too long. Otherwise all spammers will start itineraries to avoid deletion. (WT-en) Jc8136 07:47, 28 March 2012 (EDT)

Result: Merge tag added for Newport. See Project:Itineraries. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 17:16, 8 April 2012 (EDT)

title: Talk:Four Days in Newport, Rhode Island


text:
Talk:Four days in the New Hampshire White Mountains

To whom this may concern:

In regards to the qualifications of this page, we, the two original authors, feel as though we have properly addressed and followed the Project:What_is_an_article definitions for an itinerary. Beyond following the basic code format, we have displayed, organized, and published content that follows the guidelines set by the community. An itinerary is defined as "a group of destinations according to a temporal (time) division rather than a spatial one." Our work contains a very clear time line which takes the user to historical places, trails in the wilderness, local shops and entertainment venues within the White Mountain Region. We feel that by consolidating this article with the White Mountain Region page all of the extra information we typed in would be removed as it is not pertinent to that page. The information that we display would lose the "temporal" value that it currently maintains. The content is being displayed in a manner that focuses on the time constraints that a typical vacationing individual would have. It provides guidelines and suggestions for the traveler, much like the general region page would; however the importance of this article comes from the organization that we provided by taking the traveler from point A on one day to point B on another. We feel as though our article is well within the spirit of the attitude of Wikivoyage and we hope that you do not merge our work.

Sincerely,

(WT-en) GoldenWolf 18:34, 25 April 2012 (EDT)Sarah & Justin

 * See Project:Itineraries for some concerns with articles like this one. The information in this article is great, but a major concern is that these types of "X in Y days" articles separate content from where readers are most likely looking (the town and region articles), making for a sub-optimal organization of information. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 19:49, 25 April 2012 (EDT)


text:
Talk:Fox Glacier

does any 1 know how big fox glacier is tall

if u do fanx

Rename to Fox Glacier / Te Moeka o Tuawe
In line with all of our NZ articles that are dual named. -- SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:02, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

 * Are you sure? Should we have dual names for everyplace in Quebec, too, in that case? This is, after all, English-language Wikivoyage. Which of those two names is most used in English? That's the governing principle of Naming conventions. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:17, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
 * The situation isn't comparable to Quebec, because the official name includes both the Maori and the English name side by side (so Aoraki / Mt Cook, Stewart Island / Rakiura etc.), regardless of whichever language it's in. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:39, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Our policy is to use common names, not official names: Florence, not Firenze; Cairo, not al-Qāhirah; Dublin, not Baile Átha Cliath; Munich, not München; Czech Republic, not Czechia. These are the names by which English-speaking travellers know these places. The official names should be mentioned in the lead paragraph. If the commonly used name changes, we will change the article title. Haida Gwaii is now much more common than Queen Charlotte Islands, so we use that. Frobisher Bay is now commonly known as Iqaluit. Ground Zero (talk) 13:35, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
 * My understanding is that usually when you're at the place, it has the dual naming, because technically that's the actual place name. It's different in speech though. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 20:20, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
 * How visible is the Te Moeka o Tuawe name on the ground? The map uses Fox Glacier / Te Moeka o Tuawe for the glacier, but the village is Fox Glacier. Streetview shows just Fox Glacier on the roadsigns. I was in Hokitika in 2019, and I only saw Fox Glacier being used on bus timetables etc. AlasdairW (talk) 21:57, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Banner
Current seems a bit grainy. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 02:58, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The current banner looks grainy, but it is hard to figure out what Banner 1 is showing, even though I've been to Fox Glacier. Ground Zero (talk) 03:56, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
 * It isn't easy to find something that screams Fox Glacier, though. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 04:06, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Fox Glacier


text:
Talk:Foz do Iguaçu

Address of the bus station?

Changed the travel time by bus to Curitiba from 7 to 11 hours. Scheduled times seem to be 10 to 11 hours depending on the service. Lonely Planet says 10. Also added a mention for Catarinense as at least they offer services. I think Pluma should too, but their timetable search showed nothing for a week from now. (WT-en) Lcpitkan 05:28, 8 November 2010 (EST)

title: Talk:Foz do Iguaçu


text:
Talk:Framingham

I removed the "author" section from this article. Once an article's on Wikivoyage, it has many authors. People can see individual contributions on the history page. See also Project:First person pronouns. --(WT-en) Evan 11:53, 17 Dec 2003 (PST)

Boston's pretty big too...
From the article:

Framingham is the largest town in Massachusetts, with a population of more than 67,000.

I thought Boston was the largest city in Massachusetts. -- (WT-en) Sapphire 21:43, 2 October 2006 (EDT)

Framingham is the largest "town" in MA cause we refuse to change the designation to city :-) (WT-en) Dohnutman 21:38 2 October 2006 (EDT)

 * Clever. I hadn't noticed "town". -- (WT-en) Sapphire 21:43, 2 October 2006 (EDT)

I think Framingham is the actually largest "town" in the country cause of this too but I am not 100% (WT-en) Dohnutman 22:39 2 October 2006 (EDT)

title: Talk:Framingham