text:
Talk:Lombok

Lombok Accommodation
It is unfair to have ANY accommodation listed on the main Lombok page. Either the "sleep" section should include all sleep accommodations or none. Senggigi/Mansit is a big enough area to include The Oberoi Lombok, and * Hotel Tugu Lombok and The Anandita. As the Kuta area expands with the new airport, all of the tourist locations must be changed to something like:"Greater Kuta" "Seketong", "Greater Senggigi", etc. Therefore, I put the Oberoi, et. al. into the Senggigi subsection.

 * Fine, we just need to make sure the article scope is defined accordingly. A map would be nice... (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:06, 30 June 2009 (EDT)

It doesn't make sense to repeat all of the other sections such as "Getting There", etc. are repeated in each sub-area of Lombok. (WT-en) BenJohnson

 * Every article on Wikivoyage has the same standard sections, and "Get in" needs to cover how you would get there from nearby places. So the basic idea is that Lombok tells you how to get to the island (plane, ferry, etc), and then Senggigi tells you how to get to Senggigi from the airport, port, etc. (WT-en) Jpatokal 22:06, 30 June 2009 (EDT)

Add a link
I would like to add a link to "Lombok by Bicycle 2004", http://users.chariot.net.au/~gloria/indonesia.htm

but I don't yet know how ! Any advice for a new user ?

 * If it's an event, go ahead and add it under "Do" -- be sure to include all the needed information here, not just the link! Check out Project:External links and Project:Where you can stick it for more! Hope this helps, (WT-en) Majnoona 02:13, 18 June 2006 (EDT)

 * Thanks Maj ..I think I have added the link OK ..not sure how to make Automatic sig for this post however :( ../ Textbot 2006.jun 18

Use ~ to sign your comments. Maj, explained this on your talk page for future reference. - (WT-en) Andrew Haggard (Sapphire) 02:32, 18 June 2006 (EDT)

--- tks Sapphire ..here goes >> (WT-en) Textbot 02:41, 18 June 2006 (EDT)

Ghost hotel
No point listing places that are closed... (WT-en) Jpatokal 00:12, 25 November 2007 (EST)

 * Nusa Bunga, Klui, Central Lombok, tel: +62 0370 693035 fax: +62 370 693036 web: www.nusabunga.com . The hotel is located 4 kilometers north of Senggigi at the southern end of the beach at Kelui.

Still closed but has a new owner and is currently under renovation (oct 2009)
 * bungalows are now demolished, the road frontage fenced off and the site is still under renovation in January 2010 (WT-en) felix 13:23, 26 January 2010 (EST)

 * Re-opening as JeevaKlui (sic) with planned opening date of 1 august 2010. Rebuilt as a small boutique resort hotel(WT-en) felix 04:29, 12 July 2010 (EDT)

 * Opened on august 1, 2010 (WT-en) felix 10:22, 2 August 2010 (EDT)

Dead link
The link for cycling in Lombok returns a permission denied when I click on it. Has the status changed since the add?

Good work on the Lombok articles
Some excellent work on the main Lombok article and Senggigi in the past 24 hours. This has been done by an anonymous user on roaming Speedy IP 125.167.150.126. Whoever you are, would be good if you registered here as this same IP is being used by others also. Really good work and please keep it up! --(WT-en) Burmesedays 21:46, 7 October 2009 (EDT)

Structure of the Lombok Articles
(moved from Talk:Senggigi)

Structural proposal from Felix505 for this article and others in Lombok
Felix, you are dead right with your understanding of official administrative divisions. I don't see how that is appropriate for a travel guide though? And it would massively over-complicate I think. Do you think you could write fully developed articles for each of those 30 odd locations you mention, plus the 4 regional guides for each of 4 regions you propose, bearing in mind the comments about what goes where and repetition etc on your talk page? I think the current structure of Lombok as a region and then each destination as simply that, is more advisable. By all means add more destinations, but when doing so bear in mind that: Once again, I must thank you for all your efforts and please keep it up. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 23:11, 9 October 2009 (EDT)
 * each destination must be able to support a fully developed article with See, Do, Sleep, Eat etc
 * no repetition of background information already in higher level articles
 * aside from Senggigi, Mount Rinjani and Gili Islands, the existing Lombok articles for well known destinations are still under-developed and short of even the usable bar.

 * Agree with Burmesedays. Felix555, just to underline the point, on Wikivoyage we don't really give a shit about administrative divisions; what matters is what makes sense for the traveler, and I think the four-way split you propose for South, Central-Eastern, Northern and Western is quite sensible. (WT-en) Jpatokal 01:16, 10 October 2009 (EDT)

 * Those regional divisions do make sense but I think 4 regional articles would be very tough to do in this case. I am struggling to see how Lombok would support four different sub-regions. IMHO, there is not nor will there be enough destination collateral, hence my thought that Lombok direct -> destinations would be far more manageable.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 01:40, 10 October 2009 (EDT)

 * In response to -Burmesedays-
 * Good heavens I am not for a moment suggesting all those places have a page, that would be ridiculous at this time an without doubt for some time yet into the distant future.Can't agree more with what you say here Burmesedays:
 * each destination must be able to support a fully developed article with See, Do, Sleep, Eat etc
 * no repetition of background information already in higher level articles
 * aside from Senggigi, Mount Rinjani and Gili Islands, the existing Lombok articles for well known destinations are still under-developed and short of even the usable bar.

 * On your third point it might be time to give consideration to a further region. Maybe Tangung needs to be carved off and work started on building a page with a separate emphasis suiting that different region.
 * The Tangung 'area' that includes Sira, Medana, Tangung and possibly Pemenang and Bangsal do currently fulfil the minimum requirements I think and doing a page for them would alleviate the absurdity of previous information that tended to generalise that area as some sort of northern end of Senggigi, which it most certainly is not. Certainly you can eat/drink/sleep/see/do/buy etc in the Tanjung area and it has some pretty outstanding nearby attractions to which that area is very central ie Rinjani/Sanuru/Bayan and north east coast/Gilli's/Monkey forest and the Gorge on the way through to Ampenan and has the added attraction of a significant resort hotel, a golf course and a new boat marina.

 * I think it would be a mischief to tag it on to Renjani as Tanjung was not looking much like an active volcano the last time I was there and I hope it stays that way. Likewise it is not Gilli Islands although Gilli is most certainly a destination to go to from Tangung.

 * Bangsal is gateway to Gilli's and Pemenang has a market and many other services in addition to being the connecting point to the road to Ampenan with the Monkey forest and Gorge on the way. Further to that the new road connecting Malimbu to the Pemenang-Ampenan road is going to offer an alternative scenic route forming a small triangle with an appex at Pemenang. So hence my detail on possible regions of Lombok for future partitioning with particular emphasis on the west coast as it is currently the main destination..

 * I think it is important to understand there are at least 4 regions (some might even say 5) of Lombok. Further to this administration divisions DO effect tourists at least indirectly.

 * In response to -Jpatoka-:
 * In no way do I suggest rigidly following Lombok's administrative zones and I am not putting them forward as a current template for a Wikipages coverage. I put all that info in there merely to give clarity to the regions and sub-districts of Lombok and how they might develop in the future.

 * One of the main things that motivated me to descend upon the Lombok and Senggigi pages was the geographic confusions in describing Senggigi within the greater west coast context.

 * If Emaar does really go ahead the south needs to be put on the map and it is a popular destination in it's own right already.

 * When the airport goes into service things are going to need some serious attention and it may be prudent to have some forward thinking happening concerning defining the regions in advance of the airport happening.

 * So how about this as a 'current' starting point, starting in the north and working down with the those indicated in bold as 'pages' and those indicated in CAPS as being 'region pages':

 * LOMBOK NTB'>

 * NORTHERN LOMBOK>
 * Renjani and inc (Renjani, Sanura, Gilli Lawang, Gilli Sulat,, Bayan, ObelObel,)

 * WEST LOMBOK>
 * Tangung  inc.  (Tangung, Medana, Sire, Pemanang, Bagsal, Hu/ton Monyet/Malimbu)
 * Gilli Islands inc. ( Gilli T, Gilli M Gilli A}
 * Senggigi  inc.(Mangsit, Senggigi, Batu Bolong, Batu Layar,)  -  (maybe also Kelui/Setangi but I am at a loss as to how)
 * Mataram inc ( Mataram, Ampenan, Cakranegara, Sweta, Nermada)

 * CENTRAL AND EAST LOMBOK>
 * Praya inc. (Selong, Kayangan, Gilli Pentangan, Gilli Pasaran, Gilli Lampu)

 * SOUTH LOMBOK>
 * Kuta inc., ( Kuta, Tangung Aan, Sekotong, Gilli Gede, Southern Beaches)
 * (+ possibly next year - Bandara Udara Internasional Lombok Baru)

 * The bali page seems to provide a pretty good template for moving forward and as they say in Lombok..."better than nothing". I think Wikivoyage "Bali" is a most valuable template and the map/region system has good utility and is easy on the eye. Lombok could certainly use a map in any case or at least a good public domain sat photo with a regional overlay showing significant points. ie Mataram, senggigi, new airport location and similar. A sat photo may be appealing due to the rather interesting 'look' of Rinjani but the block colour a graphic approach is going to be easier on the eye.(WT-en) felix

content for region pages (current limitations)
Sorry -Burmesedays- I did of course see your comments on issues of lack of suitable content for 4 region pages. I am just trying to get some sense into the region structure as a starting point. I think one of my main points here at is the need to consider doing a Tangung page in the immediate future as this situation of Senggigi being used as a generic term for the west coast needs to be fixed and Tangung/Pemenang area really does deserve it's own identity. Later maybe the south has to be looked at with some urgency due to the airport looming up. //Felix-

 * no doubt in my mind that Tanjung needs its own article. As for the regional structure, why not just plunge ahead and then everyone can review later? When you start a page, you will find the relevant templates here (Tanjung would be the small city template for example.  Good luck! Also Felix,. it would be good if you signed your name with a timestamp after each comment on a talk page. The button to do this is on the toolbar to the left of the large dash (or you can manually type 2 dashes and 3 tildes: --~ --(WT-en) Burmesedays 05:21, 11 October 2009 (EDT)

 * Thanks again for the useful advice and tips. (WT-en) felix 11:49, 11 October 2009 (EDT)

 * BTY I think the multiple spontaneous user log-outs may have been a cookie corruption issue as I have at times had to just give up on trying to remain logged in due to the need to keep on re-authenticating. I have done a deep cleanse of all caches, cookies and SOL's and I hope that problem has now gone.(WT-en) felix 01:58, 13 October 2009 (EDT)

Implement the Lombok regional structure
As per Felix505's suggestion let's try a regional structure as follows:
 * North Lombok
 * West Lombok
 * Central and East Lombok
 * South Lombok

I will put this into place today but have other Wikivoyage priorities at the moment, so others will need to assign the destinations to each region and write the articles. Best of luck. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 22:58, 12 October 2009 (EDT)

 * the basics of this are now in place. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 23:59, 12 October 2009 (EDT)

 * Nice work -Burmesedays-. In putting that up and clarifying a starting point we now have at least a structure to move forward with. As time permits I will try and write up some preliminary content for at least the Tanjung area. Anything north of Tanjung-Godang should be included in the Northern Region along with Rinjani as should anything lying inland as that quickly rises to the slopes of Gunung Rinjani.

 * My view is that we also need to define a southern limit for Tanjung. I suggest the southern limit should certainly be no further south than Pandanan (a to the little north of Nipah/Malimbu). Maybe though it should just stop at Bangsal/Pemenang.
 * After thinking about it further and with a little more clarity of thought I think the Tanjung area should logically include Teluk Nare due to it's obvious affiliation with the whole Gili thing and definitely go no further south than that. (WT-en) felix 13:59, 26 January 2010 (EST)

 * The Tanjung part of the coast is also defined by a topographic change from the alluvial flood plains of the area around Pemenang to the quite different terrain and topography of the many bays and prominent headlands that continues along the coast to the south at Batu Layar/Montong where things start to flatten out again to the south west of Gunung Sari. This of course is a topographical effect of Gunung Tampole and Gunung Punikan and of course Rinjani itself.

 * This West Region could then include Huton Monyet (monkey forest, the Pemenang-Ampenan scenic george and winding mountain road and the new road linking across to Malimbu and the west coast road as attractions "to see" on Senggigi page, Tanjung page and Mataram page hence linking their individual identities with both a geographic link as well as the transportation routes linking them together. User:Felix505|felix]] 01:49, 13 October 2009 (EDT)

 * Felix, when replying in a discussion, it is much clearer if you use the colon convention to indent the reply (please see your replies above which I have edited). Then it is much easier to see at a quick glance who is replying to what. Thanks. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 02:07, 13 October 2009 (EDT)

 * OK got that on the indent(WT-en) felix 10:15, 13 October 2009 (EDT)

Taxi pane info regional discriptions and notes on Dengue Fever Outbreak jan 2010
I have been a bit unwell and also very busy so have not been able to further the process described above. However I am going to try and pay it some attention over the next few weeks as time permits. Today I intend to at least try to update the airport taxi pane with the current zone rates. All my airport drive-by or visits have not afforded the opportunity to get a copy of the current info until yesterday. Of course the list is too long to post as it would fill and entire page. There are 23 zones in all. I might try listing all 23 zones with an indicative destination applicable to each zone and then if anyone would like to give comments on culling down to a suitable list we can take it from there pre posting a final version. I will try and complete the blank pane as a starting point on upload that to the 'live' page. Then I will start work on the full 23 zones for a future possibly more comprehensive revision.

On a different topic I post here information current 26 january 2010 that Lombok is experiencing a serious (DHF) Dengue Hemorrhagic Fever outbreak.

The hospitals are full and it is VERY difficult to get a hospital bed and even more difficult to get a private room. Dengue fever is common in Lombok especially at this time of year. Dengue fever is a mosquito borne illness.

It is effecting the West Lombok tourism precincts and other regions. The problem has existed since at least mid-december.

I can speak with some authority on the current situation as I contracted it myself and it was very hard to get a hospital room or bed. Indeed I attempted to get into a hospital myself for several days and could not and eventually lapsed into unconsciousness with a temperatures peaking at 40C-41C and quite low blood platelet levels. Clearly I survived but a 16 year old nephew did not, he was discharged from hospital and died in his family home the next day. Currently I have two friends in hospital here. Accordingly I am aware of the current hospital situation, they are all overflowing and indeed I had to put one friend into a rapidly converted and emptied out office room as there was nothing else available in the hospital.

This is NOT a health crisis and there are no people lining corridors on Gurneys' or anything like that but it is however a serious health issue here at present. I certainly do not want to promote any 'Global War Against Common Sense' like panics here due to this post on the discussion page. This is just an annual outbreak of the same grinding mosquito borne diseas problems that occur throughout the tropics and most especially in the 3rd world.

Anyone already in Lombok or anywhere else in Indonesia and SE Asia or planning to visit there should exercise all normal anti-malarial precautions and use mosquito nets when sleeping and obtain mosquito repellent and use it appropriately. Indonesian Hospitals are usually very well qualified in treating Dengue as it is common throughout Indonesia as well as other tropical areas including SEAsia and northern Australia. Speedy medical intervention is recommended as the potential for severe dehydration and high fever is very dangerous. If diagnosed with DHF or suspected DHF I would recommend rapid local hospital admission to a good local hospital rather than repatriation as the trip home would require reasonably intensive medical supervision and be unnecessarily stressful for the patient. Pulmonary and Cerebral edema are possible complications of Dengue so a sufferer should seek rapid professional medical intervention. There is currently no 'cure' for DHF only medical assistance in mitigating complications. Delaying medical intervention should be avoided as prompt professional intervention significantly mitigates both the risks and the suffering of DHF.

If small bright red spots appear on the body, legs or arms seek immediate medical attention as this may indicate a DHF infection. They are readily distinguishable from insect bites or hives being of a dense red color and they are not normally raised with the skin remaining flat. There are several low grade viruses circulating in Lombok at present (probably arriving with tourists from the northern hemisphere) but they are not serious only lasting for a few days at the most with 'flu and cold' symptoms including a runny nose and headache. However if the symptoms are severe and involve an elevated and enduring fever then seek medical opinion to exclude the possibility of a DHF or Malaria infection.

In the case of severe fever high fluid intakes and electrolyte management is critical. Intravenous infusion of saline solution will assist a Dengue Fever sufferer and would be expected as normal in the treatment of confirmed or suspected Dengue fever. Confirmation is by way of Laboratory analysis of a fresh drawn blood sample. Paracetamol will reduce fever. The use of Aspirin and other NSAID's such as Ibuprofen and Naproxen should be avoided in cases of suspected or confirmed DHF.

Nursing care may be required for a serious case of DHF as the illness is often quite debilitating making it difficult for a patient to self manage or to care for themselves even in a hospital situation. The provision of a 24/7 personal carer is advised unless in a VERY high standard Hospital with plentiful, willing and available nursing staff. If your gums start bleeding rinsing with COLD water may assist.

Depressed Blood Platelet levels in Indonesia are described as 'Thrombos' (it should be over 150 in a normal healthy person, anything down around 100-135 is worrying and certainly requires immediate medical intervention). Blood Pressure (BP) is described as 'Tensi' in Indonesia. Fever is 'Panas' (literally this means -hot-). DHF fevers can reach 40C-41C. Dengue is pronounced 'Den-w e' and sometimes just referred to as "malaria" by local people although of course it is not Malaria but it is a 'Mosquito Borne Disease'. Antibodies-DHF: Anti Dengue Igm (Hasil-result will be negatif or positif) Blood Platelet [Thrombocytes] (PLT) or in Indonesia - [Thrombos] when within the normal range is 150-390…450. PLT under 150 (<150) suggests the presence of a medical problem requiring professional medical attention and that should be sought without delay. When seeking confirmation of (DHF) Dengue Hemorrhagic Fever both PLT and IgM results should be sought by laboritorium analysis to support the observation of supporting symptoms by a suitably qualified medical professional.

Caution is recommended for visiting Lombok at this time, however my personal view is that it is NOT presenting a sufficient reason for a normal healthy person to postpone a visit or to leave the region, just be careful and seek medical attention if suffering very severe body aches, headaches, and high fever. Vomiting and appetite loss may also occur with the onset of DHF but the vomiting is not normally serious or prolonged, appetite loss is however commonly prolonged and dietary intake needs both nursing/carer support and careful management.

Severe vomiting and diarrhoea would normally be attributed gasto-intestinal infections arising from food or water borne bacteria or viral contamination and are common with travellers throughout SE Asia.

Anyone already in Lombok or planning to visit should exercise all normal anti-malarial precautions, use mosquito nets or other mosquito control methods when sleeping, obtain mosquito repellent and use it appropriately.

Locally supplied Minyak Tawon has some insect repellent properties and is not considered poisonous. Indeed it is used medicinally and for treating cuts, abrasions and insect bites. Do not expose to mucous membranes and skin test prior to use. (WT-en) felix 01:36, 26 January 2010 (EST)

 * Hi Felix. Good to see you back and sorry to hear you have been unwell. In your absence, User:(WT-en) Whatsinaname did a lot of good work on Kuta (Lombok) and some on Lembar, but otherwise, not much has changed with the Lombok articles. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 01:42, 26 January 2010 (EST)

Thanks for letting me know I will have a look and see what User:(WT-en) Whatsinaname has done. Great to see some input happening. Best wishes and maybe you can have a look over the taxi zone draft on the Talk page when I get the info up, I will get the basis info per (your) existing draft of destination list onto the main page asap though...cheers (WT-en) felix 02:08, 26 January 2010 (EST)

 * Yes that is a great effort on the Kuta page and a great start on Lembar. Can't say I know much about Lembar myself as I always seem to go there in the dark and most of it remains a mystery to me aside from the obvious. I notice that User:(WT-en) Whatsinaname also did some tidying up on the lombok page with some further cleaning up of some lingering messy artefacts from a fair while back and also cleaning up some of my own sloppy and inappropriate capitalisation and similar. I also note with some amusement that User:(WT-en) Whatsinaname appears to be a north american as the double 'l's were all removed from traveller and similar (traveller-traveler). Well I will take that no further other than to say that the 'correct' spelling is traveller :) I had probably just better keep quiet about the Capitalisations though.
 * I am trying not to laugh as I write this.... I guess until we all start calling it 'American' then we will just have to go on calling it 'English' and while we are still doing that then it is correctly spelt traveller.
 * Certainly I will not be changing them all back though as there are far too many far more serious typos and spelling errors to deal with in the world than worrying about that at the moment.
 * It does make me curious though, is there a wikivoyage spelling 'style' and if so is it UK english or US english?
 * Most times I just mix mine up at random without even noticing but I certainly draw the line using a 'z' instead of an 's'.
 * My own language is at most times admittedly a fairly hopeless mish-mash.
 * I notice that there has been a bit of work done on tidying up a lot of the text since I last had a good look, the page has much improved for it.(WT-en) felix 14:46, 26 January 2010 (EST)

 * I have now put some info into the taxi pane. I have the full list available but upon looking over it whilst compiling the current info into the pane I think it best if I just upload a scanned image onto a talk page or similar. It is literally a page full of destinations within the 23 zones. I cannot do an image upload at this time as all my current attempts only result in repeated requests for a user login accordingly I have given up that idea for the moment. I have not previously uploaded an image into wikivoyage  and so am unfamiliar with the process. As I am logged in already and have logged out and back in again I assume it is a temporary server error and will try again later.

If a destination is missing and someone feels it is important to include it please put a note here and I will endeavour to find the destination on the 'official' list and add it on. (WT-en) felix 14:46, 26 January 2010 (EST)

Regions 2
The exercise of producing a Lombok region map went on the backburner, but I am now re-addressing this and will have a draft map ready soon based on the amended five region structure for the island. Sadly the free sources are not good and a lot of the minor roads will be missing.

 * Map is done and uploaded. Comments please. I have also suggested a number of articles (all redlinked). These are not really speculative, but destinations worthy of an article. Anyone who knows Lombok please just plunge forward.

--(WT-en) Burmesedays 10:31, 29 March 2010 (EDT)
 * Tanjung
 * Senaru
 * Praya
 * Tetebatu
 * Sekotong
 * Tanjung Aan

 * The map look great and changes the look and utility of the page in a very positive way. The colour coding now falls into place well and the whole page is starting to look good.  I have been a bit distracted by things lately but I will try and do something on Tanjung soon.  I already have some photos and some ideas in my head but I have not yet applied anything to a draft page.  The map is somewhat inspiring though:)  (WT-en) felix 02:51, 10 May 2010 (EDT)felix505

broken link to reference article
I have noticed that the academic institution previously hosting SVEN CEDERROTH's article "From Ancestor Worship to Monotheism, Politics of Religion in Lombok" is not currently giving access to his article. As it is an article widely referenced in academic papers I imagine the problem is either temporary or that the article will reappear elsewhere. I have contacted the institution concerned with an enquiry and will update the link as information comes to hand. I have not edited the article to remove the link appearing in the culture section of the lombok article at this time as it may just be a temporary site problem at the university. (WT-en) felix 04:51, 12 July 2010 (EDT)

Lombok - transition to new international/domestic airport
Lombok's new international airport Bandara Internasional Lombok (BIL), (, ICAO:WADL) opened on 1 October 2011. The new airport in Praya has replaced operations at Selaparang International Airport in Mataram. Selaparang Airport was closed for airline operations on the evening of 30 September 2011.

I am working all today and into the night and may not be able to do a suitable transition on all the Lombok articles.

Due to the WT 'purge issues the new page versions are possibly not appearing.

As the current edits contain critical information for arriving and departing passengers it would be wonderful if IB can do something to ensure that only the current newly edited versions are appearing to readers.

I hope that someone at IB can assist with this.

I have sent an email containing the content of this note to dick.bradley@internetbrands dot comThanks--(WT-en) felix 07:08, 1 October 2011 (EDT)

Lombok article set import readiness notes
All pages in the Lombok article group are displaying correctly following the import.

Each article in the set is correctly displaying the source of content:

"This article is derived from the article West Lombok on wikitravel.org/en in its revision from 18:07, 21 December 2011 (UTC). There, it is published under the CC-by-sa 3.0 licence. More details and the full list of contributers (marked by the prefix WT-en) can be found on the associated history page."

 * http://en2.wikivoyage.org/wiki/West_Lombok: no apparent WT identifying content : All images displaying
 * http://en2.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Central_and_East_Lombok: no apparent WT identifying content : All images displaying
 * http://en2.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Gili_Islands: no apparent WT identifying content : All images displaying
 * http://en2.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Gili_Trawangan: no apparent WT identifying content : All images displaying
 * http://en2.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Gili_Meno: no apparent WT identifying content : All images displaying
 * http://en2.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Gili_Air: no apparent WT identifying content : All images displaying
 * http://en2.wikivoyage.org/wiki/South_Lombok: no apparent WT identifying content : All images displaying
 * http://en2.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Kuta_(Lombok): no apparent WT identifying content : All images displaying
 * http://en2.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Central_and_East_Lombok: no apparent WT identifying content : All images displaying
 * http://en2.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Labuhan_Lombok: no apparent WT identifying content : All images displaying
 * http://en2.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Tetebatu: no apparent WT identifying content : All images displaying
 * http://en2.wikivoyage.org/wiki/North_Lombok: no apparent WT identifying content : All images displaying
 * http://en2.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Mount_Rinjani: no apparent WT identifying content : All images displaying
 * http://en2.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Tanjung: no apparent WT identifying content : All images displaying
 * http://en2.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Bangsal: no apparent WT identifying content : All images displaying
 * http://en2.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Senaru: no apparent WT identifying content : All images displaying
 * http://en2.wikivoyage.org/wiki/West_Lombok: no apparent WT identifying content : All images displaying
 * http://en2.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Mataram: no apparent WT identifying content : All images displaying
 * http://en2.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Lembar: no apparent WT identifying content : All images displaying
 * http://en2.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Senggigi: no apparent WT identifying content : All images displaying

The articles above have all been scrubbed of any recent anomalous editing.

Region map File:Lombok Regions map.png needs some work unrelated to the WT import issues.

The region boundaries are conflicting with the administrative boundaries. This matter that was discussed at some length when the map and regions were established. Principal argument for carrying forward bearing an embedded conflict with administrative boundaries was that the traveller is probably unaware of them, therefore they are not of consequence.

I held a position opposed to that viewpoint at the time as I believed that conflicts would soon emerge between the article regional boundaries and the actual daily realities of the destination for visitors. Those issues have indeed since further developed and clarified over time. The (administrative) boundaries have since become clearer in terms of regional identification, the identity of the new Regency of North Lombok has become more established and issues have come forward in sometimes trivial but still noticeable points of confusion for travelers, such as airport taxi zones delineated by administrative zones, and confusions over the positions of hotels with conflicts between the articles and the hotels addresses.

Also the airport has moved, rendering the current map misleading. To be honest I somehow overlooked this earlier. I fixed it immediately in the Wikipedia articles when the new airport opened but somehow 'forgot' to do it in the WT articles. The new airport is in the Regency of Central Lombok and is pretty much universally described as being in "Central Lombok", "South Central Lombok" or "South Lombok". It is technically in Central Lombok (just south of the city of Praya. Currently the line of division between the Wiki V South Lombok region and the Central Lombok region, central Lombok is defined . This needs some discussion and sorting out when time permits as the article maps are currently confusing. Once that is done I can fix the content of all the respective articles by shuffling it about as appropriate to the outcomes. I am comfortable with doing that as I am quite familiar with the island and I also structured the WP regional articles for the island some time back so I have my head around it reasonably well. Sadly simply following the available regional admin boundaries also has some conflicts with 'travelers logic' so it needs some thrashing out sometime when the heat of transfer has cooled sufficiently. -- Felix (talk) 01:07, 9 September 2012 (CEST)

Robbery account
See here. People are robbed all over the world every day. What is especially important about whatever instance is detailed at the external link? And if it's particularly important for travellers to know about, the brief outlines of the incident need to be summarized and inputted into the "Stay safe" section. One goal of this site is for as much as possible to be printable from each article, so requiring people to go to an external reference in order to understand what happened is not in keeping with that. In addition, Wikivoyage does not use refs, which makes it even more important to summarize the source if it's important to share the information. The source can be cited in the edit summary.

Please understand, I am completely sympathetic with anyone who's been robbed! I just want to help ensure that each article is as good and clear as it can be, and when I say something is vague it's because I had trouble fully understanding it myself. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:44, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Airlines and destinations
Removed from article as out of date --Traveler100 (talk) 18:29, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Caution box - Still relevant?
Is the caution box still relevant? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:32, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

 * I doubt it, since it refers to "earthquakes in July and August 2018 ", but it would be nice to hear from someone who knows the area. Pashley (talk) 04:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * As an aside, I give credit to whoever wrote that detailed composition on 'Get In' and 'Get Around' for Lombok, but, my gosh, what a tome - I feel like I'm reading a dissertation. I wonder if most travelers read through all of that. Lazarus1255 (talk) 05:16, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Lombok


text:
Talk:Lomé

Should Lomé have an article name of Lome? Please see Project:Article naming conventions. -- (WT-en) Huttite 05:47, 11 Jan 2005 (EST)

 * Nope, per Project:Article_naming_conventions (see also Project talk:Naming_conventions). I didn't actually recognize this article title—looks like it should be pronounced "loam." Moving to Lomé. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 10:11, 16 April 2010 (EDT)

Alternative banner for this article?
I created a new alternative banner for this article (I initially created it first and foremost so that it would be used at the top of the parallel article in the Hebrew edition of Wikivoyage, yet I later decided to also suggest that the English Wikivoyage community would consider using it here as well). So, which banner do you prefer having at the top of this article? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 05:18, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

 * The Voodoo fetish market is much more interesting than the street scene. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:28, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

 * Good example of when not to replace a banner :) --Andrewssi2 (talk) 12:40, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. Danapit (talk) 18:48, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Agree, keep. JuliasTravels (talk) 21:16, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

 * The first is very interesting. The second is quite bare. Keep. James A ▪ talk 10:00, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

 * First Syced (talk) 09:14, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:53, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Hôtel du 2 février à Lomé.jpg

 * "Reason for the nomination: According to fr:Hôtel 2 Février Lomé, the building was completed in 1980. There is no acceptable freedom of panorama in Togo, and COM:VRT permission from the architects is still required. Togolese FOP only allows reproductions of works through broadcasting or audiovisual works, not photos (even incidental inclusion is only allowed through audiovisual or broadcasting works, not photos)."
 * There's room for another thumbnail or two in this article, but I don't find this modern building that interesting, and the photo isn't currently visible in the article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:01, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Then it must be used via Wikidata. Then we don't need to do anything about this I guess. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 07:05, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Lomé


text:
Talk:Lonavala

These facts in Eat and Drink sounded fishy: Strictly non-vegetarian. and ''Vodka, rum, beer are the only drink available. Water is stricly prohibited.'' So, I removed them. Please feel free to add them back if necessary. --(WT-en) Evan 14:54, 6 January 2007 (EST)

Whoever wrote this must be out of his mind. Water is very much available in Lonavala, and although there aren't too many bars, there's no lack of alcoholic drinks available here. (WT-en) Upamanyuwikivoyage 06:01, 5 February 2007 (EST)

''Everything is available. You must know the right place though. Rains are here so see you there'' ashish

title: Talk:Lonavala


text:
Talk:London

Football shirts
Are there any safety risks associated with wearing football shirts in London, like in say, Buenos Aires or Glasgow? For example, if you walk around wearing an Arsenal shirt, is there a significant chance that you could be assaulted if you happen to walk past a Tottenham Hotspur supporter? The dog2 (talk) 01:26, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

 * There's always a small chance of some random psycho acting out for no reason in any big city. But the risk of assaults happening because you're wearing a particular shirt are sufficiently low that they don't warrant mentioning. Nobody cares what you're wearing in London.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:16, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Outside of match days theres practically no risk. EuropeanTawnyOwl (talk) 21:31, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

The map is slightly wrong
File:London Underground Overground DLR Crossrail map zone.svg

Ealing Broadway has a pink route validator and it is not shown on the map. Are there any other errors on this map because I am not very knowledgeable on this topic. Goldenbutternutsquash (talk) 19:39, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:London


text:
Talk:London/Bankside

Bankside seems to have two meanings - the area between Southwark and Blackfriars Bridges, or that area and up to London Bridge (ie including Borough). I think we should probably add the few things in Borough as it makes it broader and they are all in walking distance. (WT-en) Caroline 20:03, 19 Jul 2004 (EDT)

So.. what to add:

 * Borough market (fri and sat for retail)
 * Vinopolis? But is is pricey...
 * The Golden Hinde? - but it's just a replica sitting on the river
 * The Jerwood Space is another industrial conversion into an art gallery. However the cafe is nice.
 * Fish! is on the tourist trail - but I imagine it is pricey. I've certainly never been in there.
 * The Millenium Bridge? Its just a modern footbridge, and it doesn't even wobble anymore. However it is a connection between Tate Modern and St Pauls.

(WT-en) Caroline 20:21, 19 Jul 2004 (EDT)

Deletion nomination
Moved from Project:votes for deletion by (WT-en) Evan

 * London/Bankside - all information merged with London/South Bank. (WT-en) Caroline 07:02, 22 Jul 2004 (EDT)
 * Don't delete. If the names are interchangeable, or close to it, let's just make a redirect. --(WT-en) Evan 08:54, 22 Jul 2004 (EDT)
 * Don't delete; make into redirect. Bankside is a subset of South Bank but I think sufficiently close to justify redirection. -- (WT-en) Chris j wood 16:12, 22 Jul 2004 (EDT)

title: Talk:London/Bankside


text:
Talk:London/Bloomsbury

JENKINS HOTEL - BLOOMSBURY:I would advise anyone to avoid this bed and breakfast. They call it a hotel and there is nothing about it that I can recommend. We payed quite a bit (85 Pounds) for a very small room, a bathroom that you could not stand up in (or at least my parter couldn't and he is 6ft). Bland breakfast and the area was quite un-safe after dark. The beds were very narrow and the rooms were cold. All in all, I would say not to go there. Although, the British Museum was quite close and the it was only about a 20-30 min walk to the theatre district. We ended up staying at the Holiday Inn, (which we normally find to chain-like),Bloomsbury, and enjoyed our stay much more. You are still close to the British Museum and theatres but at least you know your room will be warm and the staff will smile.

Removed reference to Pinchitos restaurant as it has now unfortunately closed.

Fitzroy House
The listing for "Fitzroy House (aka L. Ron Hubbard House)" in the See section links to a web page owned by the Church of Scientology, so I assume the "museum" about their founder is also run by them. This should be very clearly mentioned in the listing (so that people know what they are getting into) due to the controversies around that institution (see Scientology - Controversies). Alternatively, the listing could be removed entirely - but I have a slight preference for adding a warning. What do others think about that? 00:13, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

 * Good catch. I think that rather that a warning, it would be best to merely make a clear mention of who owns and runs these institutions. By the way, just in case you haven't had occasion to check, keep in mind that the Wikivoyage standard is be fair, not non-POV. However, that doesn't give us a license to unnecessarily court controversy. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:07, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

title: Talk:London/Bloomsbury


text:
Talk:London/Bond Street

Do we really need a separate district for this? (WT-en) Jpatokal 09:14, 4 July 2006 (EDT)

title: Talk:London/Bond Street


text:
Talk:London/Camden

Hotels etc.?
I've upgraded this article from 'stub' to 'outline', as it's quite detailed in some areas, particularly 'Drink'. I think we could take it up to 'usable' if we could get some hotel listings - does anyone live in Camden Town or have any experience with accommodation there? -(WT-en) Fipe 20:18, 17 December 2006 (EST)

St. Pancras International railway station
Excuse my English: 1st it's not Gothic, but Neo-Gothic, next it is pompous, overdone if you like --Vadim Shlyakhov (talk) 17:24, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

 * Beg your pardon on the Neo-Gothic front, you're quite right. The 'pompous' / overdone thing is a matter of opinion, and one which I don't share. I'd prefer a more positive adjective such as 'ornate', or leave out a value judgement altogether and let travellers decide for themselves whether it's 'overdone' or not. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:37, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

 * Yeah, I think it's beautiful. "Ornate" does it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:42, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

 * No problem, "Ornate" is fine. BTW it would be great to add something more to this listing --Vadim Shlyakhov (talk) 08:05, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Banner...
To me the bridge at Camden Lock says more about this area, than Kings X. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:52, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:London/Camden


text:
Talk:London/Central

Notes on how the regions have been defined for central London.

The Regions
Dividing London into useful regions for tourists is a fairly challenging proposition. After discussing with a few colleagues at work, who've ended up in London from all corners of the world, we thought that although a tourist could look at street signs to see which London borough they were in, that this wasn't the most sensible way to divide up the city for a travel guide.

It made sense to define a central London district, spanning borough boundaries, as this would be the area where most tourists could expect to spend much of their time. However, even within this district, we felt that subdivision into regions was needed - because of the sheer amount of attractions and entertainment available.

So, the first step was to define the extent of the central London district. Conveniently, the London congestion charge boundary - a region within which motorists need to pay a daily fee of £5 on weekdays to drive - defined a good "Central London", including most of the city's main attractions.

The next step was to define this central district into regions. The main difficulty here was selecting names for regions which would be recognisable to residents (so that a tourist could ask for directions), and which are reasonably meaningful to tourists.

For example, "Westminster" is widely believed to refer to the region around the Houses of Parliament and Westminster Abbey - though a local resident would recognise it as referring to the City of Westminster, which spans a vast region of central London. Hence, its usefulness as a label for a region of central London for a tourist is questionable.

The 9 regions we split central London into are defined as follows:

Marylebone
Marylebone is located in the north-west of central London. It is defined by Marylebone Road to the north, Portland Place to the east, Oxford Street to the south, and Edgware Road to the west.

For purposes of writing, the section of Marylebone Road between the start of the Westway and Regent's Park underground station should be considered as part of Marylebone. Therefore, this area does contain Madame Tussaud's and the London Planetarium. Similarly, the stretch of Edgware Road south of the Westway down to Marble Arch should be considered as part of Marylebone to include the excellent middle eastern restaurants located there. Portland Place, Langham Place, and upper Regent Street (and therefore the Langham Hotel and BBC Broadcasting House) should also be considered as lying within Marylebone.

However, the stretch of Oxford Street between Marble Arch and Oxford Circus should be treated as lying in the Mayfair region.

Mayfair
Mayfair is located in the west of central London. It is defined by Oxford Street to the north, Regent Street to the east, Park Lane to the west, and Piccadilly to the south.

For purposes of writing, the section of Oxford Street between Marble Arch and Oxford Circus should be treated as lying in Mayfair. Therefore, Selfridges lies in this region. The stretch of Regent Street between Oxford Circus and Piccadilly Circus should also be treated as located within Mayfair. Therefore, Dickens and Jones, Hamleys and Liberty's should be considered to lie in Mayfair - despite being on the West End side of Regent Street. Piccadilly Circus itself, however, should be considered to lie in the West End.

Park Lane should be considered to lie within Mayfair, however, Hyde Park Corner should be considered to lie in St James's.

Piccadilly should be considered to lie within Mayfair, so therefore Fortnum and Mason and the Royal Academy of Arts fall within Mayfair. However, Green Park should be considered to lie in St James's.

St James's
St James's is located in the south-west of central London. It is defined by Piccadilly, Lower Regent Street, Pall Mall, Cockspur Street and Northumberland Avenue to the north. To the east, the river Thames forms a natural boundary. To the south, St James's is defined by Grosvenor Place, Bressenden Place and Vauxhall Bridge Road.

For purposes of writing, Piccadilly should be treated as in Mayfair, with the exception of Hyde Park Corner and Green Park which fall within St James's. Apsley House, No. 1 London, despite being on the north side of Hyde Park Corner, should therefore be treated as lying in St James's. Lower Regent Street (the stretch of Regent Street south of Piccadilly Circus), Pall Mall, Cockspur Street, and Northumberland Avenue should be considered to be split down the middle between St James's and West End. This ensures that Trafalgar Square lies within West End.

As regards the river, Westminster Bridge, Lambeth Bridge and Vauxhall Bridge should be considered to lie in St James's. The Hungerford Foot Bridge should be considered to lie in West End.

In the unlikely event of something of interest to tourists being located on Grosvenor Place, Bressenden Place or Vauxhall Bridge Road, these should be considered to lie in St James's too.

South Bank
The South Bank area is probably the simplest to define. It is the area south of the river Thames, within the central London area. The boundary roads to the south are Kennington Lane, New Kent Road and Tower Bridge Road.

For purposes of writing, the bridges across the river should be considered to lie within the appropriate region to the north of the river. To the south, the Elephant and Castle roundabout should be considered to lie within the South Bank area.

Any tourist attractions on Kennington Lane, New Kent Road and Tower Bridge Road should be considered to lie in the South Bank area.

The City of London
The City of London is defined as the real-life City of London, with one exception - Tower Hill, Tower Bridge and the Tower of London are included. Writers should consult a London A-Z for street boundary definitions. Boundary streets are split down the middle between the City of London and neighbouring regions.

For purposes of writing, the Tower Bridge, London Bridge, Southwark Bridge and Blackfriars Bridge should be considered to lie in the City of London. (This is consistent with the real-life definition of the City of London - as can be evidenced by the griffin statues standing on the southern sides of these bridges). The Royal Courts of Justice should be considered to lie within the Holborn region. The Temple, however, is in the City of London. Similarly, Smithfield market is in the City of London - though Farringdon station is in Clerkenwell.

St Katherine's Dock should be considered to lie in the East district of London.

Clerkenwell
This is the north-eastern area of central London. It is defined by City Road and Great Eastern Street to the north, by Commercial Street and Whitechapel High Street to the east, by the boundary of the City of London to the south, and Rosebery Avenue and the southern section of Grays Inn Road.

For purposes of writing, Rosebery Avenue and the south part of Grays Inn Road should be split down the middle between Clerkenwell and Bloomsbury. Similarly boundary streets between Clerkenwell and the City of London should be split down the middle. For clarity, Spitalfields Market should be considered to lie within Clerkenwell, but Brick Lane lies in the East district of London.

 * If Spitalfields is in Clerkenwell, then New York is in Tokyo... --82.35.73.41 05:22, 26 October 2006 (EDT)

Bloomsbury
This is probably the least obviously defined region of central London, located to the north of the district. It stretches from Portland Place to the west, to Rosebery Avenue and Theobalds Road to the east, with Euston Road and Pentonville Road to the north, and Oxford Street, New Oxford Street and Bloomsbury Way to the south.

For the purposes of writing, Portland Place, Langham Place and upper Regent Street should be considered to lie in neighbouring Marylebone. Euston Road and Pentonville Road should be considered to lie in Bloomsbury - so the British Library, as well as St Pancras and Kings Cross St Pancras stations should also be considered to lie in Bloomsbury.

Rosebery Avenue, Theobalds Road, Bloomsbury Way and New Oxford Street should be split down the middle between Bloomsbury and either the Clerkenwell, Holborn or West End region.

The stretch of Oxford Street between Oxford Circus and the junction with Tottenham Court Road should be considered to fall within the West End region.

West End
The West End region is probably the most complex region to define. To the north, it is defined by Oxford Street, New Oxford Street and Bloomsbury Way. To the east, it is defined by the southern part of Southampton Row, Kingsway, the western part of Aldwych, the Waterloo Bridge approach road, and the river. To the south, it is defined by south Regent Street, Pall Mall, Cockspur Street and Northumberland Avenue. To the west, it is defined by the stretch of Regent Street between Oxford Circus and Piccadilly Circus.

The stretch of Oxford Street between Oxford Circus and Tottenham Court Road should be considered to lie within the West End region. New Oxford Street, Bloomsbury Way, the sourthern part of Southampton Row, Kingsway, the western part of Aldwych, and the Waterloo Bridge approach road, should be split down the middle between West End and the neighbouring regions (Bloomsbury and Holborn). This means that BBC Bush House and Somerset House should be considered to lie within Holborn.

South Regent Street, Pall Mall, Cockspur Street and Northumberland Street should be split along the middle between West End and St James's regions. The stretch of Regent Street between Oxford Circus and Piccadilly Circus should be considered to lie in Mayfair. This means that all the shops on that section of Regent Street, including Dickens and Jones, Liberty's and Hamley's (which all lie on the eastern side of the street) should be treated as lying in Mayfair.

Piccadilly Circus should be considered to lie in the West End region.

Holborn
The Holborn region covers the legal centre of London. It is defined by Theobalds Road to the north, the southern part of Grays Inn Road and the boundary of the City of London to the east, the river to the south, and the southern part of Southampton Row, Kingsway, the western part of Aldwych and the Waterloo Bridge approach road to the west.

The southern part of Southampton Row, Kingsway, the western part of Aldwych and the approach road to Waterloo Bridge should be split down the middle between Holborn and West End. Theobalds Road should be split down the middle between Holborn and Bloomsbury. The southern part of Grays Inn Road should be split down the middle between Holborn and Clerkenwell. The boundary between Holborn and the City of London should use the political definition.

Holborn includes Gray's Inn, Lincoln's Inn, the Royal Courts of Justice and Somerset House.

Thoughts
Yeah, sorry, this has ended up being incredibly wordy - probably more so than is necessary, but it's really for my own reference to decide where various tourist attractions and shops should be listed.

---
 * Arg, so there is a lot of great info here and I know people have been trying to work the breakdown out, but it's just killing me to have info for, say, Bloomsbury, on both the Central London and Bloomsbury page-- users shouldn't need to print out two (big) pages for a complete list of stuff... can we turn the "Central London" content into one or two sentence intro teasers and move the full description to the destination pages? Or someone have another idea? (WT-en) Majnoona 13:05, 26 Feb 2004 (EST)

(WT-en) MykReeve, 02 Jan 04, 22:54 (GMT)

Attraction Listings
The local attractions are coming along nicely. We have a preferred format for attractions, but I think these can be adapted very easily. More great work! --(WT-en) Evan 17:06, 5 Jan 2004 (EST)

 * Yes, sorry. I did look at the preferred format, to remind me what to stick in there, but I ended up finding it easier to just slap down the information, than to amend it to that format as I went along. I figured it'd be easier that way to go back and fiddle later on. Cheers for the comments though, I'll keep going at this this week, and hopefully have a fairly solid 'See' and 'Do' section by the end. -- (WT-en) MykReeve 18:04, 5 Jan 2004 (EST)

Structure
Should listings go in the Central London page or in the areas within Central London?

I think having a Central London page could be a good thing, but I didn't notice it for some time while browsing London - I was just following the links from the main London page to the areas within Central London like Soho and Covent Garden. I think there needs to be a guideline on what goes into the Central London page and what goes into the pages for the areas within it. One suggestion: All the See, Do, Eat etc sections go on the Central London page, divided up into the sub-areas as identified here already. This has the benefit that people can quickly scan the page for a particular item. Say I want to find a particular museum but I can't remember where it is or its exact name, it would be annoying to have to go to the Soho page, Covent Garden page, Mayfair, Bloomsbury, etc... Then the question becomes: what do we do with all the sub-area pages like Soho. In this scenario the answer is probably to delete them and move all their content to the central london page. Another suggestion: All the See, Do, etc listings go in their appropriate area page. Either delete the Central London page or just use it as an explanation of which bits of london fall into which areas. This has the advantage that the Central London page won't be waaaaay too long, but it means that people have to visit a number of pages to find all the good things to do, or to see, or to eat, etc. This seems to be the model Paris has chosen.

I'm not too fussed either way, but we really do need to make a call one way or another and go with it. --(WT-en) RJK 02:03, 21 Nov 2004 (GMT)

title: Talk:London/Central


text:
Talk:London/Chinatown

I've moved this page to London/Chinatown, on the principle that people looking for the Chinatowns in other cities might be a bit galled to find London's is the only one represented. User:(WT-en) MykReeve

 * Absolutely. The whole set of London districts needs to be revised; thanks for taking the time to do this one. --(WT-en) Evan 15:54, 29 Dec 2003 (PST)

The last two edits were by me, for some reason it was showing me as being logged in when I wasn't. (WT-en) sheridan 17:12, 3 Jan 2005 (EST)

title: Talk:London/Chinatown


text:
Talk:London/City of London

The Tower of London
User:(WT-en) Dpaajones moved The Tower of London out of this article in March 2007 beacuse it is just on the outside edge of the official council area. On Wikivoyage the traveller comes first, so because most people would visit it from the City, would consider it part of the City and we don't have any proper East London articles yet, I propose to reinstate it in a few weeks time. -- (WT-en) DanielC 14:47, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Hello - here to help
Hi all,

We're the Visitor Development team at the City of London Corporation, and wanted to help out with this page if that's OK. Just to declare an interest: we'd like to provide some useful information, but many of the materials we have obviously carry the City Corporation's logo, etc. If this is a problem, please do let us know.

In the future we'd like to add maps and pictures - we have quite a bit of content designed to help visitors with their trip. For now, however, we'll just make a few edits to the text - the existing version as of 06/02 is very comprehensive and has lots of good information, so we'll simply be correcting a couple of things if they're not quite right (for instance, the City's population is a little higher than the 8000 the article currently states) along with a general proofreading.

Wherever possible we'll provide links and evidence for our edits, though in many cases we might not be able to. For instance, the paragraph that currently contains "It is hard to believe how dead the area is on the weekend and it can barely be stressed enough that if you are in The City on a weekend, it will seem like the movie 28 Days Later" is certainly evocative but also not quite accurate. We don't have footfall stats to share, but we do know that the City has a few busy areas on a weekend from our own experiences! (Experiences in the City, that is: sadly none of us has ever been in a real-life Rage-addled zombie-fest.)

Please let us know if there's anything else we could do to help, if you have an idea for extra content for the article that we could provide, or if you feel our edits aren't reasonable. We're a small team but we'll monitor the Discussion page as often as we can.

Many thanks,

The Visitor Development team

 * It's great to hear that you are interested in improving the article. Welcome, tourism professionals might have some good advice on how to go about it. The main thing to consider is that all your contributions will automatically be licensed under our copyleft, which frees anyone to create derivative works under the same license, while providing attribution. So additions that have your logo on them (which is something we try to avoid), may be edited to remove the logo. Regarding zombie references, be sure to replace anything contentious with prose that is equally lively. You could even keep the original language, but transition to explain while that is the stereotype, there are some areas that... --Peter Talk 16:22, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

 * Great - thanks Peter. Useful information, and thanks for the advice regarding logos and media. We'll keep that in mind - it might be better then if we just link to some content rather than host it here, if that's acceptable.
 * Visit the City

 * Since you are the official Visitor Development team at the City of London Corporation, it is quite appropriate for there to be a link to your site at the beginning of the article. It's http://www.visitthecity.co.uk/, isn't it? If so, it's already linked. I would love for you to add more content, but more than one link to your site would normally not be within the guidelines of our external links policy. However, I love your enthusiasm for improving the article, so I would love for you to work with us on ways to do that within our guidelines. What specific things are you thinking of linking to? Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:06, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

 * Hi Ikan, Yep - that's our site, but you'll notice it's a redirect to the Corporation website. We've added a second link to our pages at the end of the Tourist Information Centre paragraph, but this was to provide both versions (the re-direct and the standard URL). Not sure if this has added clarity or confused the issue, and it might need to be taken down anyway if it's breach of your guidelines (apologies, didn't notice that one). Regarding things we'd link to, we're developing some visitor-friendly maps which I thought would be useful - printable and free. It might be that a different site - one of the many London bloggers perhaps - links to our pages, and we could link to that. (That's possibly unwieldy, but it wouldn't breach your guidelines.) Other things which could feature are materials like downloadable walking tour maps and guides, lists of attractions, hotels, shops, and a programme of events. We've just put a catch-all link with 'The City Corporation's 'Visiting the City' pages also contains information for visitors, including lists of attractions, events, and walking tours' at the moment to cover this, but I think that can be improved. Essentially, we've got a good range of materials that we use in the City Information Centre, so can try to help with pretty much anything, but we want to use it to support what other people recommend and write rather than controlling the content too much - that's obviously not what Wikivoyage is for.
 * Once again, thanks for your help.
 * Stuart from the Visitor Development Team.

 * Thanks a lot, Stuart. I really would like to work with you on these things. There are some issues, though. Under our external links policy, off-site maps cannot be directly linked, but I would think it would be fine to mention in a listing of the Tourism Information Centre that, among other things, you provide free maps. The lists of attractions sound very useful, and can help us in the following way: If some attractions are not yet listed on our City of London page or the listings could use more information, please feel free to include some of the content from your lists here. Events are great to list, too. The walking tours - are these self-guided? If so, they might (or possibly might not) be good as separate itinerary pages. Please have a look at Itineraries for some guidelines on what is and is not a good type of itinerary to list on this site. The key point is: "An itinerary article should be a guide for traveling along a specific, recognized route and not merely a suggested sightseeing schedule." If any of these walking tours turn out to be good for itineraries, I would think it would be fine to link the relevant sub-site from "Visiting the City" once in the article and mention that the Wikivoyage article includes material from (but does not plagiarize from) your site. If they are "merely suggested sightseeing schedule[s]," they could be included in this article, rather than an additional article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:01, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Map oddity
At least with my main browser, current Firefox on Ubuntu Linux, I see a large blank square at London/City_of_London with a little tag telling me to click for a full-size map. Clicking works and gives me essentially the same map I get if I click on the map icon at the top of the article. What is up with that?

I can test with other browsers if needed, but I suspect the problem is the page not my browser, so I am asking first. Pashley (talk) 23:19, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

 * The map does appear for me, though it does sometimes take a second or two longer to load than the rest of the page. You could try a hard refresh of the page in your browser perhaps? --Nick talk 00:23, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Serviced apartment listing
Please have a look at this edit. I was going to revert it on the basis that their office is in Lancashire, but I'm not so sure; does this statement of purpose make them different from or similar to AirBnB, which obviously cannot be listed here? The basic problem is that no exact street address is given, whereas one should be, following this site's Manual of style. So what do you think; does the new listing need to be removed or not? Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:57, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Listings in the wrong district?
Based on the map at London and the mapshape here, it looks like many of the listings in this article should be in other districts, especially London/Holborn-Clerkenwell. Am I mistaken? Or should we start moving those listings? —Granger (talk · contribs) 15:05, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You're not wrong, and some of them also belong in London/East End. Would need to confirm on the map, but I would say everything outside the mapshape and east of the Northern line (the black one) is in Shoreditch or Whitechapel, ergo East End, whereas markers west of the Northern line outside the shape are in Clerkenwell.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 15:15, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll double-check the maps in the London article and start moving the listings. —Granger (talk · contribs) 17:04, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:London/City of London


text:
Talk:London/Croydon

I saw a newspaper article a fortnight ago [July 2006] that had the owner of Beano's record store saying that due to the downturn in business since the arrival of digital music, he was no longer able to keep the bricks-and-mortar store running, and that Beano's would soon become an online-only store. But I cannot find an online source for this.

title: Talk:London/Croydon


text:
Talk:London/Crystal Palace

Removed External Links: see Where did the "External links" sections go?' (WT-en) SHC 21:44, 23 April 2006 (EDT)
 * WikiPedia:Crystal Palace -- about the palace itself

title: Talk:London/Crystal Palace