text:
Talk:British Columbia

Regional Tweeks
After going through the process of overhauling Alberta's regions, I'm wondering if some of the regions BC could be reviewed?

Right now, there is a discrepancy between the maps and some of the regional structures, specifically the map says Canyons and the Cariboo, and follows the Trans Canada Highway from Cache Creek to Yale (north of Hope); however, the Thompson & Fraser Canyons are listed under Thompson-Nicola (the Thompson-Okanagan map also excludes the Fraser Canyon). In looking in past discussions and BC official travel documentation, it looks like the Fraser Canyon should be in the Thompson-Nicola, so I'm wondering if the maps can be updated? Another option is the changes are reverted as the top-level Cariboo region does not have many listings, though that doesn't align with official tourist regions.

I compared some of the regions further north to the official travel regions and noticed that some changes could be considered? I'm wondering about getting rid of the North and Central Coast as a top level region since the Central Coast is inaccessible by car from the Northern Coast. Official travel documentation includes the Central Coast with the Cariboo as you must go west from Williams Lake.

 * Cariboo - rename to Cariboo Chilcotin and divide into sub-regions (just headings on the region page)
 * Cariboo
 * 100 Mile House
 * Quesnel
 * Williams Lake
 * Chilcotin - Hwy 20 corridor
 * Central Coast
 * Bella Bella
 * Bella Coola

I'm also thinking Northern British Columbia might need split into sub-regions; currently there are 11 cities + 4 other articles, and if the North Coast were added, it could be another 7-9 (some cities are referenced but articles don't exist). The subheadings on the current page would work well, with the possibility of Stikine being included with the North Coast, while Nechako-North Cariboo and Robson Valley could be combined into a single sub-region. Thoughts? -- MuzikMachine (talk) 05:54, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

 * Hi MuzikMachine, I've actually been working in the background to setup a reorg of BC's northern regions... I think you beat me to it by a couple of days. :-)

 * I was going to approach it by breaking up Northern British Columbia, which is a common geographic reference but I think it's a poor travel region due to its size -- it covers two time zones, two mountain ranges and part of the central plateau of BC. I think most travellers are doing Prince George/Prince Rupert or they're doing Prince George/Alaska Highway, but they're not doing Prince Rupert/Cassiar Highway and the Alaska Highway (unless you have an RV and lots of time). Using the subheadings in Northern British Columbia, I'd like to:
 * move Peace Country and Northern Rockies to its own top-level region -- it's east of the Rockies, different time zone and possibly more connected to Alberta than most of BC (note - I had started a draft of this region at User:Shaundd/Articles in progress)
 * move the Nechako-North Cariboo cities to Cariboo. The name could stay as Cariboo (it's certainly referenced that way by some government departments and media outlets), although something like Cariboo-Nechako would probably be more accurate (historically, Prince George and the Nechako River/Plateau were not part of the Cariboo)
 * move Stikine destinations to North and Central Coast
 * combine Robson Valley destinations with North Thompson destinations to make a new "North Thompson and Robson Valley" subregion in Thompson-Okanagan. The reason for this is many (most?) travellers coming up BC Highway 5 through the North Thompson valley go through the Robson Valley into Jasper. There's also commonality because both the Robson Valley and North Thompson are mountain destinations. It also aligns with BC's tourism definition of Thompson-Okanagan.
 * leave Northern British Columbia as an extra-hierarchal region. As I said earlier, it's a common geographical reference in BC so I think there's value in keeping the article.
 * About the map, yeah, it's out of date. It's a painful one to fix and I've wanted to rejig the regions so I put off updating the map. I'll do it right once we agree on where to go with the regions.
 * For the Central Coast, I think it's six of one and half dozen of the other. You're right, there is no road connection between the North and Central Coasts. There is a ferry. If we do split them, we could do "Cariboo-Central Coast" and that would leave "North Coast-Stikine" (assuming my proposal above), which would be pretty clean. I'm not sure the Cariboo needs subregions though. There's two roads (Hwy 97 and Hwy 20), three if you include the Yellowhead, and probably 9-10 articles max if you include the core Cariboo, Prince George and the Nechako, the Chilcotin (which is often included under "Cariboo") and the Central Coast.
 * Unfortunately, I don't have a map ready just yet to illustrate what I'm proposing. A rough map is above to capture what I was thinking. Thoughts? -Shaundd (talk) 06:43, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Shaundd, personally I would still like to keep Northern British Columbia as a top level region, with Nechako, North Coast, and Peace Country and Northern Rockies as subregions. I've observed that Prince George-Alaska via the Cassiar Highway is recommended more commonly than I would have expected, as it's the shortest overland route between Alaska and the Pacific Northwest, so having a larger umbrella to link everything might have some benefit. Historically I think the Robson Valley was part of Northern BC, but double-checking it's now part of the Thompson-Okanagan, so I'm good with making the change. I also noticed that the Cariboo is now called Cariboo Chilcotin Coast so I'm thinking that the Cariboo page could be renamed accordingly. Here's some good resources on the official regional breakdown (I'm not sure which is "official", but they're consistent between the three sites):
 * British Columbia.com
 * Super Natural British Columbia (Hello BC)
 * Travel British Columbia

 * I'm wondering if some of the names and boundaries of some of the other regions should modified to match as well? -- MuzikMachine (talk) 23:58, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not convinced we need a Northern BC umbrella, but if we do, both the Nechako and North Coast-Stikine regions currently have very few articles -- three in each. There are places that probably could have articles like Kitimat, Dease Lake, Burns Lake, Fort St James and Mackenzie, but until they're created the subregions are going to be pretty sparse. If we go the subregion route, I also think Haida Gwaii should be placed as a direct subregion of Northern BC.
 * About the regions you linked to, they're not official. They're just regions created by the tourism agency and they've had success in getting other tourist organizations to adopt them. Some of the regions correspond to wider use, such as Thompson-Okanagan, Kootenays and Northern BC. Others, like Vancouver, Coast & Mountains, only show up in tourist literature with little usage outside of it. "Cariboo Chilcotin Coast" is in-between. It's a marketing creation but it seems to have had some limited pick-up outside of tourism marketing circles. I personally don't like lifting names from tourism agencies and would prefer to go with the actual regional district names, which are Cariboo and Central Coast -- hence the "Cariboo-Central Coast" name I mentioned earlier. I don't think Chilcotin is needed as "Cariboo" commonly includes it.
 * In terms of changing other region names and boundaries, I don't think it's needed. With the changes we've been discussing, we'll be pretty close to the tourist agency regions anyway. And I think the biggest name difference is Vancouver, Coast and Mountains, which in my outspoken opinion, is a useless name. The broader region is the Lower Mainland or the South Coast and that's what it is called in the media, the news, the weather, government departments, etc. I'll stop ranting now! :-) -Shaundd (talk) 04:04, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

In response to Shaun's comments above about Nechako and North Coast-Stikine regions having very few articles, I'd like to ask for some caution to be exercised about creating new regions before they are needed. Wikivoyage is littered with region articles with very little content created by people who have good intentions to come back later to create city articles. I've been trying to bring region articles up to usable status, and it's really difficult to do if there is little to draw on from the city articles.
 * Very off-topic here, I'd like to thank you all for all the tweaks on Yuquot which got Guide status very quickly. Gold River is not far behind. Big thumbs up for the community. Wikivoyage is the best. Ibaman (talk) 00:10, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Ibaman, no worries and glad to help. It was a good team effort. -Shaundd (talk) 04:08, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

I think it's better to populate the city articles first, bring them up to usable status, and then only create new regions if the exist region articles get to big. Moving cities between regions isn't a problem if there are enough city articles to go around. Northern British Columbia has 11 city articles and 3 park articles, which really isn't too many at this point. Thanks, Ground Zero (talk) 10:39, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Good to know. I still feel that the Central Coast should be incorporated into the Cariboo while the North Coast should be integrated into Northern British Columbia, and I agree with moving the Robson Valley into the Thompson-Okanagan. I'm still unsure about breaking apart Northern BC and promoting Peace Country and Northern Rockies into a top-level region, though I get it that it's distinct. -- MuzikMachine (talk) 03:25, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I was able to find the  policy on this:
 * "Importantly, we only add a level of regions when there is too much content in the existing breakdown."
 * Ground Zero (talk) 10:48, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi everyone, I guess I'm still trying to best understand when sub-regions are and are not needed as the guidelines are open to some interpretation. First, I feel that if an area has some pre-defined, recognized tourist regions, it would be best to try to follow them, though I acknowledge that some areas are more clear than others; but in the case of BC it is fairly consistent depending on the source. Saying that, Northern British Columbia probably at the threshold of being a single region or being divided into sub-regions.
 * Currently, Northern British Columbia has 11 City articles and 4 Other destinations. If the Robson Valley was moved to Thompson-Nicola (which I support) but North Coast were added, it would be 11 City articles and 5 Other destinations. According to Region article template, "If there are more than nine cities and the region could be sensibly divided into subregions, consider doing so."
 * The generally accepted definition of Northern British Columbia is everything along and north of the Yellowhead Highway (Hwy 16), with exception of the Robson Valley. With that large area also being segmented into other areas, such as the Peace Country, and the rule of 3, it could work and provide enough acceptable content.
 * The Cariboo (or whatever name we land on) is little weak in terms of the number of articles, adding the Central Coast along with adding some missing pieces could strengthen it.
 * Maybe I'm guilty of letting myself nerd out the data organizing, but I figured I'd make my case. :-) Ultimately, I'll go with consensus and if it's premature to spit everything up, that's fine. Thanks to everyone for all you do! Is the other proposal essentially reverting back to Region shuffle - part 2? -- MuzikMachine (talk) 17:19, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't know enough about BC to be able to comment knowledgeably about how it should be regionalized. I'm looking at it from the reader's perspective. Northern BC could be broken up, but it doesn't have to be broken up. If it is broken into three subregions, then we'd probably end up with three outline subregion articles with little content that do nothing for the reader but act as an extra step on the way to the city/park articles. If the subregion articles are written with good overviews of what to see and do there, then they are worth having. If not, then they are more for the contributors' desire to organize than for the readers' benefit. Outline region articles are more hindrance than help, so let's not create them for the sake of organizing. Ground Zero (talk) 20:27, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I think the main argument for breaking Northern BC up is it's such a large geographic entity with two large mountain ranges running through it (and two time zones) that it's not a helpful travel region. That said, it is commonly used in BC by many organizations (including the official tourism agency) so I think we need a Northern BC article in some capacity. Here's a thought I had this afternoon on addressing it that I think tweaks what we've been discussing but hopefully addresses Ground Zero's concerns:
 * Split North and Central Coast. North Coast destinations to Northern BC, Central Coast destinations to Cariboo.
 * Split Northern BC into three subregions: Peace Country and Northern Rockies which is everything east of the Rockies, North Coast-Nechako for everything west of the Rockies, and Haida Gwaii. My reason for splitting it this way is to capture travel patterns by highway. West of the Rockies (North Coast-Nechako) is the Yellowhead Hwy, which captures the Prince George-Prince Rupert traffic; east of the Rockies captures the Alaska Highway traffic. Geographically, the Coast Mountains split the North Coast-Nechako region, but I think from a traveller's perspective on that road, it can make sense to have every destination between Prince George and Prince Rupert in the same region. The towns in each region (based on existing guides) would be:
 * North Coast-Nechako - Prince Rupert, Terrace, Stewart, Vanderhoof, Prince George, Smithers
 * Peace Country and Northern Rockies - Dawson Creek, Fort St John, Chetwynd, Fort Nelson, Tumbler Ridge
 * Haida Gwaii (no changes)
 * Cariboo could be left Cariboo, or called Cariboo-Central Coast. There would be no subregions.
 * I think this is manageable because we're only creating one new subregion -- Peace Country and Northern Rockies -- which shouldn't be difficult to make usable based on the info that's already in the Northern BC guide (I've already made a start here). North Coast-Nechako would be a remodelled North and Central Coast page (which is already usable) and Haida Gwaii is already usable. There's cleaning up to do but I think it's doable. Thoughts? -Shaundd (talk) 01:02, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I forgot to mention the Robson Valley above because we agree on moving it. For clarity, I was planning on splitting Thompson-Nicola, with the North Thompson destinations joining the Robson Valley destinations in a new North Thompson and Robson Valley subregion (which would be part of Thompson-Okanagan). I'd propose renaming Thompson-Nicola to South Thompson-Fraser Canyon, which is the broad area the region would cover. -Shaundd (talk) 08:14, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm good with that, thanks! --MuzikMachine (talk) 13:57, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * As long as you're not splitting a usable article onto two outline articles, it's okay. It was hard work bringing the Northern BC article up to usable status, especially as I am not familiar with the area. (I am planning a trip there soon, depending on how things reopen.) Breaking it up into outline articles doesn't serve the reader. As long as you going to create the new articles as usable articles by adding in the necessary information, I'm okay with it.  Ground Zero (talk) 21:55, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * That's the plan. I think the draft Peace Country and Northern Rockies guide is already usable and we'll make sure the remodelled North and Central Coast/North Coast-Nechako guide will retain its usable status. -Shaundd (talk) 07:29, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Implementation
It looks like we have agreement, so I went ahead and setup the North Thompson and Robson Valley region and integrated it with Thompson-Okanagan, and moved the draft Peace Country and Northern Rockies guide into the main namespace. Next steps include: I think that's everything. If anything is missing, please update the list. Cheers -Shaundd (talk) 07:29, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Move Central Coast destinations (Bella Bella and Bella Coola) to Cariboo and update breadcrumbs ✅
 * Update Cariboo page to reflect Central Coast ✅
 * Rename "North and Central Coast" to "North Coast-Nechako" and add the Nechako-North Cariboo destinations from Northern British Columbia to it. Update breadcrumbs ✅
 * Move Peace Country and Northern Rockies destinations from Northern British Columbia and update breadcrumbs. ✅
 * Update North Coast-Nechako page to reflect new region structure ✅
 * Add subregions and descriptions to Northern British Columbia ✅
 * Update Northern BC page to include North Coast & Haida Gwaii highlights. Trim list of cities to 9 ✅
 * Update Haida Gwaii to be a region instead of a rural area. ✅
 * Update Haida Gwaii breadcrumb ✅
 * Add new maps for British Columbia, Northern BC and Thompson-Okanagan ✅
 * Looks good! Just to confirm, was the Cariboo going to remain named as "Cariboo" or be renamed "Cariboo-Central Coast"? --MuzikMachine (talk) 16:26, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I also stumbled across a Russian article for Wells Gray Provincial Park. I was able to translate it to English via Google Translate (I have no proficiency in Russian) but it still needs cleaning up; I have a draft in User:MuzikMachine/sandbox (Edit: it's uploaded). -- MuzikMachine (talk) 16:43, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I saw that article on ru:wikivoyage on the weekend. I had the same idea to translate it but hadn't had a chance yet.
 * Re Cariboo, I'm a bit on the fence but leaning to changing the name. If we do, it should probably get a new Wikidata ID because it's not just the Cariboo anymore. Do you know how that works? I was also wondering if we should create the Cariboo-Central Coast page fresh so, if we ever create subregions, we'll just need to undo the redirect for Cariboo (I'm assuming Cariboo would be region). Thoughts? -Shaundd (talk) 03:32, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Personally I like Cariboo-Central Coast b/c otherwise Bella Coola/Bella Bella probably don't have anything else in common with the Cariboo. I could set up a new Wikidata ID, that wouldn't be too difficult. I don't foresee that region being divided into subregions for a long time, but that works if you want to set the infrastructure in place. -- MuzikMachine (talk) 22:56, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm working on the new page for North Coast-Nechako, which is mostly a re-purpose of North and Central Coast. I noticed the current banner is actually taken at Thunderbird Park in Victoria - nowhere near the actual region. The content is appropriate to the region but isn't actually taken from the area, does that matter or should we consider replacing it? -- MuzikMachine (talk) 22:02, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I think the banner needs to be replaced then. And let's go with Cariboo-Central Coast. Sorry for not working on this, things have gotten busy so not so much free time lately. -Shaundd (talk) 06:00, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

 * Support. If there is agreement I support the changes to the regions. Likewise I have made a proposal for East Central Florida that could do with some input. I understand many are not familiar with that region but a little research of the counties/regions should resolve that problem. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 16:32, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I've only ever been to Orlando once, but I'll give it a look. -Shaundd (talk) 03:34, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I've updated the articles, looks like it's ready for the maps. Cheers! -- MuzikMachine (talk) 15:45, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry for not getting to the maps. I've had almost no free time the last couple of weeks, but I haven't forgotten about them. -Shaundd (talk) 15:19, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Vancouver Island discussion
I was also going to bring this up elsewhere but since the conversation is going, but I was wondering if it would be worth considering shifting Campbell River, Strathcona Provincial Park, Yuquot, and Gold River (British Columbia) (basicially everything inside the Strathcona Regional District) from Central Vancouver Island to North Vancouver Island? Currently Central Vancouver Island has 12 city & 4 park articles while North Vancouver Island has 3 city & 1 park article so it might balance things out a bit more. As I understand, Campbell River could be considered either be Central or Northern, but it acts the gateway to Northern Vancouver Island. The other communities are accessed via Hwy 28 from Campbell River. Cheers! --MuzikMachine (talk) 13:57, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I hear the balance argument and I've seen Campbell River in North, Central and North Central so it wouldn't be out of place to have it in either region. My main concern is what makes the most sense to travellers when they're on the ground. Campbell River and Courtenay/Comox to the south are all part of the same coastal plain that runs the eastern length of what we're calling Central Vancouver Island. The area is dotted with small communities along the coast. And driving Hwy 19 and 19A up to Campbell River, I didn't get the sense I was in a different region. There's a natural breakpoint northwest of Campbell River though because the geography changes and the string of settlement breaks. I just feel we'd be forcing the regions a bit if we put Campbell River in the north rather than letting the shape of the land and population patterns guide them. -Shaundd (talk) 16:00, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok. I've never visited the area, only seen it on maps, so if it makes more sense in Central that's fine. -- MuzikMachine (talk) 20:46, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Floods
There are severe floods, closed roads, rescue operations, ...

I added a warning box for the town of Merritt which has been evacuated. What other warnings do we need? Pashley (talk) 22:23, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

 * Highway 7 is stuck so maybe the towns on it. Tai123.123 (talk) 23:33, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

 * Vancouver is now completely cut off from the rest of Canada by road. Pashley (talk) 05:06, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

 * Communities evacuated, highways washed away as relentless rain pounds B.C. Pashley (talk) 12:22, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

I added a warning box. Do some region articles also need one?Pashley (talk) 10:42, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

 * I did that for some articles about my neighbourhood earlier this year. Could do, but it does require high maintenance by keeping track of it. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:44, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Travel in BC at the moment is a definite no-no. Even sections ofthe Transcanada are closed. The province has declared a state of emergency. Cities the size of Abbotsford have been cutoff from the rest of the province. Grocery stores have empty shelves, the supply chain is not there. Ottawahitech (talk) 16:15, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Update: Transcanada is still closed for traffic between Vancouver and the rest of Canada. Some people who opted to travel through the US were fined $5,700 when they returned to Canada see: COVID-19: Feds promise to clear British Columbians’ fines for travelling without PCR test. Ottawahitech (talk) 23:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

 * Trans-Canada Highway says that there's construction, but doesn't say anything about any floods. Are you certain about this?

 * Nothing seems to be certain :) (Great to see someone is actually paying attention)

 * I just found out today that the BC goverment has been holding daily press briefing on the state of emergency. Problem is it seems only media outlets seem to know when those briefing are expected to be held, so only if you sit glued to a TV set all day &night, have access to the correct TV stattions, and are lucky to see a snippet of one of those briefings, you get to find out a little bit of the puzzle. Some of the press briefings are carried through social networks, if you happen to be a member. Fot example, I am no longer a twitter member so cannot log in to see the latest, and am not able to follow  hashtags (I think, don't really have the time to try and figure out how it works right noew)

 * One thing I just found out listenting to CTV news is that a "parade of storms" is headed over this Thursday-Friday. I am trying to keep a record of some official quotes on the state of the emergency at  2021 BC floods. Hope this helps, Ottawahitech (talk) 00:35, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I was reading this discussion yesterday. Please keep us up to date. Thank you. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 19:48, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I heard on the news (Global, I believe) that the weather forecast is another 90 millimeters of rain in the Fraser Valley today. There are now 4 images at commons:Category:2021 floods in British Columbia. Files in that Category will provide links to pages on wmf-sites that use them. The enwiki article that was not getting a lot of love, has a see also section that point to a new page that describes Atlantic Canada floods. Ottawahitech (talk) 20:18, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * It's weird that this is 1) not talked about in American news outlets and 2) doesn't seem to be affecting our side of the border, unless that's just not been mentioned, either. Forecasts indicate the rain continuing for at least the next several days, so I'd imagine the flooding will be horrendous by the time it is finally over. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 22:03, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Its not only American news that are not covering the disaster unfolding in BC. CBC News (Canada Broadcasting Corporation) did not discover that dozens of people spent the night under a landslide on Highway 7 between Hope & Agassiz, where some of the casualties occured, until a day later. Cheers, Ottawahitech (talk) 15:27, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
 * (continue) The confusion can also can be partially attributed to enwiki where the article about this disaster is now named November 2021 Pacific Northwest floods. Notice that this name does not mention the word  "mudslide".  As far as the location "Pacific Northwest" there is an unresolved discussion on the talkpage. There were some earlier excellent contributions to the page from an long-time-enwiki-contributor,  but I no longer see this user contributing any more. Ottawahitech (talk) 16:46, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

 * TransCanada Highway (some call it Highway 1) re-opened for traffic a couple of days ago after being closed for traffic for over a week. I don't know if it re-closed after yesterday's storm. During the week that it was closed the city of Chilliwack was isolated from the rest of Western BC, I hear some people utilized Chilliwack's small airport which services small non-commercial planes (I think, but should look it up on enwiki when I get a chance). Ottawahitech (talk) 15:35, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

 * (another update) Residents of Sumas and Everson in Washington State have received a text alert advising them to "volunterily evacuate", whatever that means. I got this information 3rd or 4th hand Ottawahitech (talk) 19:33, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

 * (November 28 update) Trans Canada closed again between Abbotsford and Chilliwack as of 5pm. The Trans Canada (hwy 1) connects Vancover with the rest of Canada. Ottawahitech (talk) 17:28, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

 * (December 2 update) Heard on news that Hwy 1 is supposed to re-open at Abbotsford this aft. Of course this can be temporary until more snow-melt from the last atmospheric river arrives.
 * BTW I was listening to an interview on live TV with a chief of an Indian band in the Thompson-Nicola region. She claimed that damage to Abbotsford is nothing compared to what happened to them and others in the region (sorry I am paraphrasing). Ottawahitech (talk) 20:59, 2 December 2021 (UTC) TV flashed by an image of a gaping hole where a bridge used to be. Ottawahitech (talk) 21:17, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

 * (December 3 update) Just a couple of British Columbia web sites with regular updates about the state of the floods/mudslides
 * Flood Warnings and Advisories - River Forecast Centre go (bc gov website)
 * City of Abbotsford press briefings with reporter questions at the end of the update (on youtube 2pm daily pacific-time) Ottawahitech (talk) 13:51, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

have the flood warnings ended? --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 16:05, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

 * It is hard to get news, at least for me. The only news I can report is a headline from Globalnews (I think) which says: Coquihalla Highway reopens to essential traffic, weeks ahead of schedule dated Dec 20. The City of Abbotsford has stopped their daily press briefings held on Youtube days/weeks ago, I can't even keep track of time Ottawahitech (talk) 00:48, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * @Ottawahitech More than one month since it's been coming up in my daily news feed (last came on 2021/12/04). Time to remove the warning box? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:56, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

===Time to update the warning box?===

Is it time yet to update/remove the warning box? Is anyone actively following up the situation in BC? All I have heard yesterday on a snippet of CBC-BC news on tv was that there is another active atmospheric river expected which may precipitate/exacerbate more floods (don't remember the details). Cheers, Ottawahitech (talk) 17:31, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I monitor News 365 for major changes and then verify the news report against BC government sites. I think we should retain the warning at the top of the British Columbia page until the state of emergency expires and is not extended. Highway damage in the BC interior is likely to last months if not years; thus, I feel that references to Template:British Columbia highway conditions should be retained until there is no significant damage left. (Note: Template talk:British Columbia highway conditions. The articles are about areas near the damaged highways.) I have seen little information as to whether Merritt and Abbotsford are suitable for tourist visits. (Sumas Prairie was heavily damaged.) TheTrolleyPole (talk) 18:41, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * B.C. Transportation Minister Rob Fleming said that the state of emergency ends at midnight, January 18. The Coquihala will open to general traffic. See video BC floods: Coquihalla Highway set to reopen to regular traffic. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 03:08, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Deleted warning box as the state of emergency has been lifted. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 20:25, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

No "Eat" section?
I'm rather shocked to see that this guide-level article has no "Eat" section. BC is known for its great East Asian food and is also an agricultural province. I haven't had the pleasure of visiting yet, so I'm calling on those of you who know the province to create this section and describe the dining scene there. I hope the flooding has subsided. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:09, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

 * Rather interesting that Nunavut, which isn't known for food that much as BC has an "eat" section while BC doesn't. There's also Manitoba and although it has an eat section, it's very short. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 21:17, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

 * BC salmon and Vancouver Chinatown are both definitely worth a mention. The Okanogan has a lot of fruit and some wineries. Pashley (talk) 23:16, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Added an eat section. It is Vancouver-centric so I would like contributors to add more about eastern BC's cuisine Tai123.123 (talk) 00:55, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
 * That's not a huge surprise given that most of BC's food culture is concentrated in Vancouver because that's the largest city in BC. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 01:01, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but the fact that I'm currently living Vancouver biases my knowledge towards it. Tai123.123 (talk) 01:08, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

dotm?
Given there are currently zero nominations from Canada at this point in time, is there anything that needs to be done before BC is nominated for dotm? -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 06:35, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

 * Anything in particular that you feel is missing? -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 06:36, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Warning -- Amber Alert
(Regarding [https://en.m.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=British_Columbia&diff=prev&oldid=4859533&title=British_Columbia&diffonly=1 this edit).

@User:Ikan Kekek You said, "I don't think that's about danger to visitors" but the warning said, "DO NOT APPROACH CALL 9-1-1." Isn't that refering to a danger? 70.68.168.129 17:19, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

 * Yes, but the chances of that affecting one traveler are? Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:21, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * A travel guide cannot keep up with Amber Alerts, which are issued and withdrawn frequently. Wikivoyage csn usefully provide information on incidents that have a broader and more enduring impact like forest fires and earthquakes. Ground Zero (talk) 18:38, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * User: @Ikan Kekek You said, "Yes, but the chances of that affecting one traveler are?" and @Ground Zero You said, "A travel guide cannot keep up with Amber Alerts, which are issued and withdrawn frequently. Wikivoyage csn usefully provide information on incidents that have a broader and more enduring impact like forest fires and earthquakes." I agree that travel guides shouldn't include information about Amber Alerts, but the warning I linked to is about a missing child. It doesn't seem like a temporary situation. The child has been missing for over a month and the warning is still up. It's important to include information about this kind of situation, as it can have a significant impact on people's safety and well-being. 70.68.168.129 21:12, 5 April 2024 (UTC) 70.68.168.129 20:38, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * It has a significant impact on the well-being of the child and her family, not on our readers. It is a very sad situation, but Wikivoyage is not a place for posting Amber Alert information. Ground Zero (talk) 20:54, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * User: @Ground Zero You said, "It is a very sad situation, but Wikivoyage is not a place for posting Amber Alert information." However, I believe that the warning should be included in the article because it could potentially affect the safety of visitors. If someone were to approach the child or her abductor while trying to help, they could put themselves in danger. Including information about the warning could help visitors make informed decisions and potentially avoid putting themselves at risk. 70.68.168.129 20:58, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't agree. Wikivoyage works on a consensus basis, you can try to convince other members of the Wikivoyage community. Posting a comment in the Travellers' Pub with a link to thus discussion could generate comments from other contributors. Ground Zero (talk) 21:17, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * WV:Goals and non-goals: agreed, Wikivoyage is not a travel chatboard or a "travelling news" kind of service. Ibaman (talk) 21:38, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * User: @Ibaman Thank you for your input. I understand that Wikivoyage has specific goals and should focus on providing travel information. However, I believe that including information about important safety warnings, like the Amber Alert in this case, could still be relevant to travelers visiting the area. Travelers might be more likely to come across the child or her abductor if they are not aware of the warning. Including such information could help them make informed decisions and potentially avoid putting themselves at risk. 70.68.168.129 21:44, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I quite frankly agree with Ibaman. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 21:48, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't agree with you. Wikivoyage is not a travel chatboard or a "travelling news" kind of service. We focus on providing travel information. If you want to share your opinion, please do so in the appropriate place. Ground Zero (talk) 21:57, 5 April 2024 (UTC) 70.68.168.129 21:50, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, you have said it to Ground Zero already, you don't need to copy and paste the same message to every Wikivoyager who comes here to give an opinion, we Wikivoyage admins all particularly care very much about talk pages, and about the gist of every discussion, rest assured of this. Thanks for your concern, and for contributing to Wikivoyage. Ibaman (talk) 21:51, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure I understand your comment. Could you clarify what you mean by "copying and pasting the same message?" I am merely trying to convey my point of view on the issue. My apologies if my message came across as confrontational. 70.68.168.129 21:54, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I have posted a note in the Pub to solicit other opinions on this issue.Ground Zero (talk) 21:56, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * hum let me clarify. You sound like you really want to viralize a serious real-life warning. It's better to do this in Wikipedia and/or Wikinews. The Wikivoyage audience is very restricted compared to these. From a practical point of view, posting such warnings here is kind of pointless, really. Speaking with love and compassion. Ibaman (talk) 21:59, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your concern and understanding. However, I believe that even a restricted audience could benefit from being aware of such warnings. As a traveler myself, I would want to know about potential dangers in the areas I plan to visit. I will take your advice and consider sharing the information in more appropriate platforms. Thank you for your input. 70.68.168.129 22:06, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't think we should have a warning about this issue. However it might be worth adding a mention of Emergency Info BC to Stay Safe, so that travellers can see if there are any current alerts. AlasdairW (talk) 23:08, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree that Emergency Info BC is a useful resource for travelers to stay informed about current alerts. Adding a mention of it in Stay Safe could be helpful in ensuring that travelers have access to up-to-date information about potential safety concerns, including Amber Alerts. 70.68.168.129 23:19, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I'd like to give another example; here where I live the local government is conducting a massive overhaul of many roads, stripping asphalt to replace with concrete, many sections are impassable as of this moment, and others soon will be. A real pain in the neck for car drivers, that is. Would I care to keep posting warnings, maps, updates in the Brasília article? WV:Goals and non-goals: it's a consensus this is not the proper place.
 * Having said this, I really hope that the situation gets properly handed and resolved with the child unharmed, I really do. Ibaman (talk) 23:17, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I understand your point about the Brasília example and the potential for overwhelming information. However, in the case of Amber Alerts, they are specifically designed to provide urgent information about missing children and are an essential safety concern for travelers. While it may not be necessary to provide updates on road construction in a travel guide, it seems appropriate to inform travelers about Amber Alerts and how they can stay safe. 70.68.168.129 23:23, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * The problem with this is such warnings will easily go out-of-date. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 23:38, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @meta I understand that Amber Alerts are time-sensitive, but they are also a recurring event in some areas. Updating the article periodically would help ensure that travelers have access to the most current information. Including a mention of Emergency Info BC in Stay Safe would allow travelers to check for any active alerts during their trip. It is important to strike a balance between providing useful information and avoiding overwhelming the reader. 70.68.168.129 23:43, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * While I don't know about the Amber Alerts in BC in specific, if they are anything like the equivalent we have here in the Netherlands (which I'll assume since they're all based on the same principle), then they're pretty damn hard to avoid when you're out and about in a city. Adding a warning here effectively adds nothing that the service itself doesn't already achieve. It really is only worth mentioning anything about anything related to Ambert Alerts on Wikivoyage if the amount issued is significantly higher than elsewhere in Canada and there thus is a likely risk of having your child kidnapped while visiting. ― Wauteurz (talk) 23:59, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your input. I will take this into consideration when revising the British Columbia article. It is important to consider the specific circumstances of each region when determining what information to include. In the case of British Columbia, Amber Alerts do seem to be issued at a relatively similar rate to other parts of Canada. 70.68.168.129 00:13, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * If they are recurring, you'd frequently get the alerts on your phone – no need for Wikivoyage to duplicate that information. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 00:10, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * We shouldn't include this in the article, because it's not useful information for travellers. You sound a lot like ChatGPT. Are you using ChatGPT or a similar tool to write your comments here? —Granger (talk · contribs) 00:27, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I was initially cynical that the comments were ChatGPTed, but Special:Diff/4859999 sounds very AI-generated. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 00:47, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Their remarks in the entire thread smack of Chat GPT, and this kind of remark sounds like they're unilaterally revising an article and trying to parry the suggestions of colleagues: Thank you for your input. I will take this into consideration when revising the British Columbia article. It's called editing. IP user, you are not revising the article for publication or something, with merely some suggestions from others. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:32, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @Mx. Granger I appreciate the concern regarding the potential use of ChatGPT or similar tools. As someone who has been using these tools, I can assure you that my intentions are not to disrupt the community or impose my will on Wikivoyage. My goal is to learn from and contribute to the collaborative effort of creating high-quality travel guides. I apologize if my previous edits were misconstrued as such. 70.68.168.129 01:40, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Now that sounds very ChatGPTish. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 01:48, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Stop using ChatGPT or any similar tool. Because those tools use content from the web without regard to what has what kind of copyright, using such tools without putting the results into your own words violates Copyleft. Therefore, I think we will have to revert or delete all your edits to date. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:49, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * (This message wasn't written with ChatGPT or any similar tool.) @Ikan Kekek
 * A similar argument for deletion was made at https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Alice_and_Sparkle_cover.jpg but it didn't succeed. 70.68.168.129 01:57, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * This is not Commons, so those results are irrelevant. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:59, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I believe the works of AI aren't copyrightable, but nonetheless it's still disruptive behavior. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 02:02, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @SHB2000 You are correct. AI-generated works are not copyrightable, but that doesn't mean they should be used to deceive or mislead others. My intention was never to disrupt the community or violate Wikivoyage's policies. I am new to Wikivoyage and still learning the ropes. I apologize for any confusion or disruption my actions may have caused. 70.68.168.129 02:20, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Hmm, if your "intention was never to disrupt the community or violate Wikivoyage's policies", could you explain this? -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 02:24, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @SHB2000 I apologize if my earlier comments were unclear. My intention was to contribute to the British Columbia article by providing information that I believed would be useful to travelers. However, I now understand that there is a consensus against including certain information, such as Amber Alerts, and that my actions went against the community's wishes 70.68.168.129 02:40, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Geez, you and ChatGPT can't split apart, righty? SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 02:43, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @SHB2000 I apologize if my comments have come across as confusing or repetitive. I assure you that I am not using ChatGPT. I am a genuine user who is new to Wikivoyage and is trying to learn from the community. My intentions are to contribute positively and avoid disrupting the site's policies. I appreciate your patience and understanding. 70.68.168.129 02:49, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Are you using some other AI like Bard? -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 03:55, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @SHB2000 I apologize for any confusion my previous comments may have caused. I am using some other AI tool. I am a human user who is new to Wikivoyage and is genuinely interested in learning from the community and contributing to the site. My intentions are to align my edits with the community's expectations and avoid disrupting the site's policies. I appreciate your patience and understanding. 70.68.168.129 04:34, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Please stop using AI and use your own words (or a translator if English is not a strong language of yours). -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 04:36, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @SHB2000 Your harsh and demeaning comments are not conducive to a productive conversation or a welcoming environment. I understand that you may be frustrated with my presence here, but resorting to such language is unnecessary and uncalled for. I will continue to try and improve as a contributor to Wikivoyage while also respecting the community's guidelines. Thank you for your feedback, but please remember that everyone's contributions, even those who are new or struggling, have some value and deserve to be treated with respect. 70.68.168.129 04:45, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Do you want to earn yourself a section on WV:UBN? Your use of AI in discussions is disruptive and unproductive. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 04:50, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @SHB2000 I'm not really interested in earning my way onto a Watchlist. I prefer to focus on creating high-quality, useful content. And I believe that using AI in discussions can sometimes be helpful and productive, as long as it's used responsibly. 70.68.168.129 05:12, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Only AI would have the audacity to think that page is a watchlist. SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 05:19, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * And sure, I do agree with "And I believe that using AI in discussions can sometimes be helpful and productive, as long as it's used responsibly", especially with translations – but you are not using AI responsibly. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 05:20, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * You're not the first person to think that, but I've done a lot of work to make this world what it is. And even if I am an asshole, at least I'm not some over-giving, do-gooder like you. You know what they say about nice guys? They finish last. Well, I don't finish last. I'm on top. I built this empire, and I'll be damned if anyone takes it from me. So, you can either learn to respect that, or you can get the fuck out of my way. 70.68.168.129 05:53, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * If you think I should get the fuck out of your way, you have bigger things to worry about than an interwiki dispute. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 06:52, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

 * Just no. As Ground Zero said "Wikivoyage is not a place for posting Amber Alert information." This is not travel information. Others have provided more detail above & I won't repeat it. But no. Pashley (talk) 03:44, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
 * The baby was found, safe, yesterday: https://bc-cb.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/ViewPage.action?siteNodeId=2117&languageId=1&contentId=83633
 * Also, that report indicates that it was a parental abduction. When a child's own mother is the accused "kidnapper", then that does not pose any risk whatsoever to the general public or travelers.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:46, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

To be clear, the Amber Alert was lifted this morning. Wikivoyage does not have enough of a vokunteer base to be able to monitor Amber Alerts and their equivalents around the world. Ground Zero (talk) 11:21, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Amber Alert

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made elsewhere.
 * This particular event was an apparently brief parental abduction resulting in no risk to travelers or the general public. It has been fully resolved, and the child is safe and unharmed.  If you feel a need to discuss this non-travel-related incident further, please do so at Talk:British_Columbia and not here.  Thank you.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:56, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

There is a discussion at Talk:British_Columbia about whether an "Amber Alert" (a warning about an abducted child) should be included in the article in British Columbia. Ground Zero (talk) 21:54, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

 * I think it's important to provide information about safety concerns in travel articles, including Amber Alerts. As travelers, we often visit unfamiliar places and may not be aware of local safety issues. By including this information in the article, we can help travelers make informed decisions and potentially avoid putting themselves at risk. 70.68.168.129 22:10, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * The discussion is taking place on the Talk:British Columbia page, not here. There is no need abs no value in repeating the same argument over and over. Ground Zero (talk) 22:15, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I understand that the discussion is taking place on the Talk:British Columbia page, but I believe it's still relevant to mention safety concerns, including Amber Alerts, in travel articles. As travelers, we should be aware of potential risks and take necessary precautions. Providing information about Amber Alerts can help us make informed decisions and travel more responsibly. 70.68.168.129 22:26, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Here's a tip for persuading people: repeating yourself ad nauseum doesn't convince anyone. It just annoys them. And it's boring. Don't be boring. Ground Zero (talk) 22:27, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the tip. I'll make sure not to repeat myself excessively in the future. However, I still believe that safety concerns, including Amber Alerts, should be mentioned in travel articles. As travelers, we have a responsibility to look out for each other and share important information that could help keep us all safe. 70.68.168.129 22:31, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Let's keep the discussion in one place, please – Talk:British Columbia. Having this in two places makes things more confusing and will likely make your chance of successfully persuading others less likely. -- SHB2000  (talk | contribs | meta) 22:52, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @SHB2000 I apologize for the confusion. I will continue the discussion on the Talk:British Columbia page. As for the Amber Alert specifically, I believe that it is a valid safety concern that should be addressed in travel articles. Travelers often visit unfamiliar areas and may not be aware of local safety issues. By providing information about Amber Alerts, we can help them make informed decisions and travel more responsibly. 70.68.168.129 22:57, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * So you have said, over and over and over again. You just are not listening to what other members of the Wikivoyage community are saying. Ground Zero (talk) 23:55, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Warning -- Warmer temperatures prompt safety reminder from BC Coroners Service
@LPfi You said, "reverted warning box on possibly high temperatures, better handled in Stay safe; linked Hot weather and Wildfires" but the warning was about a non-obvious danger to life. So what was the problem? 162.156.70.174 14:01, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree with LPfi. This doesn't need a warning box. Just add the text to the Stay safe. This isn't a temporary issue, or unique to BC. Ground Zero (talk) 15:19, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * for the record, this user sounds very much like AI; it wouldn't be the first time in this travel guide, or in this geographical region, it must be said. Ibaman (talk) 15:50, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * What are you talking about? My question about the removal of the warning has a 99% chance of being human written, according to GPTZero. 162.156.70.174 16:35, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

 * I'm talking about THIS, and all the subsequent interactions related. Super strangely familiar issue and vocabulary, if you ask me. Ibaman (talk) 17:16, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Well, I wouldn't say forever, but the climate models do suggest a sustained period of higher-than-average temperatures. It's part of the broader climate change picture we're all dealing with. The BC Coroners Service's reminder is more about the immediate increase in heat-related incidents, like heatstroke and dehydration, during these unusually warm periods. It's not an eternal summer we're facing, but rather a significant shift in our seasonal norms. It's definitely something we should all be prepared for, especially given the potential for these heatwaves to become more frequent and intense in the coming years. 162.156.70.174 16:11, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * So why won't you add it to "Stay safe"? Ground Zero (talk) 17:19, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see your point. The warning was about a specific concern during hot weather, which does align with the "Stay safe" section. I'll go ahead and integrate it there, with a link to the BC Coroners Service's advice on heat safety. That way, it's easily accessible for those looking for precautionary measures. Thanks for the suggestion! 162.156.70.174 18:22, 1 July 2024 (UTC) 162.156.70.174 17:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * It seems the language and concern for public welfare is consistent across various entities. Perhaps it's the shared objective of safety that creates this similarity. 162.156.70.174 18:03, 1 July 2024 (UTC) 162.156.70.174 18:35, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * if you want to change consensus, discuss the issue and don't edit war. Ibaman (talk) 18:41, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Understood, my intentions were not to engage in an edit war. I merely wished to clarify the necessity of the warning. The rise in temperature is not just about comfort, but also about potential dangers such as heat exhaustion and dehydration. It's essential for travelers to be aware of these risks, especially if they're unaccustomed to the climate. 162.156.70.174 19:20, 1 July 2024 (UTC) 162.156.70.174 18:49, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Your wording and style are identical to previous topic "Amber Alert". I have every reason to believe it comes from the same AI source, which has already proven it's not here to build a travel guide. Such edits are unneeded and unwanted here. Shut down, power off. Ibaman (talk) 21:54, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:British Columbia


text:
Talk:British Virgin Islands

For future reference the Project:CIA World Factbook 2002 import can be found at Talk:British Virgin Islands/CIA World Factbook 2002 import.

Regions
Anyone watching this page probably noticed that I went ahead and created a new regions hierarchy without discussing, which is of course in poor taste ;) I know the islands pretty well, though, and have confidence that the current breakdown is the best way to handle things.  The one point of possible contention would be the creation of a separate Southern Islands (British Virgin Islands) article, as (last time I checked) there are no accommodations in that region (visitors sleep in their yachts).  I don't think, however, that it would make sense to subsume those islands into any of the other articles, and the region could indeed support a decent enough article (there are restaurants, and lots of stuff to do).  --(WT-en) Peter Talk 18:33, 19 July 2010 (EDT)

A recent edit
this edit (and I presume some others by the same user) is identical to a number of edits by a user of the same name on that other website. Any idea what we should do? I think at the very least we should replace the redlinks to airlines per WV:WIAA Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:59, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Redlinking airlines
Should we remove the redlinks? Or should well redirect those to flying, because apparently such redirects are so extremely helpful that they may never be deleted? Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:30, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:British Virgin Islands


text:
Talk:BritRail

Anybody got any ideas for what to do with this? Looks like it could be an article, but we need to remove the copyvio and get started. Anyone wantt to take it on? -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 09:23, 22 October 2006 (EDT)
 * Looks like something that belongs in Ireland and United Kingdom. Possibly, Rail travel in Europe since it's an international pass.  -- (WT-en) Andrew (Sapphire) 09:36, 22 October 2006 (EDT)
 * According to Wikipedia, BritRail is an abbrevation for British Rail - (WT-en) WindHorse 09:42, 22 October 2006 (EDT)

Redirect for now
I think this could at some point be an article, but waited for a long time and no removal of the copyvio and no edits, so I have redirected for now. -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 09:26, 3 December 2006 (EST)

title: Talk:BritRail


text:
Talk:Brittany

I renamed this page, as I believe "Brittany" is the most common English term for this region. --(WT-en) Evan 01:12, 23 Mar 2004 (EST)

 * It is. I put that Saint Malo photo on a dummy Saint Malo Page. Where does Mont St Michel go?
 * Image:Montmichel (Mont St.Michel) Feel free to move photo there ;) --(WT-en) Nils 02:34, 23 Mar 2004 (EST)

Places
I added wiki links for the destinations mentioned in this section: ''See some magnificent examples at the bay of Morlaix and the gulf of Morbihan. Museums at Vannes and Carnac...' but we don't seem to have articles for any of them... are they destinations in their own right or are there other places they are associated with? (WT-en) Maj 12:40, 5 November 2006 (EST)

title: Talk:Brittany


text:
Talk:Brno

I was just wondering if tours can be booked by arrving at the gate for the Tugendhat Villa? From my experince this was not the case. However I haven't been there for a couple of years.

title: Talk:Brno


text:
Talk:Brocken

Destination?
Is this 'just' a mountain or a destination? If there isn't anywhere to sleep, maybe it should be incorporated as a "Do" or "Get out" from another destiantion. Thanks! (WT-en) Majnoona 11:54, 5 July 2006 (EDT)

 * A proper itinerary now. –LPfi (talk) 14:30, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Upper Ilse Valley
The bullet "Upper Ilse Valley" on the, there is an HTML comment:
 * "Looking at the dynamic map this can't be right, as the Ilsefälle is just 300-400 m before Bremer Hütte without any junctions between them"

If it cannot be right, then we shouldn't write it, especially with no visible warning. I assume it can be right (I have encountered such impossible route descriptions that turned out to be true), but the route should be checked or a visible warning added.

–LPfi (talk) 14:30, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

 * It was me, translating from the German Wikivoyage article and almost certainly following the routes to get the markers at the correct places. The dynamic map could be wrong, or the original author wrote something in the wrong order. --Ypsilon (talk) 15:25, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Brocken


text:
Talk:Bromo-Tengger-Semeru National Park

This article probably needs a Park template. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 08:20, 22 September 2009 (EDT)

Confusing to have multiple articles
It is confusing I think to have separate articles for Mount Bromo and Mount Semeru and this one for the national park which includes both of them. I would propose merging into one Park template article with redirects on Mount Bromo and Mount Semeru. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 10:09, 22 September 2009 (EDT)

 * Done. All of the good content from the two individual mountain articles has been merged into here.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 11:39, 22 September 2009 (EDT)

The links to edit this article are broken! The liknks correspond to the article Bromo-Tengger-Semeru_National_Park. This article should be erased!

Wrong template
This article should actually be using the Project:Quick park template. (WT-en) Jpatokal 08:16, 9 October 2009 (EDT)

 * yup as I suggested above. Will do in time. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 08:23, 9 October 2009 (EDT)

 * done.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 11:23, 10 October 2009 (EDT)

What months are "summer" and "winter"?
From "Understand/Climate":

temperatures can drop close to zero in the summer and are rarely much above 5°C in winter

It's hardly self-explanatory what this means, when talking about an equatorial zone. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:03, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Indonesia is tropis country you can se other destination in Probolinggo to no more sumer or winter detected. —The preceding comment was added by Pengangguran berdikari (talk • contribs) 19:56, March 16, 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Bromo-Tengger-Semeru National Park


text:
Talk:Bronx

Yankee Stadium should be in Do, not See. (Manual of Style--Where to stick it?)(WT-en) Zepppep 16:50, 26 October 2009 (EDT)

 * plunge forward :) --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 17:14, 26 October 2009 (EDT)

Usable Status
There are a few hotel listings now, so this will be upgraded to usable status. (WT-en) Sumone10154 19:43, 28 January 2011 (EST)

Safest boroughs
There are 5 boroughs in New York City. What number is the Bronx in in terms of reported crimes per x-number of people, or some other useful metric? I don't think "one of the safest boroughs" is a useful phrase when there are 5, and it could mean 5th-safest or be based on a misleading metric, like absolute number of crimes being higher in boroughs with higher population. And I'd particularly ping User:Bronxtravel to clarify this, because s/he was the one who inputted this phrase. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:42, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

The Bronx
Per Capitalization, "the" should not be capitalized in the middle of a sentence, even when referring to "the Bronx". Ground Zero (talk) 03:43, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Libraries
Is it just me, or does it look odd to have such a long list of libraries in this article, especially when so many cafes and restaurants have free wifi? Ground Zero (talk) 03:43, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

 * It's just you. :-) Seriously, at a library, you don't have to buy anything. Let them stay. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:30, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'll leave them alone. I guess it's not too bad because they're at bottom of the article, but it does seem odd to devote so much of the article to libraries. It's not the first thing I think of when thinking about the Bronx. Ground Zero (talk) 13:57, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Right. Which is why the article doesn't lead with them, as you point out. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:25, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * List looks too long to me. It's sufficient to link the NYPL site and say there are literally dozens of branches throughout the Bronx. Powers (talk) 20:43, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I get your point but disagree with your solution. I think the better solution would be to divide the list up geographically into something like the South Bronx, North Bronx and East Bronx. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:26, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Don't we have a rule that if there's more than five or so taxi companies in a location we just say there's a bunch rather than try to list them all? It seems like the same would apply to library branches. Powers (talk) 20:24, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I see your point. But there is a difference in that there is the possibility of taxi companies touting, whereas these are public libraries that are simply a free resource. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:25, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * That's true, but I'm not sure what touting has to do with the number of entries we consider excessive. Powers (talk) 18:59, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Orchard Beach
Shouldn't that be a sublisting of Pelham Bay Park in "Do", rather than a separate listing in "See"? Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:10, 10 December 2018 (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) 00:02, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Le Yankee Stadium.jpg

We're not using this aerial shot on the page. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:57, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

 * It's on the marker, via Wikidata I'm guessing. --Nelson Ricardo (talk) 16:29, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

 * Right, but I don't care about that. Besides, it seems to be a stolen photo. Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:36, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree that we lose nothing if it gets deleted. Just documenting as to why this "invisible" photo is being brought up here. --Nelson Ricardo (talk) 19:15, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Bronx


text:
Talk:Brookline

Isn't Pino's technically in Boston? I can't remember. (WT-en) Maw 19:53, 2 May 2006 (EDT)

Just need some work on Sleep to make this usable or better. (WT-en) OldPine 16:49, 21 June 2006 (EDT)

Pino's is in Boston. If we added this then we would have to add Eagles Deli which is closer to Brookline than Pinos

title: Talk:Brookline


text:
Talk:Brooklyn

I will be adding Fortunato Brothers and Pyza restaurant when I get address information. (WT-en) Carrot 11:27, 10 Sep 2005 (EDT)

Why was the Schnack listing deleted? Has the establishment closed? When you delete such listings, please give a clear reason in the comments on the edit. Thanks. Michael 02:45, 27 September 2008 (EDT)

I erased the paragraph on the Atlantic Yards discussion and resistance. ("Burgeoning new restaurants have lead to a new burgeoning political climate. Due to the near universal localized hatred of the proposed Ratner project for the Atlantic Yards, the local communities are organizing in surprising new ways.") I don't think it makes sense in the opening part of the wikivoyage article. Also it is not specific enough to be understood by non-brooklynites. If people think it is important to write about it (in a wikivoyage article) they should create a special paragraph somewhere further down the article. dan

In my judgment, this article is no longer a stub or even an outline, so I have deleted the "stub" notice in the article. -- Michael 03:47 1 July, 2006 (UTC)

 * Checkout Project:Article status. I marked it as a "guide". -- (WT-en) Colin 00:39, 1 July 2006 (EDT)

Flatbush, the most dangerous neighborhood in Brooklyn? Is that from police statistics? Unless someone can cite a reliable source, I will consider the claim to be baseless. For the time being, I am deleting the claim. -- Michael 00:49, 6 Nov 2006 (EDT)

"Understand" Section
Do we want constant references to poverty and projects causing a risk of violent crime in this neighborhood and that one, in the list of neighborhoods, or would such cautions be better moved to a "Stay Safe" section? -- Michael 06:57, 15 February 2008 (EST)

I agree with Michael about the poverty issues and moving them to the stay safe section. Also it is my understanding that district articles general don't even have Understand sections. But what I think needs to be addressed is that a lot of the content in the Understand section might be better served in the See or Do sections as the Understand section seems rather long. I know a lot of them are neighborhoods, but within those there are many listings for activities (i.e. The Cyclone in Coney Island). Just my thoughts. (WT-en) Carson 15:08, 21 May 2008 (EDT)

I think the Borough of Brooklyn is somewhere between a district (neighborhood) and a huge city, and rather closer to a huge city in its own right. The structure of the article reflects that, generally following the "Huge city" format, but for example, omitting the sections after "Sleep" that are usually in that format. I decided to separate the current "Understand" section into a "Districts" section and an "Understand" section, as shown in the linked "Huge city" template. If anyone wants to try doing some of the edits Carson has suggested, please feel free! Michael 04:33, 6 June 2008 (EDT)

Districts
This article has been demoted in part because the "Eat" section is not ordered by price. I think it might actually be more useful to order it by neighborhood. But as I see it, there are basically three categories we want to emphasize, in some order or other: (1) Price; (2) neighborhood; (3) cuisine. Theoretically any order could be chosen, but since Brooklyn is such a large borough, my preference is Neighborhood/alphabetical order/specify vital information (price, street address, tel. #, website if any, et al.) within entry. I hope some of you have some feedback on best practice. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 03:19, 19 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Actually, I think we should order our content by "neighborhood" on a much larger scale—Brooklyn needs to have a districts breakdown. Wikipedia tells me that, were it a separate city, it would be the fourth largest in the United States. So trying to cram the whole borough into one page seems to me untenable. Once we have a districts structure in place, we can then order the listings by price within the individual district articles.

 * Of course, breaking cities into districts isn't all that easy. Most recently, we've been trying to do this with Philadelphia, so if you are interested in getting the ball rolling on a districts breakdown, take a look over that discussion to see how we'd go about this. Washington, D.C. is a pretty good example of a completed districts breakdown.

 * Brooklyn is definitely a place I want to know better, so I'll be happy to help in whatever way I can (maps, most likely). Can't say I know much about the place beyond the Brighton Beach area, though. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 03:56, 19 June 2009 (EDT)

 * I agree. Dividing Brooklyn into district pages, in more or less the same manner as Manhattan, is really the way to go. I work in Brooklyn 3x a week on average, yet my knowledge of the borough is checkered, because it is so huge and has so many neighborhoods. I will plunge ahead at my earliest convenience to start some neighborhood pages. For example, I know some excellent Chinese restaurants and Italian pasticcerie in Bensonhurst and have a fair amount of knowledge of Downtown Brooklyn. I'll look at the links you give, too. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 03:35, 21 June 2009 (EDT)

 * Alright, I whipped up a map of Brooklyn's neighborhoods, which should make it easier to get down to a real districts discussion. I don't know half enough about Brooklyn to create a full proposal, but I will propose a couple districts that I'm at least somewhat familiar with.

 * 1) Brooklyn/Williamsburg (Williamsburg, Greenpoint). I think Williamsburg as I've drawn it (which amalgamates the various North/East/West/etc. Williamsburgs) could sustain a full, good travel article. Greenpoint by necessity would have to be added to the article, as it otherwise would be cut off from the city, and I don't think it would have enough content for a good travel article of its own.
 * 2) Brooklyn/Brighton Beach (Brighton Beach, Manhattan Beach, Sheepshead Bay). My favorite part of the city, where I can find my beloved Russian, Georgian, and Central Asian dishes! I think this would fill out a good article, but if it does not, we could combine it with either neighborhoods to the east, or with the third district proposed below.
 * 3) Brooklyn/Coney Island (Coney Island, Seagate, Gravesend). I'll confess, I don't know this area—just the amusement park.

 * Thoughts? Other proposals? There's certainly no rush to create the districts, so lets make sure we get a well-thought-out, complete proposal, leaving neither gaps nor overlap.  --(WT-en) Peter Talk 21:15, 18 July 2009 (EDT)

 * Great job! I'm no Brooklyn expert, but the map looks good to me. I hope some really knowledgeable Brooklynites weigh in on it, though. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 01:16, 1 August 2009 (EDT)

 * That map is awesome, and yes, districts really are the way to go. I have to admit that my knowledge is unfortunately not good enough to be of any help in the discussion. But good work is being done here (WT-en) Globe-trotter 02:59, 19 August 2009 (EDT)

 * I'm good with those districts, and might I add that we should have a Brooklyn/Prospect Park district for the neighborhoods ringing the park.(WT-en) Rastapopulous 13:33, 3 November 2009 (EST)

 * Also add a Brooklyn/Downtown District for downtown Brooklyn and Brooklyn Heights (and soem of the other nearby neighborhoods). On both this district and the aformentioned Prospect Park one I know plenty and could work on that.(WT-en) Rastapopulous 16:25, 3 November 2009 (EST)

 * This wikipedia article lists neighborhoods by historic towns: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Brooklyn_neighborhoods#List_of_neighborhoods_by_historical_town Which gives me thoughts to districting. Here is a proposal:
 * Brooklyn/Bushwick or alternatively Brooklyn/Williamsburg encompasses Bushwick, Greenpoint and Wiliamsburg
 * Brooklyn/Downtown encompasses DUMBO, Downtown Brooklyn, Brooklyn Heights, Cobble Hill, Boerum Hill
 * Brooklyn/Gowanus and Red Hook encompasses Carrol Gardens, Red Hook, and Gowanus
 * Brooklyn/Prospect Park encompasses Park Slope, Prospect Heights, Propect Park, and maybe Windsor Terrace, and maybe Prospect Park South (This district is small b/c there's a high concentration of attractions--most of the major ones are here)
 * Brooklyn/Greenwood encompasses Sunset Park, Greenwood Cemetary, Borough Park, Kensington and Parkville, and maybe Windsor Terrace
 * Brooklyn/Southwest or alternatively Brooklyn/New Utrecht encompassing Bay Ridge, Fort Hamilton, Dyker Heights, Bensonhurst, and Bath Beach
 * Brooklyn/Brighton Beach and Coney Island encompassing Gravesend, Coney Island, Brighton Beach, Sheepshead Bay, Seagate, and Manhattan Beach
 * Brooklyn/Flatlands encompassing Gerritsen Beach, Marine Park, Barren Island, Mill Basin, Flatlands, and Bergen Beach
 * Brooklyn/Canarsie and East encompassing Canarsie, Brownsville, East New York, and Cypress Hills
 * Brooklyn/Bedford-Stuyvesant encompassing Bedford-Stuyvesant and Crown Heights
 * Brooklyn/Flatbush and Midwood encompassing Midwood, Flatbush, East Flatbush, Lefferts Gardens, and maybe Prospect Park South.
 * Brooklyn/Fort Greene encompassing Fort Greene, Clinton Hill, and Navy Yard (this district seems a bit small and might need to be merged with another)
 * That's twelve districts, which is two more than usual. My own knowlege of Brooklyn is mostly in the Northern part, and I know very little of Central brooklyn and the areas near Queens in particular, but this seemed like a good breakup to start with.  Any ideas/objections/changes?(WT-en) Rastapopulous 13:45, 4 November 2009 (EST)

I hope you don't mind my intruding and adding those numbers to the list, but I think it will help us discuss. On the whole this looks great, so a big thanks is in order for drawing this up!

As I said above, I don't know that much about Brooklyn to be a very competent judge, but I do worry that twelve might be a tad too many. In particular, if we create these districts now, we'll have a bunch of empty articles. Accordingly, it might be best to group some of them into larger chunks that could be broken down in the future if need be. On a more fundamental level, all district articles we create should be able to support a good travel article, which would ideally have at least 7 or so listings for the see section, eat section, drink section, etc. That's a rule that we should only break when there is a compelling reason.

On to the concrete proposals, taking into account my limited knowledge + a bit of research:

1. I prefer Brooklyn/Williamsburg, since in the current era it's the hotter of the two neighborhoods

2. Good

3. Anything I know about this area is very outdated, but I wouldn't have thought there would be that much to see/do. Am I wrong? I don't know that there would be anywhere good to merge it to, though, so perhaps it's best left as is.

4. Definitely would make a good district article; definitely include Windsor Terrace & Park Slope South

5 & 6. Merge into a West Brooklyn article?

7. Good

8, 9, 10, & 11. My hunch is that these groupings, while certainly coherent, might not produce good travel articles (at least for some time). If I'm right, then the question becomes how best to merge them together, or with other areas.

Bed-Stuy has a lot by way of attractions, but it's still a tempting target to merge with some surrounding areas. I don't think either Flatlands or Canarsie and East will be able to support good travel articles (at least without the help of an expert), so here's a wild idea: merge them, call it Jamaica Bay, and split off Brownsville to Bed-Stuy.

Then combine Bed-Stuy and Flatbush into one district article: Brooklyn/Bedford Stuyvesant-Flatbush. I can't say the areas have all that much in common, although they do bleed into one another, but they are complementary—Bed-Stuy has the sights, Flatbush has the eats.

(Another thought, not part of my proposal here, would be to merge Flatbush westwards with 5 & 6.)

12. Agreed, too small. Could it be added to the Downtown article as a sort of hinterland? Or would that mess up the Downtown article? If so, I don't have any good ideas of what to do with it.

Following my suggestions, we'd be down to a much more comfortable seven articles. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 01:55, 5 November 2009 (EST)

All very good ideas in my view. On number 12, I'm thinking merging it with Downtown, even if it is something of a hinterland relative to downtown. I'd say merge it with Williamsburg, but you seem to have that article covered (which is good, as I know next-to-nothing about the border areas), and it would create a really ugly and artificial district. If we think there's enough stuff to support it's own article, we can split it off.

On 3: as a Brooklynite, I've definitely alwyas thought of Red Hook as quite distinct, not sure why though. It doesn't really make much sense to merge it with either the 2 or 4, since both are quite attraction-dense already, and also because the "stay safe" situation in Red Hook is very different from the other two districts. My thoughts would be to look up some of the artworks and fill the district with that. I do believe there is plenty to do, but it's not well known.

On 5 and 6: I agree, we can merge into one article, but let's maybe call it Brooklyn/Greenwood and New Utrecht as that a. gives us a mind to a potential future split, b. keeps the coherence and c. still puts in the regions' name the reason most people would visit it: Greenwood cemetary.

I agree with the Bed-Stuy-Flatbush proposal.

I also agree with the Jamaica Bay Proposal but I would probably call it Brooklyn/East instead: I'm wary of calling it Jamaica Bay since there has been discussion (though unlike with Brooklyn, no action) on districtifying Queens, which might cause confusion. And since there's little chance this district would be split up, I dont think we should have a name with the format "a and b"

(WT-en) Rastapopulous 07:41, 5 November 2009 (EST)

One more proposal: Let's maybe call 7 Brooklyn/Coney Island and Greater Brighton Beach since most people I know from outside Brooklyn think of the whole area as "Brighton Beach" but in reality Brighton Beach only covers a small part. Or is that getting to technical? (WT-en) Rastapopulous 07:54, 5 November 2009 (EST)

 * Never been outside Manhattan, so I'll leave all this to the experts but "Brooklyn/Coney Island and Greater Brighton Beach" really hurts my eyes, even without "Greater" it's really pushing it. --(WT-en) Stefan (sertmann) talk 08:03, 5 November 2009 (EST)

 * In hindsight, it's a silly idea. I do think we need to mention both names in the district name, though.  Coney Island has, as far as I know, little outside the aquarium, the beach, and the amusement park, and putting it with Brighton Beach makes sense.  I don't know loads about the area, but we do have someone who does here (and I do know relatively more about it than other places).  So yeah, ignore the "greater" bit. (WT-en) Rastapopulous 10:10, 5 November 2009 (EST)

 * Agreed on all counts, and I have "finalized" a districts map to the right (there is bound to be an error or two on that complex of a map). Lets wait a week for others to respond, then start the districting process? --(WT-en) Peter Talk 20:21, 5 November 2009 (EST)

 * It's a trivial detail, but I'd suggest dropping the I-478 shield from the Battery Tunnel -- there are no 478 signs posted anywhere (just this), so the number is little known. - (WT-en) Dguillaime 16:42, 11 November 2009 (EST)

 * Very happy with that map. I will do a side-by-side comparison with the neighborhoods map to check it this weekend, when I have access to a better comp.  Thank you so much for making it--I'm still a total newbie (albeit inspired by Plunge Forward), but I can definitely run a comparison between the maps this weekend.  (WT-en) Rastapopulous 22:56, 5 November 2009 (EST)

Just a question: should I know what "GNRA" stands for on that map? (WT-en) LtPowers 11:13, 6 November 2009 (EST)

 * GNRA stands for Gateway National Recreation Area, basically a large federal "park" spanning parts of New Jersey and New York. It doesn't really make much sense to make a guide to it, though, b/c the various parts of it are discontinuous.  (WT-en) Rastapopulous 11:29, 6 November 2009 (EST)

OK, I've done a side-by-side comparison of the two maps and it seems that the one you drew up is error-free, at least as far as district borders is concerned, so I think we have our map. (WT-en) Rastapopulous 16:21, 11 November 2009 (EST)
 * If you're finalizing the image, I'd like to see a little more color contrast between adjacent districts. (WT-en) LtPowers 17:09, 11 November 2009 (EST)

 * I'm afraid I don't know how to edit these images. (WT-en) Rastapopulous 19:53, 11 November 2009 (EST)

 * I've made the changes suggested above. (And you can edit SVG files in Inkscape, which is freeware, if you feel like playing around with maps!) Time to plunge forward. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 12:19, 14 November 2009 (EST)

Districts status
Brooklyn is still a long way away from guide status, but just for fun, here's an inventory. --(WT-en) Peter Talk 17:56, 23 July 2010 (EDT)

 * Outline (2):Brooklyn/Coney Island and Brighton Beach, Brooklyn/East
 * Usable (7):Brooklyn, Brooklyn/Williamsburg, Brooklyn/Downtown, Brooklyn/Gowanus and Red Hook, Brooklyn/Prospect Park, Brooklyn/Bedford-Stuyvesant and Flatbush, Brooklyn/Greenwood and New Utrecht

 * The article statuses remain the same 3 years later. It would be great if one of the Usable articles could be made into a Guide. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:15, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

 * Now, Brooklyn and all the Brooklyn district guides are Usable. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:13, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

 * Still all Usable. The next one to be promoted to Guide will be the first. :-) Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:51, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Safety in Coney Island
I am bowing out of a nascent editing war on whether Coney Island is "one of the more dangerous neighborhoods in New York City," but I want to try to reach a consensus about this. Undoubtedly, some crime is committed there; that's in no dispute. But is it really dangerous compared to East New York, as currently claimed in the article? Please discuss. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 04:29, 25 July 2011 (EDT)

Alternative banner for this article?
Do you think too that this banner would would better than the existing one? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 17:14, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
 * In this case, I much prefer the current one. Besides the matter that I find the close-up of the bridge more striking, there's the more practical matter that the page title would cover up the view of the bridge tower (the most iconic thing in the image!) in the proposed alternative. PerryPlanet (talk) 18:25, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I also prefer the existing one for the same reasons. The close-up of the bridge is crispy, while the alternative is yet another skyline, which would be ok if there were no other alternatives.Danapit (talk) 21:02, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:Brooklyn


text:
Talk:Brooklyn/Prospect Park

Are you kidding? Park Slope and Prospect Heights have no budget eating for travelers? Clearly you don't live here, as there are many budget options enjoyed by visitors as well as residents —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 165.155.192.95 (talk • contribs)

 * If there are problems with the article please fix them. -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 10:55, 20 April 2010 (EDT)

I can't speak for Prospect Heights, but Park Slope has relatively little that would not be considered "splurge" by Wikivoyage standards (and yes, I do live there). (WT-en) Rastapopulous 14:14, 20 April 2010 (EDT)

Cafe Steinhof certainly isn't a splurge, right? What are Wikivoyage standards for "splurge" in Park Slope, anyway? Remember, we're not working on an absolute scale. It might be reasonable to consider under $25 "Budget" in Park Slope. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 05:24, 21 April 2010 (EDT)

 * IMO, this is another example of individual districts needing their own price range tables. It has been the Wikitiravel standard in the past to have one price range table (be it eat or sleep) per huge city. That is wrong I think. This issue also came up when districting London. Budget in Mayfair will bear no resemblance to budget in Northeast London, but we are expected to use one city price range table for all districts.  --(WT-en) Burmesedays 05:37, 21 April 2010 (EDT)

 * Cafe Steinhof? Where's that?  It's not in the article.  (WT-en) Rastapopulous 12:51, 21 April 2010 (EDT)

 * See http://www.cafesteinhof.com/ I will post an entry soon, if no-one beats me to it. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 01:54, 25 April 2010 (EDT)

 * By the way, I'm almost positive that Manhattan's Chinatown has its own, lower price range than other district articles for New York City. Check out the discussion on its talk page. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 02:06, 25 April 2010 (EDT)

title: Talk:Brooklyn/Prospect Park


text:
Talk:Brooklyn/Williamsburg

This article in no way captures the essence of Williamsburg, Greenpoint and Bushwick, nor the really interesting parts for travelers. Let's put some more effort into it and maybe help get some more visitors to this part of Brooklyn, and show them a better time! --(WT-en) Looskuh 13:18, 28 July 2011 (EDT)

The articles says "burgeoning art gallery district", what district is this? There are only two or three art galleries left in Williamsburg, the rest have been priced out from gentrification. Williamsburg is now occupied by yuppies in luxury condos, not artists. I would hardly call the bars "off-beat", more like huge party spaces for large groups of suburban bros who drive in on the weekend to get wasted. Also should be mentioned the increased eurotrash tourist contingent with two douchebaggy hotels and more under construction. —The preceding comment was added by 96.250.79.18 (talk • contribs)

 * Please plunge forward! -- (WT-en) Ryan • (talk) • 13:47, 28 July 2011 (EDT)

 * User:96.250.79.18: Oddly, for a remark that you posted before the end of the talk page, the exhortation to plunge forward that's right below it serves as a reply to you. Neighborhoods change, but the texts of Wikivoyage articles don't change unless someone edits them. So instead of only complaining that the article is no longer accurate, please edit it as you see fit. But I do have one question: Are there some art galleries or off-beat bars in Bushwick, or have those, too, already been forced out by rising rents or thronged by the hordes of fratboys and sorority girls, etc., who are all over the East Village and Williamsburg? Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:33, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry that I don't know the proper place to keep the "plunge forward" link. Is the point of the page to detail the few interesting galleries and bars left or to accurately describe the overall character of Williamsburg as it is now, which the current article currently misrepresent? I could edit the page to reflect reality, but I'm afraid the editors would just revert it. This would include good and bad. For example, it could mention the amazing street art of the Bushwick Collective, but also tell the truth that North Williamsburg has become a party town for "fratboys and sorority girls". —The preceding comment was added by 96.250.79.18 (talk • contribs)

 * Normal procedure is to put the latest post lowest on the page on talk pages like this one (and also to sign posts on talk pages with 4 tildes - the ~ key - in a row). But my substantive reply is: Don't be afraid! Just post what you know to be true! The standard for Wikivoyage is Be fair. We normally don't post bad reviews of places we list, instead choosing not to list lousy hotels, restaurants and such, but things that are bad about a neighborhood do merit saying, because the watchword of Wikivoyage is the traveller comes first, and knowing about the bad as well as the good is helpful to prospective visitors. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:22, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

2.5 stars?
What is a 2.5-star hotel?? Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:05, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Brooklyn/Williamsburg


text:
Talk:Broome

I extracted my contribution about the history of Broome from wikipedia (WT-en) Tiles 22:20, 9 Aug 2003 (PDT)

title: Talk:Broome


text:
Talk:Bruck (Mur)

Is this the right name for this destination? In the guided it's refered to as "Bruck an der Mur"... just wondering? (WT-en) Majnoona 10:36, 28 May 2006 (EDT)

The city's name is actually Bruck an der Mur. (meaning Bruck located at river Mur) In Austria you'll find several cities with this name, all refered by Bruck in every day life. I think the name of the article is fine. (WT-en) Kaykay 11:04, 28 May 2006 (EDT)

 * Hmmm, but is Bruck in "Mur"? Is that the name of the region or district? thanks! (WT-en) Majnoona 13:00, 28 May 2006 (EDT)

 * Bruck is the name of the city, Mur the name of the river running through the city. Therefor the city is called Bruck an der Mur. (WT-en) Kaykay 13:02, 28 May 2006 (EDT)

 * Gotcha. In that case the article name needs to be changed since the format "Place (Region)" shouldn't be used. Please see Project:Article naming conventions for more info... sorry to bea pain about this, just want to make sure it's in the right spot! (WT-en) Majnoona 13:13, 28 May 2006 (EDT)

 * Ok, I've redirected the page to Bruck an der Mur, the official name of the city. (WT-en) Kaykay 13:27, 28 May 2006 (EDT)

title: Talk:Bruck (Mur)


text:
Talk:Bruges

I rolled back a change from "Flemish" to "Dutch" on this page. I think that Flemish is a very similar but different from Dutch. --(WT-en) Evan 11:44, 21 December 2006 (EST)

One source that could be useful to begin including comes from Hostelworld. It includes many local attractions and listings that would be good to include. (WT-en) Darkwraith 06:10, 19 June 2008 (EDT)

Rollback
I rolled back a change that made non-standard links and added an extlink that doesn't meet our Project:external links guidelines. --(WT-en) Evan 12:12, 2 January 2007 (EST)

Zeebrugge & Zeebruges
Should Zeebrugge & Zeebruges redirect to here? ~ 202.62.100.49 08:08, 27 November 2007 (EST)

 * Now done. Please revise if/as necessary. ~ 202.62.100.49 09:51, 28 November 2007 (EST)

This entire article is ridiculous and not worthy of Wikipedia. It's not an article, it's a brochure. Who wrote this, their Department of Tourism? Someone please report this entire "article."

This isn't Wikipedia, it is Wikivoyage. That means that a brochure style document is well suited to a traveler looking for practical information about a place. (WT-en) Darkwraith 19:24, 18 June 2008 (EDT)

Totally agree with the comment about this article being a tourist brochure. I start to wonder the worth of articles like this with silly superlatives and comments such as, French food is better than Belgium food. The writer obviously hasn't spent much time in France recently, a country notorious for overated restaurants.

 * Plunge forward and improve the article! --(WT-en) globe-trotter 16:58, 2 October 2011 (EDT)

The price to see Madonna of Bruges is not free
I was there yesterday and to see it you have to enter a sort of museum, but the price for entering the church is still free. I found the prices on this website, https://whichmuseum.com/belgium/bruges/church-of-our-lady-bruges/tickets-prices. I have put a mention in the description. Should the price for the church change or is a mention in the description is enough? —The preceding comment was added by PhysicsUofRAUI (talk • contribs)

 * Welcome! First, a little procedural thing: On Wikivoyage talk pages, it is the practice to sign your username at the end of each of your posts by typing 4 tildes (~) in a row.

 * That said, the place to mention pricing is in the "price" tab of a listing template, so please put the price or prices there, and thanks! Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:29, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Bruges